Ray77 Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Pronger should have been ejected as well, with the high flying elbows. No question those two knew who they were hitting. I absolutely agree with you that Detroit played outstanding, disciplined hockey. Even Bertuzzi! Pretty much letting the Ducks self destruct. It concerned me that the Wings could not put the puck in net during their sustained power plays. Other than that, they were solid. I'm disappointed in the Sabres (with the exception of Miller), but equally impressed with the Senators. Their game is on right now. Alfredsson is a machine out there. If the Ducks somehow manage to move on, I shall enjoy being a rabid Ottawa fan for the Cup. For those that are Pronger haters - he was just suspended for 1 game for the hit. LINK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxdonyms Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Vanek's lack of defensive play just had a big part to do with Ottawa's 2nd goal of the game. Buffalo letting Game 4 slip away after taking a 3-0 lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Vanek's lack of defensive play just had a big part to do with Ottawa's 2nd goal of the game. Buffalo letting Game 4 slip away after taking a 3-0 lead. Yep Vanek and Defense don't go in the same sentence. I said that when he played for the Gophers and he is still the same one dimensional player he was in college. Not saying his offense isn't bad he is dynamic but he isn't defensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farce poobah Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Yep Vanek and Defense don't go in the same sentence. I said that when he played for the Gophers and he is still the same one dimensional player he was in college. Not saying his offense isn't bad he is dynamic but he isn't defensive. He pretty much led the frickin league in plus-minus. You don't do that without playing D. [/end stereotype] That said, I can't disagree with the comment about last night's game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Consider me shocked. Buffalo prolonged the series one more game. I didn't think they had it in them. Can they make it two in a row? Can I find someone who is will to bet me yes? Ottawa takes it in Game 5. Score? 4-2 (empty netter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AccountingStu Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Well, now Ruff can't play Stafford, barring injury, because he should do as little line-up manipulation as possible and allow his players a chance to figure out their roles. I say Ruff should take credit for 2 of the losses in this series (u pick 'em) just from over-coaching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 He pretty much led the frickin league in plus-minus. You don't do that without playing D. [/end stereotype] That said, I can't disagree with the comment about last night's game. Remember he had 43+ goals on a high power offensive team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxdonyms Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 Remember he had 43+ goals on a high power offensive team. He's also on the most ideal line. The top line is getting the other teams top defensive line. Buffalo's top defensive line is taking the other team's top offensive line. Buffalo's 2nd line is a lot more potent offensively than most other teams 2nd line, and are usually playing against the other teams 2nd line. He's definitely got offensive talent. No one argues that. However, when you're on a line that requires the other team to play defense the majority of the shift, it limits the amount of time he has to play defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lives-to-play-hockey-06 Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 He's also on the most ideal line. The top line is getting the other teams top defensive line. Buffalo's top defensive line is taking the other team's top offensive line. Buffalo's 2nd line is a lot more potent offensively than most other teams 2nd line, and are usually playing against the other teams 2nd line. He's definitely got offensive talent. No one argues that. However, when you're on a line that requires the other team to play defense the majority of the shift, it limits the amount of time he has to play defense. Let me guess you guys think Stafford is better than Vanek? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxdonyms Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 Let me guess you guys think Stafford is better than Vanek? Offensively, not a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 Offensively, not a chance. I agree. Vanek's offensive capabilities are very very strong. He's proven that at every level (yes, even at Minnesota). With Stafford on his line, he gets a young power forward who can pass, augment Vanek's offensive capabilities, and back up for him if he has a defensive breakdown. Even when Stafford was still at UND I thought it would be a VERY good deal to have Vanek and Stafford on the same line in the pros. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 Let me guess you guys think Stafford is better than Vanek? No, that not it, but Drew is a more complete player, he plays at both ends of the ice. It will be interesting to see if he can get 20-30 goals next season. I think it is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrkac Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 No, that not it, but Drew is a more complete player, he plays at both ends of the ice. It will be interesting to see if he can get 20-30 goals next season. I think it is possible. they both tend to disappear in parts of games. i though both did in college. Vanek has dominated periods in NHL games where Stafford has not but is a rookie. it's been well documented Vanek has mostly done it in the offensive side. they were fun to watch down the stretch and i'm sure Stafford will be more of a force next year. it's great to see so many WCHA players be a big part of NHL teams. Go college hockey! but can't seem to get myself to root for HE players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AccountingStu Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 http://www.wgr550.com/sabres/fullstory.php?id=2399 "Zubrus Doubtful; Stafford on Standby" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted May 20, 2007 Share Posted May 20, 2007 Well there ya go. Detroit and Anaheim were even through 1 then Detroit took over for period 2 and 18 minutes of Period 3. Then Anaheim scores with 45 seconds left and I said "Anaheim wins this game." Sure enough, Lilja whiffs and Selanne scores the easiest non-empty netter of the playoffs. Anaheim is going to win this series. Go Ottawa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I don't think that is such a bad thing. I believe that every successful team needs a good mix of offensive specialists, defensive specialists, and "complete" players. You don't see people getting down on Matt Greene because he doesn't play offense, so based on that logic nobody should give Vanek any grief about not playing defense. In theory, I don't think a team made up of 20 "complete" players would be as good as a team made up of 10 "complete" players, 5 offensive specialists, and 5 defensive specialists. Obviously the Wild disagree (but I agree with you). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz Boy Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 The Ducks move on. Hooray. Go Sens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 The Ducks move on. Hooray. Go Sens. Not all that surprising considering the outcome of game 5. Detroit simply gave up after they got scored on with 48 seconds left in the game. This was a winable series. Too bad they didn't know it. Go Sens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skateshattrick Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Not all that surprising considering the outcome of game 5. Detroit simply gave up after they got scored on with 48 seconds left in the game. This was a winable series. Too bad they didn't know it. Go Sens. It was more than a winnable series--the Wings dominated games 4 and 5 (particularly 5), only to lose late. They pi**ed this series down their legs because they are a better team than the Ducks. If they had Schneider and Kronwall, it would have been different. Oh well. Go Sens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxnami Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 F*&(#$# Ducks... Go Sens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxforeverbaby Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 F*&(#$# Ducks... Go Sens! all I have say is NO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZSIOUX Posted May 23, 2007 Author Share Posted May 23, 2007 go ducks, have to represent bemidji as my buddy and former scsu huskie joe motzko got called up for the game last night......fun to see really could care less either way but if hes playing then quack quack quack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxforeverbaby Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 go ducks, have to represent bemidji as my buddy and former scsu huskie joe motzko got called up for the game last night......fun to see really could care less either way but if hes playing then quack quack quack i really could care less too, I just don't want the Sens to win. They took out my Devils and that means no cheering for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsiouxnami Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 go ducks, have to represent bemidji as my buddy and former scsu huskie joe motzko got called up for the game last night......fun to see really could care less either way but if hes playing then quack quack quack Also nice to see a product of the Bottineau Lumberjacks playing a major role in the Ducks' success! I have to agree with Siouxforeverbaby. . . . can't go for the Sens since they knocked out the Devils (and Buffalo for that matter)!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 F*&(#$# Ducks... Go Sens! LOL I am not sure that you spelled that right. :silly: 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.