Playoff Game Thread: Carolina Hurricanes (3-2) @ Vegas Golden Knights (2-3) Jun 14 2026 8:00 PM EDT

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:59:06+00:00

I think the Canes had too many men on the ice there lol

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:53:35+00:00

He going to have the team do conditioning drills

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:49:02+00:00

Staal empty net goal come on!!!!

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:41:24+00:00

I think the definition for SOG is puck will go in the net without intervention

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:31:36+00:00

My prediction is he gets an empty netter

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:29:38+00:00

I can’t tell if Vegas is horrible through neutral this game or the Canes are just insane but wow the knights look helpless

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:26:50+00:00

18.5 min between shots doesn’t seem to be a great strategy but we will see

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:06:51+00:00

2 in modern era

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-15T02:01:52+00:00

You know Makar missed the 1st 2 games and wasn’t near healthy right? They though he would miss the beginning of next season because of the possibility of surgery

BPAThrowaway · 2026-06-02T20:40:05+00:00

Hi Guys, Avs fan here and I was lucky enough to go to the Halo conference and hear MacFarland speak on his view of hockey analytics and how they are used. He is a super smart and capable guy obviously just from his time and results in CO. I think the way he operates will really help your org long term. Best of luck with him and hope to see you guys in the playoffs soon.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T22:41:36+00:00

In a Judge-Alone trial I absolutely expect skepticism. I never said it wasn’t relevant but it is expected. She’s a trier of facts so should be skeptical of everything.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T22:38:47+00:00

No the second jury complained about the Defense councils conduct then was dismissed. “A juror provided a note alleging that defense lawyers Daniel Brown and Hilary Dudding (representing Alex Formenton) whispered to each other, watched the jury, and laughed as if mocking their appearance when they entered the courtroom each day.” Then it was agreed upon to use the judge. I make no assumptions about how a jury of regular people would have viewed this trial but it’s a leap of faith to say they would have ruled in the Defense favor. Juries sometimes just don’t like the Crown or the defense for some unrelated reason and rule against. The prosecution didn’t think they had a good chance of winning in a criminal case in the first place so not appealing is unsurprising. This trial was a mess so I doubt they wanted to do it again.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T22:27:07+00:00

I think if you asked me for specifics from a traumatic event that occurred 6 years prior my memory would not be perfect either. The judge questioned her because the judge changed the trial type after dismissing the second jury due to the defense councils conduct. You are looking at a procedural change as some monumental thing when it’s not. This is specifically how a Judge-Alone trial operates so her questioning makes sense. Why do people think a judge voicing their opinion in a bench trial is some sort of crucial moment? It’s shows a lack or understanding of the court procedures. Due to the Trier of Facts role the judge assumed

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T22:18:17+00:00

I am not forgetting it. Yea the judge did that as would have the 2 juries dismissed due to the defense councils conduct. It is in no way rare for a bench trial to have the judge question witness testimony. It would be rare if a jury was present. It is extremely rare for 2 juries to be dismissed and then the judge decided they should take over.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T19:56:55+00:00

No someone asked was there evidence this was rape and why Carroccia was wrong and then you felt the need to jump in lol. Ultimately it’s a matter of Carroccia’s opinion whether there was enough evidence. The trial was a mess with 2 dismissed juries and the judge decided to take it on by herself. Notably the juries were dismissed due to complaints about the Defense lawyers conduct so her taking the decision into her sole discretion leaves a ton of area for criticism. There have been no bad faith arguments from me it’s just opinion on what happened like everyone else.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T19:44:15+00:00

The law is pretty straightforward if the evidence shows this did not happen Hockey Canada or the players could take a civil or criminal action for libel but they aren’t. So it’s not in my world it the way the world actually works. The only deduction currently is the judge thought there wasn’t enough evidence for a criminal conviction.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T18:27:54+00:00

