| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| semin-rules |
Posted - 05/12/2011 : 20:43:23
The Sharks defeated the Red Wings tonight, so Vancouver will play San Jose in the confrence finals. So who Is going to win it & in how many games !? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest6878 |
Posted - 05/24/2011 : 17:57:30
Canucks, obviously in 5
first series in 7
second in 6
this one in 5
finals in 4 |
| doublechamp7 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 18:52:12
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by doublechamp7
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by doublechamp7
Anybody care to bet on this? I think it will be the Sharks.
Bring back the Jets!
While i think this is a coin toss, i'd be willing to make a wager, depending on the terms? Whatcha thinking?
Sorry I took awhile to respond to this but, if the Sharks win the series your signature will be "The Canucks are underachivers, why do I cheer for them?" and if the Canucks win My signature must be "The Canucks are awesome, why do I not cheer for them" or I could take on a Canucks avatar
Bring back the Jets!
Deal! The siggy line is fine by me. I assume it's for the rest of the playoffs, or seeing as that'd only be one round, wanna say till July 1 (end of June)???
Sounds good to me! |
| Guest5649 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 12:01:26
hahaha oh ya who else saw that chick flash eager after taking his taunting penalty? lets see the green man top that
Hey, Guest 4527 don't give the green men any ideas.....They already have their sewing kits going puting flaps on their unis...  |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 11:35:24
quote:
The Canucks haven't quite won the cup yet there sonny...may want to wait another couple weeks to see if you actually have any backtalk. Any way you look at it, as it stands now, Oiler, Flame and Leaf fans still the ability to say their team won a cup, regardless of how long ago...
I honestly appreciate the backhand kudos you just threw my Leafers, Fat Elvis.
But the Anon poster was simply stating that our teams are all on the sidelines watching the last 4 teams left in the playoffs, that's all - there was certainly nothing even close to a remark about Vancouver having already won the cup already. And let's face it . . . Vancouver is starting to look like a clear favourite here, up 2-0 on the team that I would have rated the toughest match-up of the three others left.
I am really curious to know why anyone thinks at this point the Sharks might win both at home . . . I just don't see it myself. Not that the playoffs haven't been totally unpredictable - they have - but it is really not a good sign when your team actually looks slow and fatigued each third period.
And finally . . . while some may say putting out the top pp in the third in a 6-2 game is "running up the score", I'll say that there is no deadlier virus for a hockey team then "letting up".
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest5649 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 11:30:46
The sharkies should have Eager start the opening face-off against Kesler .......SJ is a sure lock to win to-nite |
| Guest9825 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 10:34:35
Sharks take both in San Jose. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 07:49:23
Beans....i did in fact address your TOI point. If you care to see what i had to say, it's only about 5 posts up from this one, middle paragraph! And, for the record, it was just a suggestion, i'm not saying that's what happened. That game is from 3 months ago and i didn't watch it so i don't know all the circumstances. I did however decide to read the "recap" and noticed that Detroit had been outscored 12-4 in their previous 4 games (one being a 3-2 win) which included being shutout TWICE! Maybe that's why Babcock was playing his big names on the late pp? Dunno, just a thought.
The point of it being brought up by nuxfan was to prove that while you maybe haven't witnessed it, Mike Babcock has in fact run up the score on a team before.
As far as "comparing you to Sahis", i'm gonna have to let Slozo judge this. YO! Slozo! Is that one of your famous "strawman" things? NO WHERE did i compare you to Sahis Beans. I mentioned him hypothetically in a Detroit line combo, that's all! In jest of course. Unless you were referring to someone else, i think you either misread my words, or just strawmanned me? Is that a word?  |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 06:17:33
Like another thread, I will bow out gracefully as well. Even after admitting to a mistake, people want to continue to push. Fine. Hope you feel better comparing me to Sashis. But still not response to a comment of Detroit's players, in all of those games after I looked back, had noticable differences in their TOI. Their big guns played less and their 3-4 lines played more than they normally do.
