This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
|
|
A search for "2008 NHL Playoffs" doesn't give this page as a result, how can this be changed? CoW mAnX ( talk) 22:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The text is a bit difficult to read in the game summaries as it stands now, with the small, italicized text. I'm not sure if it's just me, but I can barely read any of it - if it weren't italicized, it wouldn't be so bad, but the combination of smaller text size and the formatting makes it very difficult. Just want to throw that out there. -- 24.3.143.146 ( talk) 03:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Should we make a little note as to denote who scored the game-winning goal in each game? Jmlk 1 7 05:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I would just like to request if possible that any other comments or suggestions about the proposed template are posted in an expedited matter so that a template for the summary of each series is finalized, therefore easing the amount of difficult that would otherwise be involved in switching templates later in the future. Please let me know as soon as possible, particularly if you find any bugs in experimenting with this template. Please leave comments in the section below. Thank You. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 00:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Definitely looks good and smoother all-around. I like it. – Alex43223 T | C | E 03:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand the significance of having this on there. Can we take it out? That would leave more room for adding assists as someone suggested. Civil Engineer III ( talk) 13:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Why are all the names misspelled? For example Hasek instead of Hašek, Krejci instead of Krejčí, Selanne instead of Selänne, these all seem to be diacritical problems, why are these errors included here? The Dominator Talk Edits 01:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering if this should be filled out or are you waiting for the first round to end? Tjwallace87 ( talk) 06:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I really find the location of the Arenas pretty unnecessary. Wikipedia users can simple look up information on the arenas by clicking on the the arena's name to lead them to the article on the arena. Also, in almost every case, the location of the arena is already apparent in the team's title, except for the case of team's taking regionally based titles, such as Colorado, Minnesota and New Jersey. Lastly, the addition of the location also pushes the summary tables to extend to two lines for each game in most cases, taking up a lot of space. Thus, I believe it is in the best interest to simply remove this piece of information from this page. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 09:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
We use country-of-origin flags more than team logos. This is somewhat confusing, because isn't the team more important to keep track of which player is performing well for which team?-- Sonjaaa ( talk) 12:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't we have Wikipedia:FLAGCRUFT? I don't think where the players are from is too relevant in this particular article. Also, there is some overlinking here, is there something I'm missing or shouldn't everything just be linked on first occurrence like in other articles? The Dominator Talk Edits 00:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Distracting flags must go! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(flags)#Use_of_flags_for_sports_people Who can remove them? -- 206.248.172.247 ( talk) 21:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I did not change the guideline. I just added more examples. The guideline as is (without the NHL example I added) already clearly states the flags cannot accompany the player names here. Please read the Manual of Style before saying I am not good faith.
"Flags should only be used where that person is representing a national team or country such as the Olympic games. Flag usage such as Delray Beach International Tennis Championships or using a national flag for Formula One teams and drivers are incorrect as they are not representing a nation."
-- Sonjaaa ( talk) 21:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Of course they can be part of a national team, but they aren't representing Team Canada or Team Sweden here! They are representing the Philadelphia Flyers, etc. Let's stick to Wikipedia's official Manual of Style. If you don't like the rules, then discuss them on the Manual of Style talk page to try to change them. -- Sonjaaa ( talk) 05:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
