waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
Okay... here's some gripe"ing" (?griping?... whatever).  	(I live in Santa Barbara... for reference... I think)  	Okay, ABC showed the Kings/Flames... fine... YAWN.  	ESPN (through a fortunate rainout of a baseball game) showed the   Red Wings/Toronto game... cool.  	But I SWEAR that the advertisements all week long had said that   ESPN would show Pitt/NJ on Tuesday and Bos/Buff on Thursday.  	I raced home from work early (4:30 Pacific) to catch the game, but   ALAS, it was the Boston/Buffalo game and then they promised that they would   show the Pitt/NJ game on Thursday.  OVERNIGHT they changed their mind.  	I didn't mind THAT MUCH.  I watched the game (hockey is MUCH better   than NO hockey).  During the game their were no video highlights from the   Patrick division.  What the hell was going on?  At least they should show   video highlights of the other games (especially the NYI/Caps game that was   so close).  My father (lives in Bowling Green, Kentucky [Bumbf*ck, Egypt])   got to watch the Pens game on ESPN.  I just don't get it.  	The biggest problem is that Buffalo or Boston fans who didn't want   to see the Pittsburgh/New Jersey game 2, will turn on their TVs on Thursday   and see the Pittsburgh/New Jersey game 3 instead of the Buffalo/Boston game   3.  At least, in my case, I just had to wait 2 more days to see my game.  	If I were a big Boston or Buffalo fan and I missed the game on   Tuesday due to false advertising on the part of ESPN, I'd be mad as   hell.  	Oh well... hopefully we'll get better coverage next year OR   SOMETHING.  Matt Coohill
In article <1993Apr16.160228.24945@sol.UVic.CA> gballent@hudson.UVic.CA writes: > >In article 9088@blue.cis.pitt.edu, jrmst8+@pitt.edu (Joseph R Mcdonald) writes: > >>Jagr has a higher +/-, but Francis has had more points.  And take it from >>an informed observer, Ronnie Francis has had a *much* better season than >>Jaromir Jagr.  This is not to take anything away from Jaro, who had a  >>decent year (although it didn't live up to the expectations of some). > >Bowman tended to overplay Francis at times because he is a Bowman-style >player.  He plays hard at all times, doesn't disregard his defensive >responsibilities and is a good leader.  Bowman rewarded him be increasing his >ice time. > >Jagr can be very arrogant and juvenile and display a "me first" attitude. >This rubbed Bowman the wrong way and caused him to lose some ice time. > >Throughout the year, Francis consistently recieved more ice time than >Jagr.  Althouhg I have never seen stats on this subject, I am pretty >sure that Jagr had more points per minute played that Francis.  When >you add to that Jagr's better +/- rating, I think it becomes evident >that Jagr had a better season- not that Francis had a bad one. >    Actually, what I think has become more evident, is that you are determined to   flaunt your ignorance at all cost.  Jagr did not have a better season than   Francis ... to suggest otherwise is an insult to those with a modicum of   hockey knowledge.  Save your almost maniacal devotion to the almighty   plus/minus ... it is the most misleading hockey stat available.    Until the NHL publishes a more useful quantifiable statistic including ice   time per game and some measure of its "quality" (i.e., is the player put out   in key situations like protecting a lead late in the game; is he matched up   against the other team's top one or two lines; short-handed, etc), I would   much rather see the +/- disappear altogether instead of having its dubious   merits trumpeted by those with little understanding of its implications.    Brad  --  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------   Brad K. Gibson                           INTERNET: gibson@geop.ubc.ca   Dept. of Geophysics & Astronomy            #129-2219 Main Mall                      PHONE: (604)822-6722   University of British Columbia           FAX:   (604)822-6047   Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada   V6T 1Z4
In article <1993Apr20.194441.23595@julian.uwo.ca> lee139@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Steve Lee) writes: >Woops!  This is rec.sport.hockey! Not rec.sport.golf!  Hope you check the >newsgroup header next time before posting!  	Duh! He was making a joke about how long the Leafs would last in the playoffs. (Y'know, hit the courses in the off season). Sheesh... People are so quick to complain...