But no rebuttle on that.
|
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 21:10:43
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4827
listen to all these complainers, dont watch the games if the canucks winning upsets you that much,spend that time reading about how all the flame leaf and oiler players are spending their "regular season"
The Canucks haven't quite won the cup yet there sonny...may want to wait another couple weeks to see if you actually have any backtalk. Any way you look at it, as it stands now, Oiler, Flame and Leaf fans still the ability to say their team won a cup, regardless of how long ago... |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 19:41:47
listen to all these complainers, dont watch the games if the canucks winning upsets you that much,spend that time reading about how all the flame leaf and oiler players are spending their "regular season" |
| Guest4988 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 19:21:49
I agree 2712! Marleau's gloves may have left his hands a split second or two before Bieksa's, but Bieksa initiated the fight with his dirty stick work. |
| Oilearl |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 16:32:57
Anyone that watches lots of or played hockey knows that sending a message and embarrassing a team can backfire just like making quotes in the media that get hung in the room to motivate!!
The killer instinct yes very important and in the playoffs crucial. The downside is lighting a fire under an unmotivated group that has the potential to retaliate. Bottom line the Sharks were a step behind the Canucks all night at times they looked awkward and slow.
The first 10 minutes in SJ should be a thing of beauty to watch.  |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 15:53:04
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
The second example of the 'top line PP" scoring a goal is not accurate. Detroit's 1st line PP is normally Datsuyk, Zetterberg, and Clearly. Not Hudler and Holmstom with Datsuyk. Good try though.Great examples though. Can't believe a guy with blinders on can see something so painfully obvious. I guess sending out the top PP line with less than 5 minutes left in the game and a 6 goal lead is the right thing to do. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe there isn't any honor left in the game.
Beans, i won't dissect all the examples but i took a quick look at this one and here's what i see. I see Datsyuk with Holmstrom and Hudler and two non power play scrubs (Lidstrom and Rafalski) at the point. Yeah, not nearly a #1 unit! I wouldn't doubt for a second that perhaps Datsyuk's line drew the penalty and therefore he was replaced by another player? Go back to earlier in the same game, i see a power play goal scored by Det when it was just 3-1. Scored by Zetterberg, assists to Holmstrom and Cleary. Does that mean Datsyuk's not on the top PP unit? Somehow i doubt it.
My point is, Babcock threw out Lidstrom, Rafalski, Holmstrom and Z, 4 of who are often on their top pp unit. Again, chances are, Datsyuk was tired. He could just as easily thrown out Abdelkater, Helm and Eaves but he chose not to. Yet to you, he's never run up the score. Puh-lease!!! 
In your non-disecting, did you notice that this goal was scored with nearly 14 minutes left in the game?? Could it be that Babcock did send out his 2nd line PP to start the PP who may have came off and the 1st line went on afterwards??? Is it plausbile, as you didn't disect the games, that looking at the TOI for Detroit's players that most of the their 1st and 2nd lines played less than they normally would, indicated they got fewer shifts in the 3rd period??
Puh-lease
Beans, Beans, Beans.....you're making this far too easy! First i explain to you that the Detroit #1 PP unit isn't necessarily the unit you labelled as proven by the fact they often employ Holmstrom in front of the goalie, etc. From there, you conveniently change your tune to "maybe Babcock started the 2nd unit"? Even if that was the case, who cares? If that was Vigneault, you'd claim he should have gone from unit #2 to unit #3!
Next, you point out that his big guns played less than normal. Great, now having not watched the game and not wanting/needing to look any further into it to prove my point, i have no idea what happened in the game. Is it possible that Babcock took his foot off the gas at 5-1 then something happened to piss him off and he decided to ice his best guys on a late power play??? I dunno, and i don't care because.....You're WAAAAY off on your point that the goal came with approx 14 mins left. It actually came just under 14 mins INTO the 3rd, as in, 6 mins left in the game!
So, if you wanna argue who's on his #1 unit, fine, stick to that. But when i see a pp with Lidstrom, Rafalski, Holmstrom, Datsyuk and ANYONE (even Sahis) on the ice with 6 mins left in a 5-1 game, i'd suggest it's a quality enough unit to figure that the coach is "running up the score" for whatever his reason may be! 
