2026 NHL Playoffs Thread

Donate To GopherHole



Gophers1992 said:
I’ll admit to being one of those people who wasn’t too excited about this finals matchup but holy crap what a first couple of games. Please give us 7 games of this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I am just going to root for whichever team is trailing.
 

TRF Guy said:
This was tough to watch last night

Click to expand...

Fuck.

Definitely not a coincidence to give up two PP goals after Vegas' best PK guy and top line defenseman goes to the hospital. Anxious to see what we hear today on the injury.

The only thing I was worried about for this series was Vegas 3rd pairing defensemen. Through injuries and subpar play in the playoffs, they'd rotated Lauzon, Korczak, Hutton and Coghlan (who played all year in the AHL). First game, Lauzon returns from being out a few weeks but that 3rd pair goes (-2) even in the win.

Last night, with McNabb going out and Torts protecting Coghlan, they rolled with largely 4 defensemen. You knew they were going to wear down eventually. If McNabb can't come back, that's not good for the VGK.

Still surprised they are using Coghlan over Korczak on that 3rd pair. Coghlan is a shoot-first blue-liner and Korczak is less experienced, but a better skater and a little more sound defensively.
 


Ope3 said:
Torts effed up.
Click to expand...
Border Gopher said:
What a stupid challenge haha
Click to expand...
TRF Guy said:
Yes it was
Click to expand...
Kind of an interesting thing I dislike about the way it was called by the refs, but if disallowed for interference, would be nice to know if they would've overturned it if they felt no interference, or if there was intent to blow the whistle because ref though puck was frozen. If so, there is no way to overturn the call. On the other hand, if it is solely that it was interference, when the stick makes contact, you can see the puck loose and puck goes under the body and into the net (tbh I don’t think Vegas hits the puck or drives it in, I think it’s the Carolina player falling on him as that’s where you see it continue going through).

Agree felt like almost no chance it was going to be overturned and probably not worth it at that spot in the game if it's the former case, but if that's all it is, I really dislike the way the NHL goes and reviews plays (like it really should not take a challenge on a scoring play imo if all goals in the playoffs are reviewed in Toronto).
 
Last edited:

It was a stupid challenge because Torts needs to know that the NHL refuses to overturn calls on the ice, especially in the playoffs, but that should have been a goal unless they had evidence of an early whistle, which they don't seem to.
 

Winnipegopher said:
It was a stupid challenge because Torts needs to know that the NHL refuses to overturn calls on the ice, especially in the playoffs, but that should have been a goal unless they had evidence of an early whistle, which they don't seem to.
Click to expand...

Challenge was definitely risky. Not sure how much Torts is aware of this but historically, the folks with VGK that are responsible for this kind of thing during the game are exceptional at deciding on a challenge; almost always when they challenge they win, they're just almost never wrong. I know the final decision was with Torts, but not doubt he had people advising him to challenge.

I would imagine factoring into the decision (maybe?) was how lethal the VGK PK had been through the playoffs.... HOWEVER, if that's your thinking, you better be also considering that you had no Brayden McNabb on your PK.

Whatever. Spilled milk now. A split on the road and you go back home, although I don't think for either of these teams the home/road disparity is much at all.

 

Ogie Ogilthorpe said:
Challenge was definitely risky. Not sure how much Torts is aware of this but historically, the folks with VGK that are responsible for this kind of thing during the game are exceptional at deciding on a challenge; almost always when they challenge they win, they're just almost never wrong. I know the final decision was with Torts, but not doubt he had people advising him to challenge.

I would imagine factoring into the decision (maybe?) was how lethal the VGK PK had been through the playoffs.... HOWEVER, if that's your thinking, you better be also considering that you had no Brayden McNabb on your PK.

Whatever. Spilled milk now. A split on the road and you go back home, although I don't think for either of these teams the home/road disparity is much at all.

Click to expand...
Agree with everything in the chiclets take. My feeling is they should’ve said no interference and then said intent to blow the whistle and no penalty but no goal. I could live with that call even if it’s because the ref is out of position. Their reasoning is terrible
 



Gotta love hockey players. And the Stanley Cup Final

 
Last edited:

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom