Fresh off a 6-2 first round, I feel reasonably confident about round two. This, of course, is the point where the hockey gods decide to mock me for taking credit for getting the four predetermined "gimmes" and two of the four coin-tosses. No "gimmes" here, though, so let's get right down to the superficial bullshit.

May 9: I fail at updating.

Prince of Wales Conference Semifinals

(1) Montreal vs. (6) Philadelphia

Playoff History: The Habs and Flyers have met four times in the playoffs: the 1973 semifinals (4-1 MTL), the 1976 finals (4-0 MTL), the 1987 conference finals (4-2 PHI), and the 1989 conference finals (4-2 MTL).

Last Series: Both teams nearly hocked up 3-1 leads, ultimately scraping past their respective foes, Boston and Washington, in seven games.

This Time Around: The Habs went 4-0 against the Flyers this season and have won their last six in a row, almost uniformly clobbering them in the process, but we all know what the season series means when the games are worth something more than seeding. Philadelphia has a slow but physical defence that Montreal's speed should be able to take advantage of, as they've certainly shown an ability to handle the physical game, but Philly also showed that they can pack a hell of a wallop on the counterpunch, lighting up the Capitals for four or more goals three times. Discipline, as has been noted elsewhere, is going to be a big factor in this, as Philly has continued their regular-season power play success in the playoffs, whereas Montreal has not. Another key matchup will be goaltending, where both Carey Price and Martin Biron have had moments of weakness alongside a generally solid body of work, with Price perhaps looking more impressive, of the two. In terms of depth, though, you've got to go with the Canadiens without question. Few teams can come at you with two good scoring lines the way Montreal can, and that's something we should see a lot more of in the second round, based on how Guy Carbonneau's new lines performed in Game 7 against Boston.

The Verdict: I think we've all learned our lesson from last round and realized that no one (other than the Senators) in these playoffs is a pushover. That being said, I can't see any real reason, short of a total collapse by Price, for Montreal not to advance. Montreal in six.

	4	2	2	2	4		1
	3	4	3	4	6		4

Story of the Series: Hey, look. A total collapse by Price. Anyway, a week later and I'm still not sure how much of the Habs' epic fail was bad luck and how much of it was shitty play. I'm gonna go with 25:75 on this. They did hit a lot of goalposts, and they did have some truly unbelievable things happen, e.g. the first Umberger goal in Game 5. But Price was bad, the D was bad (though, as it turns out, severely injured), the special teams were little better than the awful they were in Round 1, Kovalev and the Belarussians were often invisible, and Saku Koivu, while a great player and a great captain, cannot carry a team single-handedly when everyone else is having various kinds of ridiculous issues. Biron was good, yes, but it's not like the Habs didn't fire a bunch right into his crest. In all, a good learning experience, but it should have been clear from the Boston series that this wasn't Montreal's year, much as it was clear to me in the West that it wasn't San Jose's year based on the Calgary series.

(2) Pittsburgh vs. (5) New York Rangers

Playoff History: The Pens and Rangers have met three times in the playoffs: the 1989 division semifinals (4-0 PIT), the 1992 division finals (4-2 PIT), and the 1996 conference semifinals (4-1 PIT).

Last Series: Both teams were home and cool quickly: Pittsburgh dispatched the Senators in just four, while the Rangers needed five to surpass the Devils.

This Time Around: This one should be good. While the Rangers are generally regarded as a defensive team (and Henrik Lundqvist led the League with 10 shutouts this season), they have a number of heralded offensive players, while Pittsburgh's stable of scorers, young and old, needs no introduction. The general consensus is that the series will come down to goaltending, but I look at the special teams stats, where Pittsburgh holds a significant lead, and I wonder if, in a tight series, that might not make a potential difference, especially considering the fact that an overtime power-play has decided at least one series this year already, that I can think of.

The Verdict: Put away your conspiracy theories, kids, no matter who wins this one, Gary wins. The real question here is whether the Pens are that good or the Sens were just that bad. I say the former. Pittsburgh in seven.

	5	2	5	0	3		4
	4	0	3	3	2		1

Story of the Series: It seemed to me like every time the Rangers had any sort of momentum -- or even when the Penguins didn't -- they took some kind of retarded penalty to cancel it all out and give Pittsburgh a massive edge, and the Pens, to their credit, refused to let them off the mat. The only exception here was Game 4, when the Rangers played a very physical game and managed to goad both Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin into silly retaliation penalties. Jaromir Jagr was a force throughout, Brenden Shanahan was still invisible, and Henrik Lundqvist was decidedly average, if not outright bad at times, through this series, while Malkin continues to be a big story here in the playoffs, as is young keeper Marc-Andre Fleury, who's finally starting to look like the guy the Penguins drafted first overall five years ago. I must admit to a certain disappointment here, in that while some of the games were close, the series wound up ending in decidedly swift fashion (a theme of the second round). I've heard the Pens' 2-0 victory -- really 1-0 with an empty-netter -- being pointed to as a sign that the team is "ready." I'm not sure if you can compare it to the '84 Oilers beating the Islanders 1-0 in the first game of the Stanley Cup Finals that year, at least not yet, but it does at least show that the Penguins can play more than one style of game, which will prove handy, should they make the Finals.