When you're done removing that foot, you might wanna remove this one too.....  |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 14:14:30
quote:
bieksa more or less forced him into it by continuely taking hacks at his legs
Wow. If we had a fight every time a player hacked at the legs of another player, we'd never finish games |
| Guest2712 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 14:05:07
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4827
looks like the price of kleenex'sstock just sky rocketed!!!, by the way marleau dropped his glovess so bieksa was just accepting the offer
you make it sound like marleau just decided to randomly drop his gloves. bieksa more or less forced him into it by continuely taking hacks at his legs. didn't see him hacking away at eager's legs......wonder why that is??? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 13:58:01
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
The second example of the 'top line PP" scoring a goal is not accurate. Detroit's 1st line PP is normally Datsuyk, Zetterberg, and Clearly. Not Hudler and Holmstom with Datsuyk. Good try though.Great examples though. Can't believe a guy with blinders on can see something so painfully obvious. I guess sending out the top PP line with less than 5 minutes left in the game and a 6 goal lead is the right thing to do. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe there isn't any honor left in the game.
Beans, i won't dissect all the examples but i took a quick look at this one and here's what i see. I see Datsyuk with Holmstrom and Hudler and two non power play scrubs (Lidstrom and Rafalski) at the point. Yeah, not nearly a #1 unit! I wouldn't doubt for a second that perhaps Datsyuk's line drew the penalty and therefore he was replaced by another player? Go back to earlier in the same game, i see a power play goal scored by Det when it was just 3-1. Scored by Zetterberg, assists to Holmstrom and Cleary. Does that mean Datsyuk's not on the top PP unit? Somehow i doubt it.
My point is, Babcock threw out Lidstrom, Rafalski, Holmstrom and Z, 4 of who are often on their top pp unit. Again, chances are, Datsyuk was tired. He could just as easily thrown out Abdelkater, Helm and Eaves but he chose not to. Yet to you, he's never run up the score. Puh-lease!!!
In your non-disecting, did you notice that this goal was scored with nearly 14 minutes left in the game?? Could it be that Babcock did send out his 2nd line PP to start the PP who may have came off and the 1st line went on afterwards??? Is it plausbile, as you didn't disect the games, that looking at the TOI for Detroit's players that most of the their 1st and 2nd lines played less than they normally would, indicated they got fewer shifts in the 3rd period??
Puh-lease |
| Guest5052 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 13:43:57
Its a good topic in general. I understand Beans to be saying that in general he dislikes when teams run up a scoreline, as it is dishonourable.
I am not entirely sure where i stand on this.
Certainly you hate it when it happens to you, but if a team packs it in and allows a team to run up the score, I always think they should really look inwards first. If you dont like your opponents scoring, stop them.
Second, I am not sure that its not more dishonourable to take your foot off the gas. Perhaps not so much in terms of giving 3/4th liner PP time, but in terms of playing keep away or something to that effect, it can sting as badly.
Third, surely if my team has done enough to build a lead I am entitle to eitehr reward my players who built that lead, or get PP practice out of it.
There also may well be a psych edge, either building your own confidence or harming your oppnents. You do so at your own risk, IE wary of the backlash, but thats each teams call.
Fourth, maybe Falstaff was right about honour (food for worms-useless).
Having said that, I am not suggesting that anyone should or shouldnt like it. just that there may be lots to think about.
In conclusion, I dont think of it as dishonourable per se. Certainly no more so than when players chirp at each other on the bench, which is part of the game. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 13:21:15
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
The second example of the 'top line PP" scoring a goal is not accurate. Detroit's 1st line PP is normally Datsuyk, Zetterberg, and Clearly. Not Hudler and Holmstom with Datsuyk. Good try though.Great examples though. Can't believe a guy with blinders on can see something so painfully obvious. I guess sending out the top PP line with less than 5 minutes left in the game and a 6 goal lead is the right thing to do. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe there isn't any honor left in the game.
Beans, i won't dissect all the examples but i took a quick look at this one and here's what i see. I see Datsyuk with Holmstrom and Hudler and two non power play scrubs (Lidstrom and Rafalski) at the point. Yeah, not nearly a #1 unit! I wouldn't doubt for a second that perhaps Datsyuk's line drew the penalty and therefore he was replaced by another player? Go back to earlier in the same game, i see a power play goal scored by Det when it was just 3-1. Scored by Zetterberg, assists to Holmstrom and Cleary. Does that mean Datsyuk's not on the top PP unit? Somehow i doubt it.
My point is, Babcock threw out Lidstrom, Rafalski, Holmstrom and Z, 4 of who are often on their top pp unit. Again, chances are, Datsyuk was tired. He could just as easily thrown out Abdelkater, Helm and Eaves but he chose not to. Yet to you, he's never run up the score. Puh-lease!!!