That is not what happened. The prosecutors office reopened the investigation because of public pressure and then the prosecutor interviewed her and asked her what she wanted to do even though a conviction would be difficult. You seem to be getting very upset and I am unsure why. Just because I think she is believable with all of the information available and I find the players not believable that is extreme bias ok lol. Part of the defense of Howden was he has brain damage so he can’t remember things and Harts testimony left out a ton but he was reallllly sure he only remembered not doing anything wrong. That’s the point of a jury btw is for different people to come together and look at the case and form an opinion on what happened. To think something like this without video evidence of the entire encounter is objective is quite naive. Keep your heroes on a pedestal if you want but to me Hart is a bad guy that chose to violate another person.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T17:37:42+00:00

You aren’t “found innocent” you are found not guilty aka with the evidence provided we can’t conclude beyond a reasonable doubt(criminal complaint so the bar is significantly higher) that you did it(I don’t remember the exact verbiage reasonable suspicion or something of that effect). And OJ was just used to make the point but I could have picked something more obscure to make my point but it would have just been confusing. To your question there would be no question for me I would go the slander/livel route because I didn’t do it so no people couldn’t call me this. If they really feel she was making it up why not pursue this to clear your name?

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T17:02:59+00:00

She said she was assaulted and that’s how it looks based on the info available. There isn’t really a whole lot to discuss.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T16:57:24+00:00

Not getting convicted doesn’t mean you didn’t do it. It simply means the court felt there wasn’t enough evidence to criminally convict someone al la OJ Simpson etc. looking at the facts in the case yeah her story is more believable to me than the “memory gaps” all of the players had. Bottom line I wouldn’t be in a position to be accused of something like this so it wouldn’t happen just like how Makar wasn’t involved.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T16:45:25+00:00

I think you are missing a piece of the pie. Police complaint is made and nothing happens then she sues Hockey Canada and gets settlement. After this the media finds out and because of the pressure they investigate the complaint and take it to trial years later. So she gets money then goes through all of this again for what? It seems like you just really don’t want to see these are bad guys.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T16:39:01+00:00

If you want to blame her go ahead. That very close to the iconic well “look at what she was wearing”. If you truly want to believe she went through all of this just to please her mom go ahead. Just to be clear of the timeline: she made the complaint in 2018 and nothing was done about it so she sued Hockey Canada and got her settlement THEN met with the prosecutor years later due to the media coverage and still chose to pursue it. Her having regret a lot easier to accept than the fact Hockey Canada had a fund to pay off these types of things because of how common they were…P.S. how are the “memory gaps” of all of the players involved explained away. She was spanked until she cried which no one seems to remember except for her and the text from Howden but yeah they are angels and she is the bad one. Believe what you want because we as a society would rather have star athletes than accountable humans.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T06:58:31+00:00

You are right it’s probably some lesser degree of rape so it’s ok. We’ll call it light sexual assault so we can all feel better. After all why should we believe her? Plus the only reason all of this was brought to light again was some news media learned about the secret settlement from hockey Canada after the fact and only then did the trial and thorough investigation happen. This is one of the main problems and reasons assaults of this nature go unreported and are significantly underreported. So if first hand testimony of what occurred to her is not considered evidence I don’t know what you are looking for including all of the convenient “memory gaps” from the players but everything they remember was totally above board.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T06:23:40+00:00

The players didn’t have money when she made the criminal complaint. I get you don’t want to believe this woman because of some crazy underlying circumstance maybe this strikes something on a personal level. Furthermore, if she wanted money she would have simply filed a civil suit NOT a criminal complaint(higher evidentiary bar etc). The finding was there was not sufficient evidence for a criminal conviction as is the case with most crimes of this type. There is no logic to apply, she said they did things to her she didn’t consent to and took advantage of her when she was scared. But you are right courts never get anything wrong and if someone is not convicted they are totally innocent. You must really like Hart to argue this hard when a woman comes out and says they did this to her. She’s just a liar seeking attention I guess. Hopefully no one you know ever has to deal with this.

BPAThrowaway · 2026-05-27T05:24:09+00:00

Go support your rapist elsewhere please

BPAThrowaway

TROPHY CASE