Originally <a href='/showthread.php?p=19023548'>posted</a> on 06/28/2013:
After reviewing this series I think Chicago got pretty lucky to win this.
Game 1 they had some fortunate bounces to get some late goals and win, Bos was -2000 when up 2 goals in the 3rd period
Game 6 they were against the ropes and caught a few breaks to score and win the game.
Obviously this is just puck luck and a major part of hockey but I still feel Boston was the better team that had the edge for the majority of time played, unfortunately that doesnt mean anything in sports only the final score.
Congrats to Chicago on the Stanley Cup win, but I am highly skeptical of this team and would not call them a "Dynasty" by any stretch.
After reviewing this series I think Chicago got pretty lucky to win this.
Game 1 they had some fortunate bounces to get some late goals and win, Bos was -2000 when up 2 goals in the 3rd period
Game 6 they were against the ropes and caught a few breaks to score and win the game.
Obviously this is just puck luck and a major part of hockey but I still feel Boston was the better team that had the edge for the majority of time played, unfortunately that doesnt mean anything in sports only the final score.
Congrats to Chicago on the Stanley Cup win, but I am highly skeptical of this team and would not call them a "Dynasty" by any stretch.