Re-watching Game 7, were you?Hockey Widow wrote:I really didn't like that game. Watching it was like having sandpaper rubbed over my eye balls.
I'll take this game over that one.
Hooray for looking on the bright side
Moderator: Referees
Re-watching Game 7, were you?Hockey Widow wrote:I really didn't like that game. Watching it was like having sandpaper rubbed over my eye balls.
Now what kind of a punk would take such a weak cheapshot at the legendary Bobby Clarke??darren wrote:You mean Bobby Clarke, the guy who built the team that finished dead last in 2007? That Bobby Clarke?Strangelove wrote: Ahhh Bobby Clarke, Canadian icon, we'd have the Cup by now if we hired him instead of Gillis.
Well, at least we'd have Steve Bernier locked up!
Agreed Dave, I was hoping AV would pull Lou during that PP.dbr wrote:If we were going to pull the goalie the minute the penalty expired, I don't understand why we didn't pull him earlier in order to get a two man advantage?
I dunno Coco, I think I'd prefer.....coco_canuck wrote:When Kesler gets back I'd like to see this forward group:
Daniel-Henrik-Burrows
Hansen-Kesler-Samuelsson
Higgins-Hodgson-Lapierre
Weise-Malhotra-Patti/Sturm/Ebbett
Samuelsson is terrible in a 3rd line role and I'm not the least bit sold on Hodgson playing the wing...at least not yet. I can definitely see Higgins playing with Kesler, but I'm not sure about Cody playing the wing, battling on the forecheck and in deep on a consistent basis. It's not easy transitioning to a playmaking role on the wing, especially on a line where Kesler dominates the puck.Mëds wrote: I think our second line would really benefit from Hodgson's creativity and puck control. Kesler and Higgins would be demons going to the net and filling the lanes with this guy feeding them the puck. If Hodson can play wing and find chemistry with Kesler, #17 could find himself scoring 45-50 goals (pro-rated to games played obviously). I really think Hodgson would be wasted on the 3rd line trying to setup guys that don't read the offensive zone the way Higgins and Kesler do, and have poor finish and need multiple chances like Hansen does.
I agree, but can't help but wonder if the no icing when short handed rule could have something to do with it?dbr wrote:If we were going to pull the goalie the minute the penalty expired, I don't understand why we didn't pull him earlier in order to get a two man advantage?
Except for the fact that if they are trying to score on a rebound from the rear boards they have to get to the puck first.....at even strength that would negate the icing.Per wrote:I agree, but can't help but wonder if the no icing when short handed rule could have something to do with it?dbr wrote:If we were going to pull the goalie the minute the penalty expired, I don't understand why we didn't pull him earlier in order to get a two man advantage?
During the penalty, if they lift the puck out they can chase after it and score on a rebound from the boards.
Try the same when equal strength and it's an icing and face off in their own end.
coco_canuck wrote:
So now Ballard is getting even less ice-time than he was last year.
I'm with ya here. It seems he either is good all game long or not. Once he starts looking mediocre, he doesnt seem to finish strong. He needs to be on a short leash since keeping him in on a bad night has never shown to be the appropriate decision. Pull him after 4 rather than keep him in for 7 and have a media field day with it. If you are worried about how it affects him psychologically, remember that it also affects the other players as well.Mëds wrote: Our coach, Luongo should have been done on the 4th goal. We battled to within one 3 times, and he couldn't close the door, we even tied it, and he gave up the winning goal less than a minute later. Even giving him a bye on the first and second goals, it was obvious the way this one started that it was not going to be Roberto's night in net. Call a spade a spade and quit giving up 2 points because you want to give your prize stallion a chance at redeeming himself.
LOL!Mëds wrote:Except for the fact that if they are trying to score on a rebound from the rear boards they have to get to the puck first.....at even strength that would negate the icing.Per wrote:I agree, but can't help but wonder if the no icing when short handed rule could have something to do with it?dbr wrote:If we were going to pull the goalie the minute the penalty expired, I don't understand why we didn't pull him earlier in order to get a two man advantage?
During the penalty, if they lift the puck out they can chase after it and score on a rebound from the boards.
Try the same when equal strength and it's an icing and face off in their own end.
Unless this was game where they played with that sissy Euro no touch.....ooooohhhh.....nevermind.....