2014 NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs (predictions and discussions)

Dumb question: If the rules always say "goalkeeper," why does everyone say "goaltender?"

 

Because the original rules go back to the beginning of the NHL in 1917 and some of the wording hasn't been changed. As it should be

 

New York better keep attacking and not sit back and allow LA to play the entire third period in its end like they did in Game 4. Lundqvist bailed them out in Game 4, but it's a tall order to expect him to fend off a shot per minute for an entire period with no attack at the other end.

 

Maybe the Gaborik goal will force New York to actually attack now.

 

But the Kings have dominated play since falling behind 2-1. Quite a few good looks in the third and in OT. How many can Lundqvist stop?

 

And a lot of newspaper editors (not to mention TV news personnel) in the Eastern and Central time zones cussing up a storm right now, left wondering when we may get an outcome.

If I'm a desk editor, I'm holding the page. It's a potential clincher and there have been too many scoring chances. Someone is going to score soon.

 

This has been all Kings since that bogus tripping call. The Rangers look like they have no legs left.

 

On my way into work here, and I logged on to check the NHL page for an update.

Deadlocked, drama. I get it. Can't access it from where I live, but I understand 2OT in the playoffs when the Cup is on the line.

But freaking tweets. The last one on the Kings page -- whatever the technical term is, I don't know -- says "ARE YOU KIDDING?!"

Well, for folks like me at home, far, far away from a TV, that means *absolutely nothing.* Bad call? Penalty shot? Goal? No-goal? Fan catch a puck? Stripper on ice?

If you're going to send out the stupid things, please include the news.

 

The Rangers power play has been magnificent in overtime. They've done everything but score.

 

There have been at least six occasions in the two overtimes I've heard myself say, "How did that not go in the net?"