"Do not emphasize nationality without good reason - Wikipedia is not a place for nationalistic pride. Flags are visually striking, and placing a national flag next to something can make its nationality or location seem to be of greater significance than other things. For example, with an English flag next to him, Paul McCartney looks like an "English singer-songwriter from Liverpool who was in the Beatles"; without the flag next to him, he looks like an "English singer-songwriter from Liverpool who was in the Beatles". Emphasizing the importance of a person's citizenship or nationality above their other qualities risks violating Wikipedia's "Neutral point of view" policy." Asher196 ( talk) 06:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. For my part, the first (or second, or third ...) thing I think of when I see a list of leading scorers is not "Gosh, from what country could these guys possibly come!" For those who do, that's why all the names are linked to their player pages. Ravenswing 12:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I thought we agreed, to keep diacritics off the player's names when dealing with NHL related articles. GoodDay ( talk) 22:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm the last of the Mouhigans, eh? I'm sticking to the NHL team rosters; as it's becoming increasingly impossible to invoke the non-dios half of the compromise, across all the Hockey articles. GoodDay ( talk) 15:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
We need some kina of warning/message, to inform editors not to add diacritics, per Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey compromise. GoodDay ( talk) 17:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The compromise was reached, after nearly 2 years of 'edit wars' & 'heated discussions' concerning diacritics on Ice Hockey articles. Trust me, pandora has been sealed in his box; let's not let him out 'again'. GoodDay ( talk) 20:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The compromise is quite clear. Diacritics for Player pages & Non-NHL related articles; No diacritics for NHL related articles. Neither side (pro-dios or anti-dios) will accept all one way or the other. Been there, done that, didn't work. GoodDay ( talk) 22:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Diacritics tend to get me tempermental (if I discuss them too much). I'd recommend you contact Resolute, Djsasso & Ravenswing for a better explanation concerning the compromise (they're better communicators, then I; IMHO). GoodDay ( talk) 23:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe a final solution must come from above, as both this article (and other articles) and the ice hockey wikiproject have consistently proven to be an unsatisfactory arena for achieving a viable consensus. Editors are naturally going to add diacritics, while others, but particularly the more vocals ones, are going to revert to hide the diacritics. The continuous warring can only come to an end with some sort of policy that endorses either side, or makes a very clear and sensible grounds for the specific use or exclusion of diacritics. Thank You. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 23:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
There appears to be a relevant discussion currently ongoing with relation to the Manual of Style. Here is a link to that specific discussion. Thanks. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 01:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
What is the point of hiding diacritics behind a pipe? If you're not willing to show them, then why bother making a direct link to them when the non-diacritic term will certainly redirect to the correct article. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 16:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Somebody is probably going to always come around and un-hide the diacritics all the time. It is too bad that you will continue to waste time enforcing this "compromise" when there are so many more items of importance on or related to this page, which would benefit from your efforts. Some items that could enhance the article far more significantly are descriptions for each of the series, and additional prose throughout the article, in addition to numerous other subjects of concerns. Thank You. — Sukh17 Talk 20:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a minimum amount of games (or TOI) played in order to be included in the goalie stats leaders? Curtis Joseph is currently included despite having played just over one game. And after replacing Jose Theodore in Game 1 of the Western Conference semifinals tonight, Peter Budaj would now be included in the list with a 0.00 GAA after 37:42 TOI (possibly the only time he'll play in the playoffs this year). I think there should be a 4 game (or ~240' TOI) minimum at this point. -- TexasDawg ( talk) 03:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I would think he would need to play a certain amount of his team's games. I don't think we want to end up with a goalie with 2 games when everybody else has 15. Grsz talk 05:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Four games: A goalie with four playoff games is a goalie that can theoretically win a round. Winning a round seems like a good qualifier. So, four games. 240 minutes. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
