ESPN "Experts' Picks"
ESPN's hockey "experts" have made their picks for the first round. They all picked the Caps across the board, which usually makes me nervous. However, if that's a bad omen for Washington, they're not alone, since a whopping 7 of the 8 series were consensus picks. They only differed on the Devils/Canes series.
Even Matthew Barnaby thinks that the Caps will win in 6, despite the fact that Theo "catches weird."
7 months ago
grapejoos
19 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Actually, Barry Melrose picked the Flyers to beat the Pens, the only other non-consensus series.
by Pivonka, Michael Ridley on Apr 14, 2009 2:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You are right about that. He also apparently picked the Ducks to upset the Sharks. I think this was edited since I posted this fanshot, but maybe I just overlooked those. Have to credit Melrose for busting up the groupthink.
by grapejoos on Apr 14, 2009 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fear Melrose lone wolf picks. Either the Ducks or Flyers are advancing. I’m thinking Flyers.
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Apr 14, 2009 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know, I haven’t seen a single expert call for a single sweep in this year’s playoffs. Team parity or no balls?
by Yoshietree on Apr 14, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No cohones.
I think Chicago could sweep Calgary. Also Boston over Les Habitants.
by wittcap79 on Apr 14, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow…there some cohones for ya. Chicago to sweep Calgary. Wow. I have to think Kipper will get them one game.
by CapsFanSince1979 on Apr 15, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He might, but they’ve played like shit for a month now and Kipper is a “glorified” Jose Theodore.
by wittcap79 on Apr 15, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s mostly no balls, but also the circumstances of the matchups. Montreal, Columbus, and St. Louis are probably the ripest to get swept, IMO.
The Habs always upset the B’s, historically. Mason is enough to go at least 5 on the DET-CLB series. The Blues are a sentimental favorite. If you think Chicago will whoop Calgary, you still have the “no playoff experience” meme to (rightfully) push that past 4. I think those factors are why you aren’t seeing many sweep predictions.
Personally, I think the Habs and Blues will get swept, but we’ll see.
by grapejoos on Apr 14, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In fairness, I think every goalie who catches with his right hand looks funny.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on Apr 14, 2009 3:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I actually think that’s what Barnaby meant when he said it (whether he realized that was the reason or not), which is kind of silly to me. I’m no goalie, but it seems like you could be equally effective catching with either hand.
by grapejoos on Apr 14, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It looks funny, but it doesn’t have any real advantages or disadvantages. Personally, I caught left, but would do the (CuJo thing?) thing where I turned around and shot the puck out backhanded because I shot right. It took me 6-7 years to train myself (And 6-7 years of getting yelled at by coaches) to shoot lefty on the forehand.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on Apr 14, 2009 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Buccigross picked precisely ZERO upsets in his column.
The keyboard is mightier.
by breed16 on Apr 14, 2009 5:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
As did LeBrun
Take away Melrose’s solo “risky” picks on the Ducks and FLyers and NO ONE calls for an upset outside of the Devils-Canes match.
Pathetic
by Wisper on Apr 14, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at these picks!!
Not a single analyst picked a single sweep. Nowhere. Not one. 6 analysts with 8 matchups and NO ONE calls out a 4-0 series.
And why? Because picking a sweep takes balls. It means you are so sure of one team that you don’t think they will lose a single game. It means that when they do lose a game or two ,or even worse the series, you look like a fool.
Instead, over 35% of the picks of this panel of experts predict a 7-game series, so that however it ends they can say “It was a really even match-up. It could have gone either way. You never know. This is playoff hockey at its finest.”
This, in some sports-talk circles, is called “Being a Coward”.
by Wisper on Apr 14, 2009 5:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
thank you, jim rome.
(or lavar arrington).
(or eric holder).
by Natty Bumppo on Apr 14, 2009 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand, maybe that’s just what they think is going to happen. If I’m in their shoes I’d rather get six of eight right without any “gutsy” picks than get four of eight right because I thought I had to prove something by picking upsets just for the sake of doing it.
by David M. Getz on Apr 14, 2009 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i will add that the ESPN link neither entertains nor informs. some commentary thrown in would be nice. otherwise basically useless if i’m trying to learn what to expect.
by Natty Bumppo on Apr 14, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think it’s cowardly to not predict a sweep before nary a game has been played. Picking a team in 5 is stepping out, eh?
Russian Machine Never Breaks
by macvechkin on Apr 14, 2009 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
update: a number of these guys went 7-1. melrose was the only one with philly, but he made up for it as the only one with the ducks.
by Natty Bumppo on Apr 30, 2009 8:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
21 | 13 | 4 | 4 | 30 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
19 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 23 |
|
Atlanta
|
18 | 10 | 6 | 2 | 22 |
|
Florida
|
19 | 8 | 9 | 2 | 18 |
|
Carolina
|
21 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 13 |
(updated 11.20.2009 at 9:16 AM EST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