In article <burke.1-290393150052@burkemac.oshag.nd.edu> burke.1@nd.edu (R. P. Burke) writes: >When talking about hockey broadcasters, let's give a moment of silence to >remember the St. Louis Blues' great, Dan Kelly. (Many of you may have heard >him in the late 60s and early 70s on CBS.) He used to do Hockey Night In >Canada intermissions, with another recently deceased great, Danny Gallivan >of the Canadiens.  Agreed here...I'll never forget Dan Kelly calling the play-by-play in the '87 Canada Cup.  He was masterful!  And Danny Gallivan will _never_ be replaced; even now when I watch HNIC I remember his voice...when I see an Al MacInnis or Al Iafrate (hey, what's with these guys named Al who can shoot??) shot from the point I still think "blistering blast"...THN had a tribute to Gallivan in the issue following his death; in the story they included a quote from one of the games he did.  It went:   "It appears Risebrough has pugnaciously construed that check," he said, "and  will undoubtedly make a visitation to the box of punition."  Classic, vintage Gallivan!  He's sorely missed.  So here's to two of the best there was and best that ever will be.
In article <1993Apr21.165801.10243@newshub.ists.ca> dchhabra@stpl.ists.ca (Deepak Chhabra) writes: >Vincent Damphousse has decided to take a vacation, apparently.  I have  My respect for the power of the hockey gods is preventing me from commenting on the above, and for commenting on whether the guy Damphousse was traded for is on vacation or not. Perhaps Roger (demonstrably in contempt of the hockey gods and paying for it) dares a comment or two?
Well, since someone probably wanted to know, here's this year's playoff matchups on the left, and what the matchups would be next year under the new alignment and playoff-matchup rules.  The same 16 teams make the playoffs under next year's rules, and three of the first round matchups are the same (QUE-MTL, CHI-STL, VAN-WIN).  PIT --+                      +-- CHI | PIT --+                      +-- CHI       +---+              +---+       |       +---+              +---+ NJ  --+   |              |   +-- STL | BUF --+   |              |   +-- STL           +---+      +---+           |           +---+      +---+ WAS --+   |   |      |   |   +-- DET | QUE --+   |   |      |   |   +-- TOR       +---+   |      |   +---+       |       +---+   |      |   +---+ NYI --+       |      |       +-- TOR | MTL --+       |      |       +-- CAL               +------+               |               +------+ BOS --+       |      |       +-- VAN | WAS --+       |      |       +-- VAN       +---+   |      |   +---+       |       +---+   |      |   +---+ BUF --+   |   |      |   |   +-- WIN | NJ  --+   |   |      |   |   +-- WIN           +---+      +---+           |           +---+      +---+ QUE --+   |              |   +-- CAL | BOS --+   |              |   +-- DET       +---+              +---+       |       +---+              +---+ MTL --+                      +-- LA  | NYI --+                      +-- LA   ====================================================================     Jim Murawski     Sr. Software Engineer               (412) 268-2650  [office]     Administrative Computing and        (412) 268-6868  [fax]          Information Services           jjm+@andrew.cmu.edu     Carnegie Mellon University          Office: UCC 155     4910 Forbes Avenue     Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890      "Le Mieux!  Le Magnifique!  Soixante Six!  Claude...NON!"
In article <1r4bkvINN5nm@abyss.West.Sun.COM>, dvb@ick (David Van Beveren) writes: >   > When you think of the NHL, who comes to mind? Gilmour? Gretzky? Mario? > .. ah... did I mention Mario? If you said Gretzky, you haven't really > been following along, have you. If you said Gilmour, you are a true > Maynard.  >  > I don't even think the selection of the HArt deserves serious discussion on > this group. It is a no-brainer.  While I agree that Lemieux deserves the Hart, it is far from a "no-brainer".  The Hart trophy goes to the player most valuable to his team, not to the best player in the league. So your above arguement is really worthless.   The Pens without Mario are still a damn good hockey team. The Leafs without  Gilmour would have been fighting Tampa Bay for the 3rd pick.   Like I said, Mario deserves it, IMHO. But it is a very close race and a  Gilmour victory would not surprise me. I dislike Doug Gilmour with a passion,  but I must concede that he is extremely valuable to the Leafs.
