Friday Night Game Thread

[Sioux-cia]

Are you trying to say Prpich did not take stupid penalties last night? If I remember correctly he wrapped his arm around a Gopher players neck in the corner well after the whistle had blown, and he sat two minutes for it. Prpich looked to me to be one of the worst players on the ice for the sioux and his loose mouth did nothing more but motivate the Gophers.

Obviously this was the first game you've watched this season. The number of stupid penalties taken by the Sioux, Prpich included has decreased considerably. The motivation for the Gophers was playing against the Sioux. The Sioux need a little more of that same motivation, playing against the Gophers, tonight.

I'll take Prpich's 'loose mouth', which he has restained, over stupid Irmen antics any day.

[Runninwiththedogs]

The silver lining for me is that that Sioux were awfully close to tying this game. I thought Spirko was the player of the game for the Sioux, and dang near tied/won that game single handedly in the 3rd period last night. What a player he is.

If the Sioux are out of gas the gophers could sweep this series tonite. But I'm still holding on to hope that the Sioux can get a split out of the weekend.

Spirko is always the player of the game . He really can work the puck, although it got away from him a few times.

I did think the Sioux were pretty keyed up during the game, especially in the 3rd period, it seemed like passes weren't connecting and they couldn't hold the zone. They did have some great pressuring opportunities, but then someone out at the blue line would let the puck go by. They need to focus on making good passes and setting up in good position to score. Too often they were set up in a way that there was no way they were going to score, especially at the end.

Prpich played a damn good game! In my opinion, he has shown a lot of maturity since early this season when he was taking stupid penalties. As a player with a history of being a rabble rouser, getting under the other players skin with his smart mouth, he has shown a lot of restraint which has resulted in his being on the ice more, making good plays. As a rabble rouser with a smart mouth myself, I'm also happy to see him use that with enough restraint not to draw stupid penalties. He sure got under Chucko's skin!

I think Prpich was lucky he stayed out of the box on a few occasions. I would really like to see less stuffing players faces into the ice from him, sometimes I wonder if he focuses a little too much on getting under the other team's skin and loses sight of other stuff, like, you know, setting up and/or scoring goals. I agree he has been much calmer in the last few weeks but last night it seemed like he was reverting to his old ways. I think tonight is the big test of whether he can keep that mischievous streak in check.

I didn't think Stafford was missing, he was great on the PK, but he wasn't the presence that he could be. Hopefully, tonight!

[dagies]

Guys stand in front of goalies all the time, just outside of the crease, which inhibit goalies field of view. Often times, it results in goals. We praise our guys when they can screen the goalie which leads to a goal. It looked like Parise had a clear view at Kessel's shot. However, he was preoccupied with Stoa, which contributed to Parise letting up the goal. I try to think if it were the other way around with a Sioux player in the Gopher's goalie crease, and I don't think I'd see it as interference that way, so why should I see it as interference this way. I'm not Woog or Mazacco.

Yep, screening the goalie is a great tactic. I agree. But IMO you shouldn't be able to stand in the crease and do it. My impression is the crease is there to give the goalie an area of operation. I agree with what PCM said, which is just get rid of the crease, because it obviously has no meaning if last night's goal stands. Only call goalie interference. IMO last night's call became a judgement call and the ref had to decide if Stoa was really inhibiting Parise's ability to make the play. I agree with you that Parise was preoccupied with Stoa, which means Stoa did his job. However, he was standing so close, and in Parise's field of vision, that I believe that should still be called because he's IN the crease. Had he been behind Parise I'd have had no problem with it.

IMO because of that call, Parise had to try and defend his crease later and took the slashing penalty. I'm not saying Parise should have slashed him, but Sheppard didn't give him room to operate. Going back to the goal, what if Kessel had passed across the ice and not shot? Parise had to be ready for that, and Stoa would have been right in front of him, right IN the crease had the pass gone between the dots. Parise would have been sunk then. So yes, I think the goalie should at least get the benefit of the doubt of a call regarding a player in the crease, not the other way around.

[Siouxdonyms]

Going back to the goal, what if Kessel had passed across the ice and not shot? Parise had to be ready for that, and Stoa would have been right in front of him, right IN the crease had the pass gone between the dots. Parise would have been sunk then. So yes, I think the goalie should at least get the benefit of the doubt of a call regarding a player in the crease, not the other way around.

[dagies]

Regardless of the call on that goal, the Sioux were outplayed last night. Still, they stayed close enough to have a chance. If they can play better tonite, they'll have a real shot to get 2.