We might as well have this debate now, so it's (hopefully) over by the time it's relevant. My position is that the home team should be on the top line when the pairings are arbitrary and not pre-determined, as in the QFs and SFs. Once the pairings are not predetermined (Conf Finals, Cup Finals), teams should simply be advanced to the line they most naturally belong on (top or bottom) irrespective of whether they're the home team. Generally speaking, when you're drawing up a bracket from scratch (i.e., pairings are arbitrary) you put the home team on top, but after that they advance to whatever line they belong on, since a bracket isn't primarily designed to express who the home team is, but instead tournament paths. Point being: if the 2/5 series in either Conference ends before the 1/6 series, the 2/5 winner should be placed on the bottom line of the Conference Finals. My hope is to reach consensus on this, both as a point of policy going forward and so that we know what we're going to do as this round gets closer to being finished. MrArticleOne ( talk) 15:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
For the sake of consistancy, I think it should remain high seed on top until the SC finals, at which point the EC goes on top and WC goes on the bottom. But thats just my opinion. Asher196 ( talk) 03:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I have not seen anywhere in hockey books or media where we list the times of the goals as is done in this article. It is always summarized by period. Why is this article done differently? Alaney2k ( talk) 17:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
So then should it be Period - Time left in period, ie 2nd - 2:36? Grsz talk 20:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Did you guys want to have separate sections for each period? I can look into something that hopefully does not take up too much space. Let me know, and I can look at the feasibility of such an option. The only barrier would be the detriment to the article's size, whic resulted in a very similarly designed template in last year's playoffs being removed and replaced with the tables currently on the 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs page. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 21:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
April 9 | San Jose Sharks | 2 – 3 | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | Versus, RIS, CBC | |||
Ryane Clowe 1 - 06:06 Ryane Clowe 2 - 59:03 |
Scoring stats | 02:47 -
Stephane Yelle 1 05:17 - pp - Dion Phaneuf 1 36:21 - Stephane Yelle 2 | ||||||
Evgeni Nabokov ( 20 saves / 23 shots ) | Goalie stats | Miikka Kiprusoff ( 37 saves / 39 shots ) |
April 10 | San Jose Sharks | 2 – 0 | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | RIS, CBC | |||
No Scoring | First period | No scoring | ||||||
Joe Pavelski 1 - 04:56 Torrey Mitchell 1 - pp - 18:09 |
Second period | No scoring | ||||||
No scoring | Third period | No scoring | ||||||
Evgeni Nabokov ( 21 saves / 21 shots ) | Goalie stats | Miikka Kiprusoff ( 41 saves / 43 shots ) |
April 13 | Calgary Flames | 4 – 3 | San Jose Sharks | Pengrowth Saddledome | Versus, RIS, CBC | |||
Jarome Iginla 1 - pp - 13:22 Daymond Langkow 1 - pp - 30:14 Dion Phaneuf 2 - 41:18 Owen Nolan 1 - 56:15 |
Scoring stats | 01:31 - pp -
Ryane Clowe 3 03:19 - Patrick Marleau 1 03:33 - Douglas Murray 1 | ||||||
Miikka Kiprusoff ( 2 saves / 5 shots ) Curtis Joseph ( 22 saves / 22 shots ) |
Goalie stats | Evgeni Nabokov ( 21 saves / 25 shots ) |
April 15 | Calgary Flames | 2 – 3 | San Jose Sharks | Pengrowth Saddledome | RIS, CBC | |||
Jarome Iginla 2 - 03:19 | First period | No Scoring | ||||||
Dion Phaneuf 3 - 18:29 | Second period | 10:56 - pp - Ryane Clowe 4 | ||||||
No scoring | Third period | 15:06 -
Jonathan Cheechoo 1 19:50 - Joe Thornton 1 | ||||||
Miikka Kiprusoff ( 29 saves / 32 shots ) | Goalie stats | Evgeni Nabokov ( 8 saves / 10 shots ) |
April 17 | San Jose Sharks | 4 – 3 | 2OT | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | Versus, RIS, CBC | ||
No Scoring | First period | No scoring | ||||||
Joe Pavelski 2 - pp - 13:32 Patrick Marleau 2 - 18:07 |
Second period | 04:03 - pp - Jarome Iginla 3 | ||||||
Jonathan Cheechoo 2 - 04:52 | Third period | 09:06 - pp -
Daymond Langkow 2 18:43 - David Moss 1 | ||||||
Jonathan Cheechoo 3 - 08:23 | Second overtime period | No scoring | ||||||
Evgeni Nabokov ( 33 saves / 36 shots ) | Goalie stats | Miikka Kiprusoff ( 22 saves / 26 shots ) |
April 20 | Calgary Flames | 7:00pm | San Jose Sharks | Pengrowth Saddledome | RIS, CBC |
April 22 | San Jose Sharks | 7:00pm | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | Versus, RIS, CBC |
San Jose leads series 3 – 2 | |
Take a look at what I did for Montreal - Boston on the article page. Only listing the periods for which there is scoring.