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 13:15:35
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
Firstly, of all the STL game of 5-3 with 5 minutes to go is not a blow out by any stretch of the imagination. Crap example to say the least.
You know Beans, the Canucks were only up 4-2 with 9 minutes to go, before they started scoring all the goals. How is last nights game a clear example of "running up the score" while this is "not a blowout by any stretch of the imagination"? Both games are similar, in that they were close up to a point midway through the 3rd, and then there was a flurry of goals in the end.
Unless your entire theory hinges on those critical 4 minutes.
When you are wrong, you are wrong. Does anyone have a tool to remove a foot from a mouth??
My apologies. I wasn't paying much attention to the game after the Canucks made it 4-2 and I made an assumption based on what I over-heard and not what actually happened. That assumption was the score was 5-1 with less than 5 minutes left when the Sedin's and Kesler were on the PP.
Again, when you are wrong, you are wrong. This time, I was wrong. My bad. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 13:05:02
One thing about this series that is worrying, but has not been discussed yet - the SJ powerplay. They are currently 3-for-3, and look dangerous every time they're on the ice. Thankfully they have only had 3 PP opportunities so far this series, but if they start getting more, and the Canucks cannot find a way to stop it, some of these games could start going the other way. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 12:53:13
quote:
Firstly, of all the STL game of 5-3 with 5 minutes to go is not a blow out by any stretch of the imagination. Crap example to say the least.
You know Beans, the Canucks were only up 4-2 with 9 minutes to go, before they started scoring all the goals. How is last nights game a clear example of "running up the score" while this is "not a blowout by any stretch of the imagination"? Both games are similar, in that they were close up to a point midway through the 3rd, and then there was a flurry of goals in the end.
Unless your entire theory hinges on those critical 4 minutes. |
| Lunchbox |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 12:48:45
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
[brAnd before someone starts talking about Eager taunting Luongo, you might want to address the Canucks having their top PP line out against the Sharks when the score is 6-2 late in the 3rd period. Talk about classless. A team can be edgy and physical without being disrespectful.
I was saying the same thing to people I watched the game with, but I think for different reasons. When it was 6-2 and the Canucks got that powerplay, I was suggesting that it would have been a good idea to play the third line on the powerplay for a bit. It gives them some confidence and a reward for playing a hell of a game, and keeps the stars off the ice when things start to get chippy. But then I saw that they did play on a later powerplay, as did the fourth line, when it was 7-3, so I guess Vigneault has a different definition of blowout than you do.
On the flip side of this argument, kudos to Viggy for letting his team "get back" at Eager for his run on Sedin on the scoreboard instead of sending out someone to take a run at Thornton. You could tell on that last Eager penalty that the Sedin's were giving the business to San Jose a little harder, and I think a lot of people on this site have argued again and again that getting back at a team on the scoreboard is the way to go.
BTW, if you want to blame a coach for trying to stir the pot, look at Eager being on the ice again with under a minute left. Any coach in their right mind should have benched this guy long ago, but McLellan threw him out there for what seemed like every second shift.
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 12:45:37
Firstly, of all the STL game of 5-3 with 5 minutes to go is not a blow out by any stretch of the imagination. Crap example to say the least.
The second example of the 'top line PP" scoring a goal is not accurate. Detroit's 1st line PP is normally Datsuyk, Zetterberg, and Clearly. Not Hudler and Holmstom with Datsuyk. Good try though.
Finally, Detroit did score 3 more goals after being up by 3. What you failed to mention was that one of those goals was short handed and the other 2 goals were scored by their 3rd line.
Great examples though. Can't believe a guy with blinders on can see something so painfully obvious. I guess sending out the top PP line with less than 5 minutes left in the game and a 6 goal lead is the right thing to do. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe there isn't any honor left in the game. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 12:20:03
Thanks for saving me the research Nux! Beans, time to take off the blinders!
Sure, i might be pissed if the Sharks did this to the Canucks, but it'd be more out of frustration and embarrassment than worrying about "classy" moves and such! I love the fact the Canucks did it and trust that they had their reasons. It's playoff hockey! A 7-3 thrashing looks a lot better and prob gets in the Sharks' minds more than a 5-3 or 6-3 win!
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 12:14:37
quote:
And no, I can't recall a single time I have watched Mike Babcock run up the score on another team.