jpc@philabs.philips.com (John P. Curcio) writes:  >In article <1qmpfa$qna@alpha.db.erau.edu> drozinst@db.erau.edu (Drozinski Tim) writes:  >>I AM an Ulf (and Pgh) fan, and what pisses me off about the whole Adam Graves/ >>Ulf Samuesson debate is that Ulf plays hard-hitting hockey (nothing wrong with  >>that) while Graves does what he does when the only way to win a game is to  >>intentionally hurt someone (which bites!).  >Jeesus... I never thought I'd see the day when I defended a Ranger....  >You obviously don't watch much hockey if you think that Graves is a >goon.  He is one of the hardest working Rangers (check that-- THE >hardest working Ranger).  He had 36 goals this year (not bad for a >checking type of player), and showed up for every single game this >season (unlike that stiff Messier).  He is fearless, and throws CLEAN >checks.  He will also stand up to someone after he hits them, not like >that pussy Oaf.  Exactly my point.  If you'd watch games more closely, you'd see a lot  of goons going after him.  Ulf is one of the main reasons why less physical  players for Pgh are left alone.  Ulf plays rough hockey, but only when  other players are putting the rush on Mario or Jagr.  If you want to say anyone on the Penguins is a cheap shot or a goon, say it's Jennings or Caufield.  Don'tslander a good defenseman because your favorite players can't beat the Pens even when they take dives (like Gartner) to try for the cheap penalties.  >As for his slash of Lemieux, fine.  It was a cheap shot.  It is the >exception, not the rule.  I bet you think Mike Gartner is a goon >because of the time that he slashed the hell out of Oaf's arm last >year, right?  After all, he did get a suspension for it...  Hey, that's fine!  If a player does something stupid, he should be penalized including Ulf.  Or Mario (you're not likely to see that happen) or anyone else for that matter.  It's pointless to say any one person is a cheap-shot goon,     because you'll see EVERYONE take a cheap shot now and then, especially if you'resomeone who is shadowed as much as Ulf is.  >-JPC  >--  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >John P. Curcio 		          Go Bruins!		   Philips Laboratories >jpc@philabs.philips.com 			           345 Scarborough Road >(914) 945-6442               	 		     Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510
YAHOOOOOOOOO!  The Habs tied this sucker at 2 and the teams now head for Quebec City to play game 5.  BTW, final score was Habs 3-Nords 2.  The score might be a bit misleading.  The Habs dominated the game from the 5:00 mark of the first and then on.  The score should have been 8-2 if it weren't for some miraculous save from a Ron Hextall (bastard!).  He's the reason the score was as close.  Habs winning goal was scored by Benoit Brunet at 1:07 of the 3rd.  Roy had an OK game.  He made the first save (one way or another) and the defense was there to clear any rebounds.  This just in, ESPN radio reports that the Bruins lost 6-5 in OT. YAHOOOOOOOOOOO!!!  Those suckers got what they deserved.  Life is just great!!!! Now if my finals would go just as well!  Nick (I'll take off my town crier hat now)
In article <115330@bu.edu> icop@csa.bu.edu (Antonio Pera) writes: > >   What's so bad about the new playoff format? Do you really believe teams >that finish fourth in their div. deserve to be in the playoffs?  >With the new format, you have more of a chance to see more teams. Do you >really want to see the Bruins against the Sabres umpteen times or would >you rather see the Bruins and the Capitals in the secound round of playoffs?  There is really nothing inherently wrong with it but they tried it just a little over a decade ago, and noone showed up for the early rounds in the playoffs...whereas soon after they went to the divisional set-up arenas were mostly filled in the early rounds.    The empirical evidence of the last two decades is that more people will show up to see the Bruins play the Sabre umpteen times than see the Bruins play the Captials in the first round.  Maybe hockey has increased in popularity sufficiently that this will no longer be the case.  The experiment is worthwhile with the uneven distribution of the expansion teams, but I prefer the divisional  playoff.
Come on Boston, where the hell are you? Seven wins in a row and what, choke?  I'd much rather see the Bruins in the Wales Conference finals vs. Pitt than Buffalo or Quebec, if only because it would be more interesting.  Not that Buffalo or Quebec can't put up a good fight, but I'd much more enjoy a 7-0 pasteing of the Bruins than the Devils.  You have to feel for Terrerri(sp?).
Well, I looked at the scoring plan I had, and have decided to modify it.  Here is the new, finalized scoring:  Pick 1st round winner, way off on games:	2 "     "    "     "     pick within one game:	3 "     "    "     "     pick exact games:	4  Pick 2nd round winner, way off on games:	4 "     "    "     "     pick within one game:	5 "     "    "     "     pick exact games:	7  Pick conference champ, way off on games:	7 "	"	"      pick within one game:	10 "	"	"      pick exact games:	13  Pick Stanley Cup winner, way off on games:	13 "	"    "	   "	pick within one game:	17 "	"    "	   "	pick exact games:	20 Pick loser in 7, series goes 7:			2 Pick loser in 7, game 7 decided in OT:		4  These are now final.  Anyone needing a copy of the entry sheet, email me at the address below.   --     Keith Keller				LET'S GO RANGERS!!!!! 						LET'S GO QUAKERS!!!!! 	kkeller@mail.sas.upenn.edu		IVY LEAGUE CHAMPS!!!!