Alaney2k (
talk)
14:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I like the new design, where you have specified in which period the goal occurred. So now it's maybe a good idea to remove Scoring Stats, which is located below the scoreline. Then we would have the goalscorers right beneath the team name. =) What do you think? lil2mas ( talk) 09:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks to everyone for updating to the period-by-period scoring. Alaney2k ( talk) 17:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Currently, the article looks very unbalanced when there are summaries for only 3 of the 12 completed series so far. Either they should all have them, or the paragraphs for the MTL-BOS, DAL-ANA and DAL-SJ should be removed. The only problem with putting summaries on each series is that the article size will increase dramatically. 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs, with summaries, currently is around 50 kilobytes long (shorter than this article now), but it still uses tables instead of templates like Template:NHLPlayoffs. The other possibility is to split the article. Thoughts? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I would go with the "splitting up"-option here, where at least the conference quarter-finals should have its own sub-article. Leaving only the first line of the current match summary (the way it is showed when it is collapsed) left in this article, and having a link to the sub-article below the quarter-final header. This sub-article should contain the match summary (uncollapsed, maybe). The written summaries can remain in the main article if it doesn't take up to much size. lil2mas ( talk) 21:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Should it say "Dallas lead series" or "Dallas leads series" ?-- Sonjaaa ( talk) 19:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Why does it need to be limited to the top five? But the more important thing is that it can only be numbered by one default catagory. Obvously anyone can sort it by any catagory that they want; but we cannot have a default listing by GAA and Sv% because they differ. It doesn't matter which one, but it can't be both. Black ngold29 05:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I think we should include more goalies in this list, like at the 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs. Have a look at User:Twas Now/Sandbox, which includes the top fourteen goaltenders. There are 22 goalies with some minutes in these playoffs; six of these haven't played enough to qualify (Boucher, Budaj, Halak, Harding, Hasek, Joseph); two others have poor stats in both categories (Brodeur—3.19/0.891), Giguere—3.18/0.898). − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and while we're at it, can we just eliminate all bolded numbers in the chart like on 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs#Goaltending? I think that's why I was confused over the way they were ordered, there's really no need for bolded numbers. Thanks! Black ngold29 00:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Now that you have included 14 goaltenders, why not include the remaining 3 who has played in the Stanley Cup Playoffs this year?? And the table should be bolded out after which category it is sorted by originally... lil2mas ( talk) 19:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The miniumum 8 games sounds reasonable to me. Black ngold29 20:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I remember hearing and reading about how much higher the ratings were for this year's playoffs. It's an important statistical measure that belongs in this article. Fdssdf ( talk) 17:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on 2008 Stanley Cup playoffs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:36, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
|
|
A search for "2008 NHL Playoffs" doesn't give this page as a result, how can this be changed? CoW mAnX ( talk) 22:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The text is a bit difficult to read in the game summaries as it stands now, with the small, italicized text. I'm not sure if it's just me, but I can barely read any of it - if it weren't italicized, it wouldn't be so bad, but the combination of smaller text size and the formatting makes it very difficult. Just want to throw that out there. -- 24.3.143.146 ( talk) 03:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Should we make a little note as to denote who scored the game-winning goal in each game? Jmlk 1 7 05:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I would just like to request if possible that any other comments or suggestions about the proposed template are posted in an expedited matter so that a template for the summary of each series is finalized, therefore easing the amount of difficult that would otherwise be involved in switching templates later in the future. Please let me know as soon as possible, particularly if you find any bugs in experimenting with this template. Please leave comments in the section below. Thank You. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 00:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Definitely looks good and smoother all-around. I like it. – Alex43223 T | C | E 03:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand the significance of having this on there. Can we take it out? That would leave more room for adding assists as someone suggested. Civil Engineer III ( talk) 13:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Why are all the names misspelled? For example Hasek instead of Hašek, Krejci instead of Krejčí, Selanne instead of Selänne, these all seem to be diacritical problems, why are these errors included here? The Dominator Talk Edits 01:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering if this should be filled out or are you waiting for the first round to end? Tjwallace87 ( talk) 06:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I really find the location of the Arenas pretty unnecessary. Wikipedia users can simple look up information on the arenas by clicking on the the arena's name to lead them to the article on the arena. Also, in almost every case, the location of the arena is already apparent in the team's title, except for the case of team's taking regionally based titles, such as Colorado, Minnesota and New Jersey. Lastly, the addition of the location also pushes the summary tables to extend to two lines for each game in most cases, taking up a lot of space. Thus, I believe it is in the best interest to simply remove this piece of information from this page. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 09:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
We use country-of-origin flags more than team logos. This is somewhat confusing, because isn't the team more important to keep track of which player is performing well for which team?-- Sonjaaa ( talk) 12:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't we have Wikipedia:FLAGCRUFT? I don't think where the players are from is too relevant in this particular article. Also, there is some overlinking here, is there something I'm missing or shouldn't everything just be linked on first occurrence like in other articles? The Dominator Talk Edits 00:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Distracting flags must go! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(flags)#Use_of_flags_for_sports_people Who can remove them? -- 206.248.172.247 ( talk) 21:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I did not change the guideline. I just added more examples. The guideline as is (without the NHL example I added) already clearly states the flags cannot accompany the player names here. Please read the Manual of Style before saying I am not good faith.
