Greyeagle Posted May 8, 2003 Share Posted May 8, 2003 Greyeagle, I bet if we sat down and had a few beers we would probably agree on a lot of things. I am just hoping that Ruutu gets his due before the end of game 7. One of the Wild players just told Ruutu that he is a little cocky. Roli the goalie is awesome again. Who would have thought that a goalie from UofMass Lowell would be the star of game 6 eh? I like it... The Wild are 5-0 when facing elimination. What a stat... Off to game seven, Man this is drama. God I hate the Canacks. Beer - the great ambassador! Did you see the thread in USCHO regardng a golf outing? Probalby a long drive but thought I'd give you a heads up. Truely an incredible run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted May 8, 2003 Share Posted May 8, 2003 "Why are you wasting your time, there's not going to be a game 6." - Todd Bertuzzi to Wild fans waiting outside the Xcel Energy Center to buy tickets to game 6 before the start of game 4. Well, Bert, how's game 7 for ya? BTW, students...who saw my quote in the Dakota Student about Springfest?? (I'm the guy in the hat, that was a really bad picture). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWG Posted May 8, 2003 Share Posted May 8, 2003 I think that the series will go 6 or 7 games, and the team that gets the best goaltending wins. Cloutier does nothing for me, so I'll take the Wild in 7. DAAAAAMMN... I hope you're right. This has been an insane series. 12-3 over two games after consistent one-goal games, usually in overtime. This is craziness. I really hope the momentum stays with us into tonight and Cloutier is off his game still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flatspin7 Posted May 8, 2003 Share Posted May 8, 2003 Its an odd thought but the Wild have been getting better during these play-offs. I think part of it is that they are getting more comfortable. I almost wonder if the other half has to do with the fact that they have nothing to loose. Of course every team wants to win it all, but at the begining of the season most people did not even have the Wild in the playoffs. So now that they are in a game seven in round 2 the weight of the moment is entirely on Vancouver. The Wild have seemed to found a nice degree of scoring touch (12 goals in 2 games) while not sacrificing their defensive style. Just as with the Avs if the Wild lose it can still be considered a degree of victory just to get to that point. If the Wild lose tonight, everybody can sit back and remember that it was a great run and there is a great future for this team. If they Win its another upset. The two last times Vancouver has had a chance to close out the series they have collapsed. At least the Avs made the Wild go to overtime to get to game 7. Any game 7 is a complete crap shoot, but right now its looking like the Wild are having fun out there and that makes a very dangerous team. I think they are just about as peaked as they can get but I think they are good enough to beat Vancouver tonight. (note- I am not making a prediction,just saying that I think they are good enough- so dont yell at me tommorow if things dont go well) But the possibility of a Ducks / Wild conference final can get filed deeply in the Who'd a thunk it file. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Beer - the great ambassador! Did you see the thread in USCHO regardng a golf outing? Probalby a long drive but thought I'd give you a heads up. Truely an incredible run. Greyeagle, I have not seen the thread on a golf outing. Do you have the link to it. My schedule isn't too condusive to golf this summer. However, it would be interesting. I am sure there would be some high handicappers out there to play money games with. Tonights game is looking up Wild, game now tied with the Dirty Canucks (I mean that literally). Luckily I am drinking a few beers or the game would be too intolerable to watch... Still holding out hope for the team in green. The Wild just lull the opposition to sleep than hammer them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Oh my God, Minnesota just score its third goal in a row. What a series, my favorite of all time. I am so sick of Todd Bertuzzi. The guy is a thug... Bertuzzi trips Zuzen (I can't spell that name) he takes out Roli and Bertuzzi has the gall to look surprised like he didn't do anything, too bad MJ didn't play tonight, but I understand why he isn't playing game 7. Dupuis score on the PP, now it is 4-2, God I am happy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyeagle Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Ronning sits. Gets a pair. Laaksonin sits. He scores. Dupios sits (while hurt). Throws a crooked number up. Guys will be begging Jauques to sit for a game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 To all who have had doubt in the Wild...I say, oh ye of little faith. First team in NHL history to comback from a 3-1 deficit twice in the same playoff year. Like I said, they were just toying with Vancouver. Well I went 3-4 in the second round, but 4-4 in who I wanted to win (I picked Dallas, but wanted Anaheim for those who don't remember). Bring on the Ducks baby! What a great series we're in for. People are talking about Giguere already as the Conn Smythe, while Gaborik keeps quietly putting up points (most in the playoffs). The road to the Cup goes through Minnesota...music to my ears Conference Finals predictions: Wild in 7 Devils in 7 We're in for the best OLD TIME HOCKEY of the playoffs with both of them. Go Wild!!!...I need to get me a Wild hat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWG Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Having said that, I think that the series will go 6 or 7 games, and the team that gets the best goaltending wins. Cloutier does nothing for me, so I'll take the Wild in 7. Ok, I promise I'll stop quoting this now, but still... way to go JMB. I'm still in such disbelief right now. This was great. down 1-3 in the series, comes back in blow-out fashion, down 0-2 in the 2nd period of a deciding game 7 on the road, not getting the power play opportunity as they're letting them play (and the Wild were doing well capitalizing on the PP), and they still win 4-2. We don't see another goaltender like Clou-sieve-tier the rest of the way, so here's hoping we have laser site scoring. MN vs. Anaheim 2 - "The Icey Rematch" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Great to see the Wild put it away with Bertuzzi in the box, yet again. His brain/weight ratio is a really low number Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyeagle Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Great to see the Wild put it away with Bertuzzi in the box, yet again. His brain/weight ratio is a really low number Speaking of a low brain-to-weight ratio. In the last two periods of game seven for the Wild: Period 2: 4 shots / one goal Period 3: 6 shots / three goals. Guess who will be looking for a job next October? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commodore Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Period 2: 4 shots / one goal Period 3: 6 shots / three goals. Guess who will be looking for a job next October? A .600 save percentage over the last 2 periods of the game. OUCH! Just the same, you can't fault Cloutier for Dupuis' first goal. Hard to make a save when the assist is coming up over the top of the net. But 15 goals over 3 games against Cloutier (one was on Auld)... Forget Roloson, Cloutier's certainly my MVP for the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flatspin7 Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Cloutier has proven throughout his carrer that he is a play off chocker. He had a good regular season but I think he rode his defence, but he really proved ineffective. Maybe he will have to look for another job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airmail Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Just the same, you can't fault Cloutier for Dupuis' first goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Just the same, you can't fault Cloutier for Dupuis' first goal. Hard to make a save when the assist is coming up over the top of the net. That was one of the most beautiful goals I have ever seen. It ranks right up there with that Michigan goal against the Gophers (Gopher fans should know what I am talking about) around 7 or 8 years ago (I think), in the National tournament. The Michigan player was behind the net, picked the puck up with his stick, and stuffed it in the upper corner. Even though I was a Gopher fan at the time, I still had to say W W Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 Mike Legg on Steve Debus. That should clear the Gopher fans out of this thread in bitterness. Bring up that goal and they get defensive. That was the first thing I thought of though when Dupuis scored it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyeagle Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 The Legg goal was my first thought too. Two NC's makes it easy to forget - or at least look past - Legg scoring on DeBus. It will take a lot more than that (unfortunately for you guys) to get rid of me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 Ok. I've got a question for the hockey experts. It still seemed to me the Wild had difficulty clearing the zone. And it seemed that Vancouver won the majority of the races to loose pucks. It seemed especially noticeable when the Wild would throw the puck along the boards behind the goal. It seemed to me the idea was to either have the puck go to a Wild player on the half wall who would then put it in transition, or hope the puck would clear the players and the zone. However, it always seemed to me that a Canuck player would be the first to the half wall. On the other end of the ice, if the same thing happened again it seemed that a Canuck player was positioned to control that puck. Certainly there were exceptions but this really bugged me for several games. The question for the experts is: 1. Did I imagine it was worse than it was only because I was anxious to see the Wild control the puck and that wasn't happening? 2. Was it really happening, but it was because of the systems the 2 teams play? If so, can you explain the difference in systems and what the Wild was hoping to accomplish? 3. Was it really happening and the Wild were just getting beat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flatspin7 Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 To me it did seem that the Wild were losing some battles at times and having problems clearing the zone, but in the end... who cares... they won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 1) Yes it was happening, the Wild have had trouble clearing the zone the entire playoffs. 2) I don't think it had anything to do with the two systems. I don't know of any system design where you want the other team to control the puck. The idea behind the passes was to get to the winger on the half wall to initiate a breakout. 3) I think that Vancouver did a good job winning the races to the puck. Again there is no system (that I know of) designed to only work when the other team has the puck. If you watched the first game then you would have seen that that is how Vancouver scored with 1.2 secinds left in the game. The Wild couldn't clear the zone and Cooke capitalized for the Canucks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greyeagle Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 dagies - Here is my take. I think the Cannucks suystem was pretty simple - when forechecking they wanted to drive the Wild D'men into the 11th row. They (the Wild) will never admit to it, but I think they were hearing footsteps and then they'd just throw the puck. Who could blame them? Would you want that animal Bertuzzi putting you through the boards. Anyway. the high forward for Vancouver seemed to play like a third D'men in the center of the ice and look to pick off a pass. This high forward also allowed for the defensemen to pinch big time. If the puck was played along the wall the Cannuck D'men would pinch without worrying about odd-man rushes. Once they got control the other forward would then jump into the play. It was almost like an offensive zone trap, IMO. The Wild was successful when making quick. shorter passes to get the puck out or sending a forward out behind the D to force them off the line. Or, I'm full of dung. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted May 11, 2003 Share Posted May 11, 2003 dagies - Here is my take. I think the Cannucks suystem was pretty simple - when forechecking they wanted to drive the Wild D'men into the 11th row. They (the Wild) will never admit to it, but I think they were hearing footsteps and then they'd just throw the puck. Who could blame them? Would you want that animal Bertuzzi putting you through the boards. Anyway. the high forward for Vancouver seemed to play like a third D'men in the center of the ice and look to pick off a pass. This high forward also allowed for the defensemen to pinch big time. If the puck was played along the wall the Cannuck D'men would pinch without worrying about odd-man rushes. Once they got control the other forward would then jump into the play. It was almost like an offensive zone trap, IMO. Yep, sounds like the classic 2-3 forecheck...simplest one in hockey. First guy in takes the body, decond guy gets the puck, third guy stays up high. They have to keep it simple with guys like Bertuzzi and Cooke! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted May 11, 2003 Share Posted May 11, 2003 Thanks everybody for the input. Very helpful, and makes a lot of sense. Now the next time I watch a game, I'll try to see it on the ice. It seems to me a lot of times in hockey you throw the puck to a spot on the ice, because your system says someone should be there to take the puck. Just seemed like the Wild players weren't there. Greyeagle, your explanation especially helps to clarify what might have been going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.