Quote:
Originally Posted by shadows
It is hard to tell the meaning behind people's posts sometimes, since they are just words after all.
Saying that people were concentrating on Philly's atrocious goaltending was by no means me dismissing Boston. They have a good team. In the regular season, I do not like them because they are a fellow Eastern team(but they were pretty much out of the reach of the Leafs this year, so I didn't hate them as much  ). That being said, in these playoffs the order of teams I wanted to win the Cup go: Vancouver, then Montreal(Canadian team), and then Boston. Being in the top three isn't too bad. 
Boston pretty much shut the door on the Lightning tonight. Thomas played really well, and there were a lot less penalties going on(well, with the suspect refereeing this post-season, a lot of penalties have been of the phantom call variety.
Seguin was a lot quieter tonight, but he was still a +1 on the night. |
In addition to my note just above, in response to Captn Sacto, which explains this communication problem generally, I would note that there is a big difference between the analytic perspective one adopts and the support perspective one adopts. It is easy to write, for instance, "I am glad Team A won, because that's the team I support. Team A won because Team B gave away the game."
It seems to me that many of the posts about the Bruins have been of that sort -- concentrating on victories as results of the Boston opponents' shortcomings rather than the Bruins own achievements. That is the source of my joking sarcasm.
Anyhow, I'll wait for the post that says the Bruins won Game 3 because of the breakdown of the Lightning in various areas, as espoused by the TV commentators, before continuing this line of discussion any further.