Ray77

Care to expand on that? Why am I a tool? I say something that you don't agree with so you call me a tool? HAAAAAA. Seriously, I'd like to hear the reasoning behind why you think I'm a tool. I'm sure you'll have some intelligent reasons - I can't wait to hear them. Also, I'm surprised to see you taking the topic at hand and turning it into namecalling - it's not like you to do that!

Great point!

I guess I don't recall anywhere in my post where I said anything about his size, shot or how physical he does or does not play.

It'll be interesting to see how that goes. His daddy won't be able to come to his rescue and he won't be able to jump ship on the Steel and just go to another team if things aren't going his way. Welcome to the real world, Simonson...good luck...you'll need it.

Duncan

Sounds like this is pending a physical and also that a 6-7 year deal gets reached between Santana and the Mets. ESPN - Mets agree to Santana deal, pending extension agreement USA Today - Twins agree to deal Santana to Mets for prospects

I'll go with Kozek.

And I would stay away from Lammy, unless you think he can score a goal. Actually, if someone wins Survivor this weekend and we start another one next weekend, Lammy may be a good pick for Saturday night's game. If the Sioux manage to light up Kangas on Friday night, maybe Lucia-pet will put in Frazee on Saturday - there's a golden opportunity for Lammy to score!

What would the numbers at the Final Five have to do with a "conspiracy"? We all know that attendance numbers would be down if the Gophers weren't in it. There's no "conspiracy" there. All that would prove is that the fair weather Gopher fans won't go watch good hockey - they will only go to watch Gopher hockey.

I was waiting for your reply. Keep it up and you'll get what's coming to you!

Why couldn't he have done this last night and kept me in Survivor?

Gotta love it!

Which 3 are left (for those of us too lazy to look back)?

I'll take an empty netter from VandeVelde to keep me in the Survivor game!

Are they playing that dumb "Ole" song that I always associate with English soccer? Man, is Mankato dumb! If the REA ever plays that I'll never go back there.

Can somebody please post this ASAP?!?!?!

That would be a quick game of Survivor if it ends up 1-0!

VandeVelde

The Nash goal was sweet, but don't forget about Toews's goal against Colorado. I'm probably a bit biased, but I think I'd vote for Toews. Nash had to put a few moves on to score, but so did Toews and he had to go through 3 guys instead of 2. Toews Goal

If he's 6'2", 200 lbs he could possibly have 2 Jason Blake's in him!

Yes, you are correct. Typically our forwards would have huge goal and assist numbers, but for the D all I really cared about was +/-. When it came down to a 1 goal game in the last 1:30 or so, I knew the guys on our team that didn't get scored on, and they were on the ice.

I've read the comment that a few people have thought +/- seems to be an overrated stat. I'm curious as to why? If you're on the ice when your team is scoring more than when you're getting scored on, especially as a defenseman, you're doing your job. Some defenseman, like Finley, are not big-time offensive defenseman and are not going to put up a bunch of goals and assists. As a coach, the only stat that I cared about was each player's +/-. I could have cared less who had 52 goals and 35 assists. What stat then, do you think, would tell the whole story, or a better story than +/-?

I have no idea how he played before going to Red Deer, however he may have learned to play this way in Red Deer.

Yeah, if I'm reading that correctly, if someone played a year of MJ's in Canada they would lose 1 year of eligibilty and have to sit out 1 year...so the first year they come they sit out and then have 3 years left instead of the normal 4 years.

Here is what I found. What You Need To Know About College Hockey Recruiting