Wow, I only needed to look back to this season to find one:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010020263 - DET 7 STL 3. DET scores 4 goals in a 3 minute span of the 3rd period, including 2 late PP goals. When the game was 5-3 with only 5 minutes left, Babcock sent out his top PP unit to score those goals.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010020821 - DET 6 BOS 1. DET is leading 2-1 after the first period, and then scores 4 straight goals. Does Babcock lay off in the 3rd when his team is up 5-1 and thoroughly outplaying BOS? No, top line PP scores a 6th goal.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/boxscore.htm?id=2010020941 - DET 7 LAK 4. DET is up 4-1 after the second period, yet proceed to score 3 more goals in the first 10 minute against LA. LA eventually scores 3 more back, but at one point the score is 7-1
Beans - every coach lets their team go at it once in a while, for lots of different reasons. Especially a team like VAN, who have admittedly had trouble scoring this playoff season (at the pace they did in the regular season anyway), and have not had a great PP. Last night was a great chance to work on the PP and have a very rare 2+ goal lead (this is the first game this playoffs they have been ahead by 3 in any game), and the Canucks took advantage of it. And I'm glad AV decided to let them go. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 11:39:11
No, not all coaches do that. I get the rubbing it in part, and I can see the strategy of trying to work the Sharks up even more. But I just don't like it and I don't care if you agree with me or not. I have always been a supporter of honor in any sport, and this is not honorable. I can only imagine the hipocricy that would be shown if the shoe was on the other foot and it was the Sharks who sent out their top PP line if they were winning by 4 goals.
And no, I can't recall a single time I have watched Mike Babcock run up the score on another team. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 11:37:23
Sorry Alex, just me goofing.
I agree with other posters and have no issue with the Canucks 'running up the score'. It's playoff hockey, and every psychological advantage is just that.
Let's just hope it doesn't backfire and give the Sharks that 'extra', that they need, when the Canucks have them on the ropes!
Regular season? Yeah, that would probably come across as less than a class move, but playoffs are all or nothing. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 11:26:42
FER......There was no attempt to imply AV is as good a coach as Babcock if that's what you interpretted from the sarcastic quote.
I can't tell with your humour if you got my point, that being, ALL coaches do it at some point. It's not as though AV does this every game so i'm sure he's got his reasons. As i stated earlier in this thread, i'd love to hear AV's reasoning. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 11:16:46
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
And before someone starts talking about Eager taunting Luongo, you might want to address the Canucks having their top PP line out against the Sharks when the score is 6-2 late in the 3rd period. Talk about classless. A team can be edgy and physical without being disrespectful.
Yeah, i agree, it's that darn crappy coach again! Surely Mike Babcock has NEVER done this before!!! [drip, drip, drip] <---------------btw, that's the sarcasm
Good God! Now the Canuckleheads are comparing Vigneault to Babcock?????
Someone quick, slap this guy with a salmon so he can get his bearings back!!!!
I had to try and beat Beans to a reply on this one. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 10:59:41
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
And before someone starts talking about Eager taunting Luongo, you might want to address the Canucks having their top PP line out against the Sharks when the score is 6-2 late in the 3rd period. Talk about classless. A team can be edgy and physical without being disrespectful.
Yeah, i agree, it's that darn crappy coach again! Surely Mike Babcock has NEVER done this before!!! [drip, drip, drip] <---------------btw, that's the sarcasm |
| n/a |
Posted - 05/19/2011 : 09:13:44
I thought it was the right call not to just put out the third and fourth lines, and to keep rolling the lines somewhat.
It's the playoffs guys, not co-ed rec hockey.
When someone is down, you push them down farther. It's called killer instinct, and it serves two purposes: killing the other teams spirit, and instilling greater confidence in your own team. It's a tactic used by all good teams for the most part.
And, in this case, it might goad the Sharks into playing more foolish hockey as they try to "get even".
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 23:26:38
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4827
hahaha oh ya who else saw that chick flash eager after taking his taunting penalty? less see the green man top that
You mean this one?
http://communities.canada.com/theprovince/blogs/whitetowel/archive/2011/05/19/sharks-eager-to-keep-abreast-of-canucks-fans.aspx
I'm interested to hear AV's reasoning for having his top power play unit out late with the game more or less out of reach. Wonder if it was simply rewarding Hank for seeming to get out of his slump? Maybe it was rubbing it in for some of the Sharks antics, or should i say Eager's antics?
