Why New Jersey will win...

Magi · #1 (**permalink**) Jun 03, 03

History is on New Jersey's side, and I'll show you why :

Prior to this year, the past 7 Stanley Cup Winners are as follows,

New Jersey, Colorado, Detroit, Dallas, New Jersey, Colorado, Detroit.

Now, on each of these Stanley Cup winning teams, the following players were on their rosters @ the time they won the cup :

New Jersey #1 - Larry Robinson, Claude Lemieux
Colorado #1 - Mike Keane, Claude Lemieux, Patrick Roy
Detroit #1 - Scotty Bowman
Dallas - Bob Gainy, Bryan Skrudland, Mike Keane, Guy Carbonneau, Kirk Muller
New Jersey #2 - Claude Lemieux, Jacques Lemaire
Colorado #2 - Patrick Roy
Detroit #2 - Scotty Bowman, Chris Chelios

What do all these players I listed have in common?

They, either as player or coach, had won a Stanley Cup as a Montreal Canadien. Every team for the past 7 years that has won the Stanley Cup has always had a player or coach who had won a Cup as a Canadien. Vancouver and Ottawa did NOT have any players from the old cup winning Canadiens, hence why they did not win. Minnesota had Lemaire, Philly had Desjardins and Leclair, Dallas had Muller and Lemieux, so they were valid cup contenders. Unfortunately they were eliminated.

As of now, between New Jersey and Anaheim, the only player/coach who has won a Stanly Cup previously as a Montreal Canadien is Pat Burns, head coach of the Devils.

If this amazing legacy which was started from the Canadiens franchise continues on its course as in the previous 7 years, then place your money on New Jersey.

This was compiled by my friend. He works at a store, meaning he does dick all for the first 6 hours of the day. Hence, why he had so much free time to do this.

This was actually given to me a month or so ago, back when Van was still playing Minny. I disregarded it and threw it in my wastebin. I stumbled upon it today, and thought I'd share it with you all.

PeAcE

KenJi · #2 (**permalink**) Jun 03, 03

When did Pat Burns win the cup. He has only been in the finals once and from what I remember I thought he lost that year, and he hasn't been in the finals since

KenJi · #3 (**permalink**) Jun 03, 03

nevermind if it was 1967 lol.

They won 4-0 against the St. Louis Blues

KenJi · #4 (**permalink**) Jun 03, 03

if it was the 1989 stanley c up finals with Calgary against Montreal.

They los tthe series which is it

KenJi · #5 (**permalink**) Jun 03, 03

this is seriously some of the most bogus and stupid reasons as to why the devils are gonna win.

If they are gonna win its because they are a good team, and they played better in the series.

Has nothing to do with a factor like this

canuckelhead · #6 (**permalink**) Jun 04, 03

You can list all that bullshit... it doesnt matter.... wasnt Detroit supposed to beat Anaheim no problem!? What about Dallas!? so fuck whatever that says... That doesnt mean shit... and if u knew hockey u would know that too..... so :finger:

KenJi · #7 (**permalink**) Jun 04, 03

^exactly

Anaheim is a good team, and they proved t hat by how well they dominated detroit and dallas.

Simply the teams that are in the finals deserve to be there, and if Anaheim loses its cause new jersey p layed better.

nothing to do with just what canuckelhead said. Bullshit is what you just posted.

The two teams in the finals are the two best teams of THIS YEARS playoffs.

p.s: your friend bullshitted you, because Pat Burns coached Montreal from 1988-1992

the only cup they won then was in 1992 under the coach of Jacque Demars(spelling??)

so ya bogus bullshit. which has no significant matter in the stanley cup playoff's either

Magi · #8 (**permalink**) Jun 04, 03

Okay I edited my post. It was mostly filled with a flame intended for Canuckelhead, who I'm guessing presumes he's an expert on hockey beause he has a hockey team name in his SN...

But I'm not like that.