Clarence S. Campbell Conference Semifinals

(1) Detroit vs. (6) Colorado

Playoff History: The Wings and Avs have met five times in the playoffs, all over seven years: the 1996 conference finals (4-2 COL), 1997 conference finals (4-2 DET), 1999 conference semifinals (4-2 COL), 2000 conference semifinals (4-1 COL), 2002 conference finals (4-3 DET).

Last Series: Detroit received a scare from Nashville before ultimately taking the series in six; Colorado, behind the goaltending of Jose Theodore, upset the Minnesota Wild in six.

This Time Around: I talked to a Wings fan I know, and he said that he wanted nothing to do with Colorado. Jose Theodore is shaping up to be the early candidate for the Arturs Irbe "Where The Fuck Did He Come From" Playoff Goaltender of the Year Award, and guys like Sakic, Forsberg, and Foote are partying like it's 1999*, the Avs could definitely cover the dark-horse bet and tack another year onto Detroit's record of early-round frustrations at the hands of lesser seeds. However, with Chris Osgood similarly playing fantastic hockey, and all the usual suspects seeming to be healthy for the Wings, the Avalanche will have a hell of an uphill battle if they want to be the third low-seeded Northwestern team to make the conference finals in four seasons.

* - And really, doesn't this Western Final Four look like 1999, in and of itself? Sub St. Louis for San Jose, and you've got an identical layout, seeding notwithstanding.

The Verdict: I really like Colorado's chances, but I like Detroit's lineup just slightly better. Theo will steal one at some point, but even so, Detroit in seven.

	4	5	4	8		4
	3	1	3	2		0

Story of the Series: Ouch. I mean, I didn't think Colorado would actually win, but I thought it would be a bloody series. Between injuries and Jose Theodore playing more like 2006-vintage Theo than 2002-vintage Theo, the Avs never really had a chance. On the other hand...nine goals in four games? Sweet fucking Jesus, where did this Franzen dude come from? He's been the story of the playoffs for the Wings; he's not the only one who's playing well, but he's the only one blowing the entire hockey world out of the water, which makes me wonder how soon it will be before it all comes crashing down. (Spoilers: Not Game 1 of the conference finals.) I don't think this series proves too much about the Wings, other than the fact that they can deliver the killing blow emphatically when the situation arises, but they certainly look like the team to beat, period, this playoff.

(2) San Jose vs. (5) Dallas

Playoff History: The Sharks and Stars have met twice in the playoffs: the 1998 conference quarterfinals (4-2 DAL) and the 2000 conference semifinals (4-1 DAL).

Last Series: San Jose narrowly survived the challenge from the Flames, needing all seven games to do it; the Stars effectively shut down the Ducks, eliminating the defending champs in six.

This Time Around: These guys had a bit of a donnybrook last time they met, suggesting that this will definitely be a hotly contested series. While you might be inclined to think that this is more about whether or not the Sharks beat themselves, it's not as though the Stars are simply the inheritors of good fortune in drawing a team of talented players with reputations for playoff chokery. I have to admit that I couldn't have been more wrong about Dallas in round one, and it looks like they've found their mojo, and that makes them a lot more dangerous than the Sharks, who barely survived their first-round series on the basis of a four-point night by the ghost of Jeremy Roenick. Still, finally surviving some adversity might be just what the doctor ordered for the Sharks, building their confidence and showing them that they really can handle this playoff thing. And hey, look: Joe Thornton has seven points in as many games. Maybe he can play in the playoffs, too.

The Verdict: While I don't think the Sharks are going to roll over and die as they often have in the second round, there's just something about the Stars I can't quite quantify that gives me confidence in them. Dallas in six.

	2	2	1	2	3	1		2
	3	5	2	1	2	2		4

Story of the Series: This was a lot closer than it was starting to look after three games. In the end, I think this series revolved around Brendan Morrow. He dominated both offensively and physically, punctuating both in Game 6 with the game-winner in OT (his fourth of the series, but sixth if you count the bullshit "kicking" goal and the legitimately-waved off "gloved" goal) and by racking up 19 hits, including one at the end of the third that blasted Milan Michalek into the next zip code. Marty Turco has been brilliant all playoff (11 GA in the equivalent of over seven games in this series), to the point where even Ender likes him, and he's pretty picky about goalies. San Jose put up a valiant fight, but yet again found a way to lose. Some likely culprits? The once-dynamic duo of Thornton and Cheechoo combined for just six points between them. Ryan Clowe vanished somewhere between the Calgary and Dallas series. Deadline prize Brian Campbell was a ridiculous liability more often than he was an offensive catalyst (though I'll admit, that pass he took from JR for the game-tier in Game 5 was fantastic -- you've got to be good to take passes like that, too, not just dish them), and was fittingly in the box for the series winner. Really, if not for Evgeni Nabokov's heroics, especially in the quadruple-overtime sixth game, the series is a laugher. Ron Wilson's head is widely expected to roll for his sketchy "motivational" tactics and storied lack of playoff success, and that might be the Sharks' last hope of making a run with the current group, because there's no good reason why they couldn't have won this series with the talent they had on the ice.

Comment on this article...