In article <121411@netnews.upenn.edu> kkeller@mail.sas.upenn.edu (Keith Keller) writes: >In article <1qup1lINNotb@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu> swartzjh@RoseVC.Rose-Hulman.Edu writes: >>Does anyone have the games ESPN will be airing this week???  Hopefully the >>Detroit/Toronto game tongiht.  I though ABC did a decent job by getting some > >F**king *NO* hockey games televised nationally tonight!  What the hell is >this???  Why the hell is ESPN showing some stupid baseball game, when >baseball is not even three weeks into the season and hockey is in the >playoffs???  No, wait, I know the answer: $$$$$$  But still!  It really >pisses me off to no end.  They better start putting some more f*cking >games on, or they will never make any money off of the deal that brought >hockey back to ESPN.  AARGH!!!!  (not that I'd watch anyway, but hockey >needs all the publicity it can get) > >-- >    Keith Keller				LET'S GO RANGERS!!!!! >						LET'S GO QUAKERS!!!!! >	kkeller@mail.sas.upenn.edu		IVY LEAGUE CHAMPS!!!! > >	   "A cow is not a vegetarian dish."  -- Keith Keller, 1993  You obviously don't understand how TV scheduling works.  ESPN had prior contracts to baseball to show Monday night games and had contracted all the other bs shows well in advance.  The NHL TV deal was very late in the scheduling process (you normally have to do this one-plus year out.  The NHL package was finished two weeks before the season started).  ESPN has shown tremendous commitment to the NHL by squeezing in extra telecasts when it could (like the last Minnesota game) and putting Stanley Cup games as backup to their baseball telecasts (which by favorable circumstances they could pull off last night).  But the bottom line is that ESPN cannot break contracts at will.  They must honor the previous deals they made.  $$$$ _does_ have something to do with it, especially if you risk a $$$$$$$$ lawsuit for breach of contract with baseball.  So relax.  I'm happy.  (I don't get SportsChannel anyway).
In article <93111.205214RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu> Robbie Po <RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu> writes: >In article <AfpIKNm00WBLI1isJ1@andrew.cmu.edu>, "William K. Willis" ><ww1a+@andrew.cmu.edu> says: >> >>     You know, I never really appreciated them before! > >Looks like Bob Errey's ring really sparkles in that locker room, and everyone >else wants one, too! :-)  Correct me if I'm wrong though, (just through  No, Fuhr's 5 rings out sparkle Errey's. And doesn't Bob have 2 rings?
Anyone who really believes that the Caps can beat the Pens are kidding themselves.  The Pens may not loose one game in the playoffs.
In article <1993Apr20.032017.5783@wuecl.wustl.edu> jca2@cec1.wustl.edu (Joseph Charles Achkar) writes: > > It was nice to see ESPN show game 1 between the Wings and Leafs since >the Cubs and Astros got rained out. Instead of showing another baseball >game, they decided on the Stanley Cup Playoffs. A classy move by ESPN. >   The only reason ESPN showed that hockey came was because there was no other baseball game scheduled for the evening.  Randy r_turgeo@oz.plymouth.edu
Gerald Olchowy (golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca) wrote:  : Bowman is the genius...Johnson isn't.  Bowman is a great coach...Johnson, : a very good one.  However, Bowman is really not a modern coach, and : Patrick's solution of having him only run the team on game days, and : delegate most of the day-to-day responsibity to the assistants is : a shrewd managerial decision on Patrick's part.    IMHO Bowman is the perfect coach for this group of players at  this time. Johnson was the perfect coach two years ago for his  group of players. I would say we have been very lucky here in  Pittsburgh that the order these coaches came in was this one.  (Excluding the unfortunate circumstances which brought about the  change.) With the immense talent on the Penguins roster this  year, a tougher Bowman keeps the egos in check. Johnson on the  other hand, was able to inspire the younger, inexperienced players  to new heights. Both coaches have / had different strengths. Both  of which came at exactly the right time.   Another person also mentioned that Bowman is the perfect coach  for this time since nobody can argue with his decisions. How can  you argue with the coach with the best record in hockey anyway?  Playing for a great coach like that demands respect which also  keeps the egos in check.   Just a couple of ideas.