I myself did not verify the information. I was just passing it along. I don't have time to look up whether Pat Burns really did coach from year x - y. I admit, I could have re-worded my post a little differently to properly express my viewpoint, which was mostly to bring up the topic for discussion, not try and force you all (2) to accept my friends information.

Thanks for the info LL.

KenJi · #9 (**permalink**) Jun 04, 03

no prob dude. u seem cool enough :)

KenJi · #10 (**permalink**) Jun 04, 03

plus i like ur avator

TANTRIC · #11 (**permalink**) Jun 05, 03

montreal... damn them french! GO DUCKS!

canuckelhead · #12 (**permalink**) Jun 05, 03

Okay.... I didnt care if ur facts were right.... i thought the points u brought up have nothing to do with anything.... i think it was plain stupid... and that's my opinion

KenJi · #13 (**permalink**) Jun 05, 03

his facts aren't right just so u know lol.

but ya his point is quite stupid. Very actually lol.

but ya anaheim is on the ropes but they have played well at home thus far. lets hope they can continue that

canuckelhead · #14 (**permalink**) Jun 05, 03

yeah i know what ur sayin man... but u know anaheim is krazy at home... and jersey is krazy at home too... i hope it goes to game 7... that would be awesome

KenJi · #15 (**permalink**) Jun 05, 03

ya the sucky part is it will be in jersey. just like canucks had to play in new york for game 7.

but ya anaheim is nuts at home. i have a feeling it will go to game 7.

I hope so or else i will cry or something lol

anaheim is the only hope left, and i want paul kariya and adam oates to win just one cup. just one

Magi · #16 (**permalink**) Jun 09, 03

Well...I don't wanna be a gimp...but... :D

nah. This had nothing to do with it. Just that New Jersey won...and if I had actually believed my friend I could've probably made some mad $$ tonight.

Also, I think I may have had a miscommunication with him. Of the players I listed, instead of them actually winning a cup with the Montreal Canadiens, I think it was just supposed to be that they had been in a Stanley Cup Final as a Canadien, but they didn't actually have to win the cup. I will confirm tomorrow.

Quote:

Okay.... I didnt care if ur facts were right.... i thought the points u brought up have nothing to do with anything.... i think it was plain stupid... and that's my opinion

Well, when you post your opinion using this --> :finger: it's rude, implies hostility, and does nothing but incite flames from most people. I'm sure there were plenty of ways you could have expressed your disbelief in my friends theory without using :finger: .

Learn some netiquette.

KenJi · #17 (**permalink**) Jun 12, 03

Ya because this was Pat Burn's first stanley cup but he did get to the finals only to lose

canuckelhead · #18 (**permalink**) Jun 12, 03

hey Magi.... shut the fuck up

Magi · #19 (**permalink**) Jun 15, 03

Quote:

Originally posted by canuckelhead
hey Magi.... shut the fuck up

no thanks cool guy.

Confirmed : The list was only meant for players/coaches who had been to a Stanley Cup Final as a Canadien.

the Legacy continues!

KenJi · #20 (**permalink**) Jun 15, 03

legacy's are meant to be broken. New Jersey won't win the cup next year. There players are getting too old. Majority of them anyways.

Magi · #21 (**permalink**) Jun 16, 03

Quote:

Originally posted by Liquid_Love
legacy's are meant to be broken. New Jersey won't win the cup next year. There players are getting too old. Majority of them anyways.

Well I know. :p But there are other teams in the NHL still who have players who've been to the final as a Canadien. Doesn't necessarily have to be Jersey.

Also, yes, I think the Legacy will be broken, but AFTER the player lockout.

KenJi · #22 (**permalink**) Jun 16, 03

nah alot of montral'ers are gonna start retiring in the years to come, just like Patrick Roy retired this year.

A new team is gonna emerge eventually. Players on detroit are getting old too. Alot of players in the league are starting to hit there 40's and +