"Flags should only be used where that person is representing a national team or country such as the Olympic games. Flag usage such as Delray Beach International Tennis Championships or using a national flag for Formula One teams and drivers are incorrect as they are not representing a nation."
-- Sonjaaa ( talk) 21:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Of course they can be part of a national team, but they aren't representing Team Canada or Team Sweden here! They are representing the Philadelphia Flyers, etc. Let's stick to Wikipedia's official Manual of Style. If you don't like the rules, then discuss them on the Manual of Style talk page to try to change them. -- Sonjaaa ( talk) 05:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
"Do not emphasize nationality without good reason - Wikipedia is not a place for nationalistic pride. Flags are visually striking, and placing a national flag next to something can make its nationality or location seem to be of greater significance than other things. For example, with an English flag next to him, Paul McCartney looks like an "English singer-songwriter from Liverpool who was in the Beatles"; without the flag next to him, he looks like an "English singer-songwriter from Liverpool who was in the Beatles". Emphasizing the importance of a person's citizenship or nationality above their other qualities risks violating Wikipedia's "Neutral point of view" policy." Asher196 ( talk) 06:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. For my part, the first (or second, or third ...) thing I think of when I see a list of leading scorers is not "Gosh, from what country could these guys possibly come!" For those who do, that's why all the names are linked to their player pages. Ravenswing 12:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I thought we agreed, to keep diacritics off the player's names when dealing with NHL related articles. GoodDay ( talk) 22:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm the last of the Mouhigans, eh? I'm sticking to the NHL team rosters; as it's becoming increasingly impossible to invoke the non-dios half of the compromise, across all the Hockey articles. GoodDay ( talk) 15:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
We need some kina of warning/message, to inform editors not to add diacritics, per Wikipedia: WikiProject Ice Hockey compromise. GoodDay ( talk) 17:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The compromise was reached, after nearly 2 years of 'edit wars' & 'heated discussions' concerning diacritics on Ice Hockey articles. Trust me, pandora has been sealed in his box; let's not let him out 'again'. GoodDay ( talk) 20:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
The compromise is quite clear. Diacritics for Player pages & Non-NHL related articles; No diacritics for NHL related articles. Neither side (pro-dios or anti-dios) will accept all one way or the other. Been there, done that, didn't work. GoodDay ( talk) 22:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Diacritics tend to get me tempermental (if I discuss them too much). I'd recommend you contact Resolute, Djsasso & Ravenswing for a better explanation concerning the compromise (they're better communicators, then I; IMHO). GoodDay ( talk) 23:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe a final solution must come from above, as both this article (and other articles) and the ice hockey wikiproject have consistently proven to be an unsatisfactory arena for achieving a viable consensus. Editors are naturally going to add diacritics, while others, but particularly the more vocals ones, are going to revert to hide the diacritics. The continuous warring can only come to an end with some sort of policy that endorses either side, or makes a very clear and sensible grounds for the specific use or exclusion of diacritics. Thank You. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 23:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
There appears to be a relevant discussion currently ongoing with relation to the Manual of Style. Here is a link to that specific discussion. Thanks. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 01:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
What is the point of hiding diacritics behind a pipe? If you're not willing to show them, then why bother making a direct link to them when the non-diacritic term will certainly redirect to the correct article. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 16:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Somebody is probably going to always come around and un-hide the diacritics all the time. It is too bad that you will continue to waste time enforcing this "compromise" when there are so many more items of importance on or related to this page, which would benefit from your efforts. Some items that could enhance the article far more significantly are descriptions for each of the series, and additional prose throughout the article, in addition to numerous other subjects of concerns. Thank You. — Sukh17 Talk 20:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a minimum amount of games (or TOI) played in order to be included in the goalie stats leaders? Curtis Joseph is currently included despite having played just over one game. And after replacing Jose Theodore in Game 1 of the Western Conference semifinals tonight, Peter Budaj would now be included in the list with a 0.00 GAA after 37:42 TOI (possibly the only time he'll play in the playoffs this year). I think there should be a 4 game (or ~240' TOI) minimum at this point. -- TexasDawg ( talk) 03:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I would think he would need to play a certain amount of his team's games. I don't think we want to end up with a goalie with 2 games when everybody else has 15. Grsz talk 05:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Four games: A goalie with four playoff games is a goalie that can theoretically win a round. Winning a round seems like a good qualifier. So, four games. 240 minutes. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
We might as well have this debate now, so it's (hopefully) over by the time it's relevant. My position is that the home team should be on the top line when the pairings are arbitrary and not pre-determined, as in the QFs and SFs. Once the pairings are not predetermined (Conf Finals, Cup Finals), teams should simply be advanced to the line they most naturally belong on (top or bottom) irrespective of whether they're the home team. Generally speaking, when you're drawing up a bracket from scratch (i.e., pairings are arbitrary) you put the home team on top, but after that they advance to whatever line they belong on, since a bracket isn't primarily designed to express who the home team is, but instead tournament paths. Point being: if the 2/5 series in either Conference ends before the 1/6 series, the 2/5 winner should be placed on the bottom line of the Conference Finals. My hope is to reach consensus on this, both as a point of policy going forward and so that we know what we're going to do as this round gets closer to being finished. MrArticleOne ( talk) 15:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
For the sake of consistancy, I think it should remain high seed on top until the SC finals, at which point the EC goes on top and WC goes on the bottom. But thats just my opinion. Asher196 ( talk) 03:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I have not seen anywhere in hockey books or media where we list the times of the goals as is done in this article. It is always summarized by period. Why is this article done differently? Alaney2k ( talk) 17:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
So then should it be Period - Time left in period, ie 2nd - 2:36? Grsz talk 20:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Did you guys want to have separate sections for each period? I can look into something that hopefully does not take up too much space. Let me know, and I can look at the feasibility of such an option. The only barrier would be the detriment to the article's size, whic resulted in a very similarly designed template in last year's playoffs being removed and replaced with the tables currently on the 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs page. -- Sukh17 T • C • E 21:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
April 9 | San Jose Sharks | 2 – 3 | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | Versus, RIS, CBC | |||
Ryane Clowe 1 - 06:06 Ryane Clowe 2 - 59:03 |
Scoring stats | 02:47 -
Stephane Yelle 1 05:17 - pp - Dion Phaneuf 1 36:21 - Stephane Yelle 2 | ||||||
Evgeni Nabokov ( 20 saves / 23 shots ) | Goalie stats | Miikka Kiprusoff ( 37 saves / 39 shots ) |
April 10 | San Jose Sharks | 2 – 0 | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | RIS, CBC | |||
No Scoring | First period | No scoring | ||||||
Joe Pavelski 1 - 04:56 Torrey Mitchell 1 - pp - 18:09 |
Second period | No scoring | ||||||
No scoring | Third period | No scoring | ||||||
Evgeni Nabokov ( 21 saves / 21 shots ) | Goalie stats | Miikka Kiprusoff ( 41 saves / 43 shots ) |
April 13 | Calgary Flames | 4 – 3 | San Jose Sharks | Pengrowth Saddledome | Versus, RIS, CBC | |||
Jarome Iginla 1 - pp - 13:22 Daymond Langkow 1 - pp - 30:14 Dion Phaneuf 2 - 41:18 Owen Nolan 1 - 56:15 |
Scoring stats | 01:31 - pp -
Ryane Clowe 3 03:19 - Patrick Marleau 1 03:33 - Douglas Murray 1 | ||||||
Miikka Kiprusoff ( 2 saves / 5 shots ) Curtis Joseph ( 22 saves / 22 shots ) |
Goalie stats | Evgeni Nabokov ( 21 saves / 25 shots ) |
April 15 | Calgary Flames | 2 – 3 | San Jose Sharks | Pengrowth Saddledome | RIS, CBC | |||
Jarome Iginla 2 - 03:19 | First period | No Scoring | ||||||
Dion Phaneuf 3 - 18:29 | Second period | 10:56 - pp - Ryane Clowe 4 | ||||||