Will be looking to see if he's asked about it and/or if he chooses to address the issue? |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 22:03:17
[quote]Originally posted by Guest4827
hahaha oh ya who else saw that chick flash eager after taking his taunting penalty? lets see the green man top that
[/quote |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 22:02:24
quote:
Now, they are still a bunch of d-bags and I think there are 22 Greg Luoganis clones in Canucks jerseys with the amount of diving I see in each game, but it's working. Why stop.
Ha! I just saw your awesome Tanner Glass epic, no wonder you're in a bad mood |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 22:00:38
hahaha oh ya who else saw that chick flash eager after taking his taunting penalty? less see the green man top that
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 21:53:41
quote:
Did anyone just see Ben Eager taunt Loungo after he scored?
That's just classless, he had lost the game for his team and I hope he knows that
I'm sure he was probably passing his congratulations for a very good game, thanking Luongo for great tips on good Italian restaurants in Vancouver, and apologizing for the hit he laid out on Sedin. Because really, what moron taunts you after making the game ONLY 7-3 with 2 minutes left?
quote:
And before someone starts talking about Eager taunting Luongo, you might want to address the Canucks having their top PP line out against the Sharks when the score is 6-2 late in the 3rd period. Talk about classless. A team can be edgy and physical without being disrespectful.
They do it because they know the other team hates it - and why not? If Eager wants to be a muppet and take dumb penalties, challenge the bench from the penalty box, taunt Luongo after scoring a goal, then I say embarrass the team a little more and score on your (many) PP opportunities and run up the score. Drill it home to the other team that they're being idiots, punish them on the scoreboard for losing control and taking cheap dumb penalties.
I recall them doing it to your Oilers earlier in the year... |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 21:44:50
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4988
I agree that Vignealt was rubbing it in by playing the Sedins on the PP while leading 6-2 and I hope it comes back to haunt them. Also, Kevin Bieksa picked his spot again. He decided to beat up on Patrick Marleau who is obviously not a fighter, just like he attacked Victor Stalberg, another non-fighter, in the Chicago series. This guy is a real jerk and one of these days, somebody in his weight class will get him. This is why the Sharks were so upset and why Ben Eager hit D.Sedin. I don't agree with that hit, but I was so sick and tired of listening to that idiot Glenn Healy and the other pro-Canuck HNIC announcers saying that Eager starting everything. Kevin Bieksa started the dirty play by fighting one of the Sharks'stars and I hope that San Jose uses it as motivation to get back in the series.
looks like the price of kleenex'sstock just sky rocketed!!!, by the way marleau dropped his glovess so bieksa was just accepting the offer |
| Guest4988 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 21:35:32
I agree that Vignealt was rubbing it in by playing the Sedins on the PP while leading 6-2 and I hope it comes back to haunt them. Also, Kevin Bieksa picked his spot again. He decided to beat up on Patrick Marleau who is obviously not a fighter, just like he attacked Victor Stalberg, another non-fighter, in the Chicago series. This guy is a real jerk and one of these days, somebody in his weight class will get him. This is why the Sharks were so upset and why Ben Eager hit D.Sedin. I don't agree with that hit, but I was so sick and tired of listening to that idiot Glenn Healy and the other pro-Canuck HNIC announcers saying that Eager starting everything. Kevin Bieksa started the dirty play by fighting one of the Sharks'stars and I hope that San Jose uses it as motivation to get back in the series. |
| Guest4827 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 21:34:06
beans = JEALOUS! |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 05/18/2011 : 21:12:57
The one thing that I am beyond impressed with is Vancouver's ability to goad the Sharks into completely undisciplined play. The Canucks have always been a very talented team, but they were normally the team taking the stupid penalties and costing them the game. But they are now the one's drawing the penalties and punish the teams on the scoreboard.
Now, they are still a bunch of d-bags and I think there are 22 Greg Luoganis clones in Canucks jerseys with the amount of diving I see in each game, but it's working. Why stop.
Hey, that's why the Canuck fans chant "Lou!!!"
And before someone starts talking about Eager taunting Luongo, you might want to address the Canucks having their top PP line out against the Sharks when the score is 6-2 late in the 3rd period. Talk about classless. A team can be edgy and physical without being disrespectful. |
|
|