In article <C5un02.Gq5@idacom.hp.com> andrew@idacom.hp.com (Andrew Scott) writes: >Here are the final stadings for the USENET Hockey Draft.  Congratulations >to this year's winner, Dave Wessels of Victoria, B.C., who parlayed his >initial 1000 points into 1575.9 points! > >Thanks to all 262 teams for entering the biggest USENET Hockey Draft ever! >I hope to hear from you all again this September, for the 7th Annual draft. > > >USENET Hockey Draft Standings >Week 28 > >Posn	Team				Total	Pts	Cash	Last Posn > >1.	Dave Wessels                    1575.9	1574	1.9	(1) >79.	Brad Gibson                     1174.2	1147	27.2	(79) >262.	Dinamo Riga                     658.0	603	571.6	(262)    An interesting note ... I have absolutely no recollection who was on my team.   I picked all my players about 2 weeks before the start of the season, and   then never touched the roster again.  I got wrapped up in my own "money" pool   and decided not to get involved at all with the USENET pool (sorry Andrew   btw).  The only thing I remember about my team is that I had Joe Sacco and   maybe John MacLean.  Maybe Francis and Kevin Stevens as well.  Out of   curiousity I checked the final standings today on r.s.h., only to find to my   amazement that with absolutely no input, the initial team still managed to   finsh 79th!  I'm not sure what that implies for those who finished below me   :)    Ciao.   Brad Gibson  --  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------   Brad K. Gibson                           INTERNET: gibson@geop.ubc.ca   Dept. of Geophysics & Astronomy            #129-2219 Main Mall                      PHONE: (604)822-6722   University of British Columbia           FAX:   (604)822-6047   Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada   V6T 1Z4
In article <BSON.93Apr22060320@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu> bson@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Jan Brittenson) writes: > >   Which doesn't mean much since the statistics are mostly based on >the 5-game playoff format. But, yes, it looks dark for the B's. What a >disappointment.  The Fat Lady is about to hit the first note...Okay,how about 3-0 deficits? The B's chances for a comeback are now less 1%(That's based on 7-game playoff format)...  >   Who do you think gets the start in game three? I hope it is going >to be Blue. If the team can rally around him, maybe Moog can too.   He got the start but the headlines on all Boston local TV sportscats said it all : "Sutter Blue It!". And he did.  Harry Sinden's appearance outside of B's dressing room after Game 3 was a pathetic site. He said something really retarded to cover Sutter's behind,"This game is not about winning or losing..". Harry,check the schedule! Your team is in the playoffs and about to go on a long summer vacation on Sunday morning!  Harry and his buttkisser Milbury will never admit that they screwed up in a major way when they brought in one of the dumbest people in the business,Brian Sutter. Sutter's playoff record as the head coach in St.Louis speaks for itself. The Blues really have a chance to advance to the second round this year...
>  >In article <C4nq5G.EKB@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, >rgemeinh@separator.ecn.purdue.edu (Richard A Gemeinhart) wrote: >>  >> In article <1993Mar26.155933.9669@ncsu.edu> fmsalvat@eos.ncsu.edu (FRANK MICH >AE SALVATORE) writes: >> > >> > >> >I am originally from New York State, and I go to school >> >in North Carolina.  Yet, I don't constantly gripe about >> >the lack of hockey.  Wouldn't some of you who chose to go >> >to school in the South realize (most who gripe are Clemson students) >> >that hockey isn't quite as popular in South Carolina >> >when you chose a school? >> > >> >Why did you all (excuse me - y'all) choose schools in >> >the South if hockey was this important to you?   >>  >> Not everyone has the luxury of deciding on a college by making sure the  >> hockey coveraage is what you want it to be.  I am a Pittsburgh transplan >> to S. C. when at home and the coveraage sucks.  Sports south didn't even show >> the final game of the Stanley Cup laast year while it was happening.  They >> put it on ktape delay and cut the intermissions then went off the air.   >> When you move you take the good with the bad and deal with it;  it doesn't >> mean thaat you can't complain about it. >  >I was transplanted by my parents from the Greater Hartford area to the >Greater Cleveland, Ohio area.  This was not an action of my choice.  The >only hockey coverage I could get there regularly was Red Wings and Penguins >(explaining, in part, why I follow these teams today).  In Cleveland you >couldn't even find hockey scores on the 11 o'clock news because they >figured that if they didn't have it, it wasn't a sport. >    At least your parents didn't move you Idaho.  The only things that get any coverage there are football, basketball and baseball!