No scoring | Third period | 15:06 -
Jonathan Cheechoo 1 19:50 - Joe Thornton 1 | ||||||
Miikka Kiprusoff ( 29 saves / 32 shots ) | Goalie stats | Evgeni Nabokov ( 8 saves / 10 shots ) |
April 17 | San Jose Sharks | 4 – 3 | 2OT | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | Versus, RIS, CBC | ||
No Scoring | First period | No scoring | ||||||
Joe Pavelski 2 - pp - 13:32 Patrick Marleau 2 - 18:07 |
Second period | 04:03 - pp - Jarome Iginla 3 | ||||||
Jonathan Cheechoo 2 - 04:52 | Third period | 09:06 - pp -
Daymond Langkow 2 18:43 - David Moss 1 | ||||||
Jonathan Cheechoo 3 - 08:23 | Second overtime period | No scoring | ||||||
Evgeni Nabokov ( 33 saves / 36 shots ) | Goalie stats | Miikka Kiprusoff ( 22 saves / 26 shots ) |
April 20 | Calgary Flames | 7:00pm | San Jose Sharks | Pengrowth Saddledome | RIS, CBC |
April 22 | San Jose Sharks | 7:00pm | Calgary Flames | HP Pavilion at San Jose | Versus, RIS, CBC |
San Jose leads series 3 – 2 | |
Take a look at what I did for Montreal - Boston on the article page. Only listing the periods for which there is scoring.
Alaney2k (
talk)
14:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I like the new design, where you have specified in which period the goal occurred. So now it's maybe a good idea to remove Scoring Stats, which is located below the scoreline. Then we would have the goalscorers right beneath the team name. =) What do you think? lil2mas ( talk) 09:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks to everyone for updating to the period-by-period scoring. Alaney2k ( talk) 17:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Currently, the article looks very unbalanced when there are summaries for only 3 of the 12 completed series so far. Either they should all have them, or the paragraphs for the MTL-BOS, DAL-ANA and DAL-SJ should be removed. The only problem with putting summaries on each series is that the article size will increase dramatically. 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs, with summaries, currently is around 50 kilobytes long (shorter than this article now), but it still uses tables instead of templates like Template:NHLPlayoffs. The other possibility is to split the article. Thoughts? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I would go with the "splitting up"-option here, where at least the conference quarter-finals should have its own sub-article. Leaving only the first line of the current match summary (the way it is showed when it is collapsed) left in this article, and having a link to the sub-article below the quarter-final header. This sub-article should contain the match summary (uncollapsed, maybe). The written summaries can remain in the main article if it doesn't take up to much size. lil2mas ( talk) 21:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Should it say "Dallas lead series" or "Dallas leads series" ?-- Sonjaaa ( talk) 19:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Why does it need to be limited to the top five? But the more important thing is that it can only be numbered by one default catagory. Obvously anyone can sort it by any catagory that they want; but we cannot have a default listing by GAA and Sv% because they differ. It doesn't matter which one, but it can't be both. Black ngold29 05:26, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I think we should include more goalies in this list, like at the 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs. Have a look at User:Twas Now/Sandbox, which includes the top fourteen goaltenders. There are 22 goalies with some minutes in these playoffs; six of these haven't played enough to qualify (Boucher, Budaj, Halak, Harding, Hasek, Joseph); two others have poor stats in both categories (Brodeur—3.19/0.891), Giguere—3.18/0.898). − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and while we're at it, can we just eliminate all bolded numbers in the chart like on 2007 Stanley Cup Playoffs#Goaltending? I think that's why I was confused over the way they were ordered, there's really no need for bolded numbers. Thanks! Black ngold29 00:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Now that you have included 14 goaltenders, why not include the remaining 3 who has played in the Stanley Cup Playoffs this year?? And the table should be bolded out after which category it is sorted by originally... lil2mas ( talk) 19:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The miniumum 8 games sounds reasonable to me. Black ngold29 20:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I remember hearing and reading about how much higher the ratings were for this year's playoffs. It's an important statistical measure that belongs in this article. Fdssdf ( talk) 17:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on 2008 Stanley Cup playoffs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:36, 19 September 2016 (UTC)