Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

NHL 2013


jodcon

Recommended Posts

It was PB (see my earlier posts on the benefits of playing with him) #top5 :)

I actually had to look that up. I was a tad harsh on BM, I just hate the guy because he is a trash talker, he turtles and I do not like the Bruins (from a team standpoint). I love the way PB plays though.

Agreed. Bergeron is a stud.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The higher seed lost, therefore it was in fact an upset by definition. Considering that three of the four games were very close and the Penguins hit the post about 19 times in those three games combined, I would consider your use of the word "thrashing" to be an excessive exaggeration.

PS - ...and, yes (before you ask), it will be an upset this year if the Penguins (as a #2 seed) beat the Bruins (as a #1 seed). Once again I am consistent in my arguments, unlike most Bruins fans I know who usually try to have it both ways.

Thrashing is exactly what it was, whether you admit it or not...the Bruins totally shut down above-average players like Crosby and Malkin and the games were not as close as your scoreboard would indicate. As far as consistency in an argument,you have to be joking...good one Dave K!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're delusional if you think it was a thrashing. Three of the four games were tightly contested battles that easily could have gone either way. Fortunately for Boston the Penguins hit the post about 19 times in those three games combined. Sorry if that reality ruins your little idea of what you think it was. Be happy your team won, but don't exaggerate and try to make it out to be more than the reality of what it actually was. As for consistency, I challenge you to prove that I am not consistent. I already have given an example of how I am consistent.

Your were inconsistent when you said if and when the Sioux was retired you would stop posting here. Then again, maybe your consistent at lying which would make you consistent I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said that, but as you are one of the more clueless people here I am not surprised that you would think something that isn't true. I recall saying that I would probably not post as much as I did before, but I didn't say that I would never ever make another post here ever again. You are the liar, not me. Now if you can go back and find a post that states otherwise I will stand corrected, but until then I'm going to ask you to stop making stuff up.

Why the F*** would I want to read through 2 years worth of your horse s*** posts. It's hard enough to read them once.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orpik hurt Toews...looks like it may be a serious shoulder injury.

Hawks have been reeling without Kane. Now Toews as well; they better get both back by the playoffs or they are toast against any of the western teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Milbury, Brooks Orpik and the idiocy of retribution

http://sports.yahoo....-143725598.html

I haven't seen Orpik's hit yet, however assuming it was clean as this article says, I agree 100%. I think there's a place for fighting in hockey, but I hate it when a guy delivers a clean hit and someone goes after him - it makes no sense. I'm curious as to how you feel about this comment from the article that you decided to link to here, DaveK:

When does an NHL player have to “answer the bell” and fight to atone for his sins?

If he takes liberties with a goalie, like when Milan Lucic freight-trained Ryan Miller? Sure. If he takes out a player with a hit that crossed the line of illegality, and you don’t believe the NHL’s punishment fit that crime? OK, fine, that’ll work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen Orpik's hit yet, however assuming it was clean as this article says, I agree 100%. I think there's a place for fighting in hockey, but I hate it when a guy delivers a clean hit and someone goes after him - it makes no sense. I'm curious as to how you feel about this comment from the article that you decided to link to here, DaveK:

OK - I just went out and watched the hit. Now I can see why Chicago would have went after Orpik, and I don't have a problem with that. Orpik clearly launched himself into Toews. I don't think it was a viscous elbow to the head or anything, however Orpik also clearly made contact to Toews head after launching into him, and that's what they're trying to take out of the game - the contact to the head. According to the rules (linked below) that should have at least been a 2 minute minor.

Rule 48 - Illegal Check to the Head

I like how in this clip Brian Engblom says, and I quote..."Yes, his shoulder does make contact to the side of the head, too, but that's a good check in my mind".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgIgat2GBRI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - I just went out and watched the hit. Now I can see why Chicago would have went after Orpik, and I don't have a problem with that. Orpik clearly launched himself into Toews. I don't think it was a viscous elbow to the head or anything, however Orpik also clearly made contact to Toews head after launching into him, and that's what they're trying to take out of the game - the contact to the head. According to the rules (linked below) that should have at least been a 2 minute minor.

Rule 48 - Illegal Check to the Head

I like how in this clip Brian Engblom says, and I quote..."Yes, his shoulder does make contact to the side of the head, too, but that's a good check in my mind".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgIgat2GBRI

So leaving your feet to deliver a head shot is clean? Yeah, ok.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, the Wild have won two in a row on the road. Have a tough schedule to finish it out, but their last three games are at home. Thursday they're at Chicago with Chicago minus their two best forwards. Should be a game Minnesota finds a way to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - I just went out and watched the hit. Now I can see why Chicago would have went after Orpik, and I don't have a problem with that. Orpik clearly launched himself into Toews. I don't think it was a viscous elbow to the head or anything, however Orpik also clearly made contact to Toews head after launching into him, and that's what they're trying to take out of the game - the contact to the head. According to the rules (linked below) that should have at least been a 2 minute minor.

Rule 48 - Illegal Check to the Head

I like how in this clip Brian Engblom says, and I quote..."Yes, his shoulder does make contact to the side of the head, too, but that's a good check in my mind".

If that is a good hit, what do people think of this one... (warning... college game highlight):

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is a good hit, what do people think of this one... (warning... college game highlight):

Frattin got a penalty for that, correct? Again, I don't think that Orpik completely obliterated Toews, however he launched and made contact to the head, deserving of a penalty. I don't have any issue with Chicago taking umbrage to Orpik's hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...