|
 |
| |
 |
| |
| |

Opening Analysis / Round 1 / Round 2 / Round 3 / Final
 |
Will Hossa play spoiler - in the Finals and in the pool? |
Repeat! For the first time in 25 years we have a rematch in the Stanley Cup Finals. Last time, the young guns got their revenge. Of course, last time Jari Kurri hadn't gone to play for the Islanders. We shall see what effect Marian Hossa's move will have.
Congratulations to those who picked six players from Pittsburgh and Detroit this year. Six of the top 20 did so... by contrast, 17 of the top 20 after round three last year had done so. Like last year (and most), this year's competitive pool will come down to who wins the Cup.
A very interesting story (or, coincidence) is shaping up at the top of the standings. Last year, when Detroit defeated Pittsburgh, Bo Chen claimed the top prize by a wide margin, defeating challenger Karen Savoie who had picked the Pens and ended out of the money. Had the Pens won, Bo would have won the pool by one point over Karen. This year, with the same two teams in the finals, we have a similar possibility. If Pittsburgh wins, Li Tan - whose beau is Bo - may cash in with Karen locked in one point behind her. In the pool's history (not including Shoot for Gold contests) no money winners have been in the top three two years in a row. Only Vince Brescia has won two pools - 1999 and 2001 when there were fewer participants.
All of the remaining contenders have many of the same players, in particular Malkin and Crosby who are on all of these entries and are thus factored out of the equation entirely. Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Lidstrom are on many of the contenders as well as Marc-Andre Fleury. On the other hand, Marian Hossa and Chris Osgood could be the difference-makers. Let's examine the contenders.
If Pittsburgh wins: Mike Walsh emerged at the end of round two and built a strong lead through round three - most importantly against fellow Pittsburgh pickers. He hopes to hang on despite not having any players that his opponents do not. Li Tan, and Karen Savoie one point behind her, have Zetterberg, Lidstrom, and Datsyuk and need 15 points to overcome the leader. They only need a few points more than Samuel Wexler (who only has Gonchar in his corner) to push him out of the money. Ryan Slack would finish tied with Karen and split either the second and third prizes, or just the third prize.
If Detroit wins: Ryan Slack, who climbed into second place in round three, is almost assured the victory if Detroit wins the Cup. He would only drop to second if Hossa gets a dozen more points than Lidstrom, or if Osgood gets a string of shutouts. Jerome Brouard, who finished one point out of the money last year, is hoping to hang on this time and is likely to do so unless Fleury gets a string of shutouts but still loses the series. Third place would be interesting: Mike Walsh could hold on but only has Fleury and a seven point lead over Peter Holland, John Upper, and David Minuk who have a bunch of Red Wings including Hossa, Datsyuk, Osgood, and Zetterberg.
Pittsburgh win | | | | Detroit win | |
Mike Walsh | 155 | Fleury | | Ryan Slack | 151 | Fleury, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk |
Samuel Wexler | 143 |
Gonchar |
| Jerome Brouard | 150 | Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk |
Li Tan | 142 |
Fleury, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk |
| Mike Walsh | 155 (-10) | Fleury |
Karen Savoie | 141 |
Fleury, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk |
| Peter Holland | 139 | Fleury, Hossa, Zetterberg, Datsyuk |
Ryan Slack | 151 (-10) | Fleury, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk | | John Upper | 139 | Fleury, Hossa, Rafalski, Datsyuk |
| | | | Martha Gill | 149 (-10) | Gonchar | | | | | Scott Hamilton | 138 | Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Rafalski |
| | | | David Minuk | 138 | Osgood, Kronwall, Datsyuk |
| | | | Adam Bloedow | 148 (-10) | Zetterberg, Datsyuk |
Many people in the Trash Talk Forum - and yours truly in various reports and analysis - anointed Martha Gill the winner with her darkhorse Carolina and Chicago picks. Judging from the state of the forum it seems that these people all left the building before the end of the game, and aren't even aware that the score had changed. Well, with both Conference Finals series running short and the losing teams underperforming, Martha received nothing but a lot of press. Good job, and better luck next year.
My prediction record now stands at 10-4 this year, and if only my own picks had matched that success I would be doing much better! Well I've had an awful record predicting the finals, having selected losers Pittsburgh, Ottawa, Edmonton, and Calgary the past four seasons. So this year since I'm hoping for the Penguins to win, I'll say Detroit in seven. Especially after that ill-advised move to pick up the Prince of Wales trophy. Let's hope I'm wrong yet again.
Hot |
Pos. Gain (R2,R3) |
|
Hot |
Rd3 Pts. |
Marco Pazzano |
61 (151,90) |
|
David Lester |
33 |
Cheryl Wallace |
54 (144,90) |
|
John Upper |
31 |
Mark Fahey |
48 (90,42) |
|
Mark Fahey |
31 |
David Lester |
46 (77,31) |
|
Mike De Petrillo |
31 |
Mike De Petrillo |
43 (77,31) |
|
Peter Holland, Marilyn Beaulieu |
30 |
Not |
Pos. Loss (R2,R3) |
|
Not |
Rd3 Pts. |
Wayne Wood |
50 (17,67) |
|
16 People with: |
0 |
Aron Slipacoff |
40 (31,71) |
|
|
|
Jen Reilly |
38 (17,55) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top Players |
Forwards |
Team |
Pts |
Picks |
Sidney Crosby |
PIT |
28 |
65 |
Evgeni Malkin |
PIT |
28 |
70 |
Alexander Ovechkin |
WAS |
21 |
122 |
Johan Franzen |
DET |
19 |
10 |
Ryan Getzlaf |
ANA |
18 |
6 |
Henrik Zetterberg |
DET |
18 |
69 |
Martin Havlat |
CHI |
15 |
9 |
Eric Staal |
CAR |
15 |
22 |
Nicklas Backstrom |
WAS |
15 |
38 |
|
Defense |
Team |
Pts |
Picks |
Niklas Lidstrom |
DET |
13 |
77 |
Brent Seabrook |
CHI |
12 |
0 |
Sergei Gonchar |
PIT |
12 |
16 |
|
|
|
|
Goalies |
Team |
Pts |
Picks |
Chris Osgood |
DET |
18 |
7 |
Cam Ward |
CAR |
18 |
7 |
Jonas Hiller |
ANA |
17 |
0 |
Simeon Varlamov |
WAS |
17 |
0 |
|
Teams |
IN |
Picks |
Cups |
Detroit |
323 |
34 |
Pittsburgh |
176 |
18 |
|
OUT |
Picks |
Cups |
Carolina |
40 |
4 |
Chicago |
36 |
3 |
|
Here are the projected scores and rankings for after
round 4. The projection assumes (wrongly, of course) that the players you
have alive will produce in round 4 at the same average rate as in the first
three rounds. Of course, if you have no players left, you will definitely have the same score as you have now!
|
Comments, questions, suggestions? E-mail Mitch.
|
|