kipwinger

That's not what he said, and I'm not really sure why you're so relentlessly combative all the time. He didn't say a single thing about Jarnkrok being "useless", just that it's a distraction on this thread...and ta-da, now we're distracted.

The speed is similar, but I don't think it's a great comparison because Ferraro is purporedly much better defensively and does play on special teams.

Yeah, if we were safely in a playoffs position I'd agree with you. But right now I think the only thought in their minds is getting into the playoffs.

Now that you mention it I recall that too, and it was pretty out of character for him. Guess I just whitewashed it in my memory because I've always liked the guy. Both he and Backes are proof positive that you can play VERY physical hockey without really needing to fight (although I guess both do on rare occasions). In my opinion that's ideally how physicality should manifest itself in the game.

Yeah, if he fights Babs will never play him again and if he isn't forced to fight then he's probably not playing his game. I'll be interested to see how this turns out.

Yeah, I feel about Backes the way I always felt about Shane Doan. The guy's awesome as hell but I cringe everytime I think about our guys going on the ice with him.

I mean, I definitely don't think he looked terrible. I just think he looked like he was in a bit over his head, like Sheahan did in call ups the first couple of years. The good thing for Ferraro is the fact that he's got legit NHL speed. If he can keep his focus on defense and pk he'll have a job just because he can skate.

No sense in calling him up, Babs will only play him 5 minutes a game so it's a wasted roster spot.

I can't speak for everyone else but my fascination with him has a lot to do with the fact that he's a huge powerforward who's a stud defensively, chips in 20-25 goals and 50+ pts. a season, hits like a truck, plays hard every shift of every game, is a consummate leader, and doesn't seem overly douchey as a person. But that's just me.

I'm fine with this. Ferraro was ok, I guess. But his speed covered up for the fact that he wasn't prepared for the speed of the NHL game, and the effects that this has on your decision making threshold. He was hurried, and played like he was hurried.

I agree with some of what you guys are saying, but not others. First of all I think it's a bad idea to focus only on yesterday's game and think "well they played back to back and clearly gassed" because it obscures the fact that this has been a recurring problem all season. I do agree that a two goal lead isn't much and certainly isn't safe, but it's the frequency by which we give up leads that worrisome. Lots of teams give up two goal leads, but most teams don't do it as frequently as we do. Finally, I completely disagree with the idea that "this is what happens when you've got a bunch of kids in the lineup" for two reasons. First, the kids are playing better hockey (even defensively) than many of the vets. Secondly, we've mostly had our regulars in on defense, so it's not like we're blowing leads because Almquist, Quellet, or Marchenko are playing regularly.

This is interesting because you're right, conventional wisdom does suggest that we do what we're currently doing, but the result is that we blow leads over and over and over. I guess the question is, does changing the strategy result in few blown leads or more? Or, put another way, are we so bad defensively that this is the best we can do and any change in strategy will only make the problem worse? That would suggest that it's not the strategy but the particular players who make the difference between holding a lead and losing it. But we've had this problem all season (even when we were relatively healthy). A whole lot of those shootouts and overtimes we lost early were blown leads.

Re: the kids. It's my understanding that part of the reason we're playing this type of system (e.g. the New Jersey Devils' special) is specifically because we've got so many injuries and kids in the lineup. Babs is always saying that we have to win this way because our team isn't like it used to be and we can't outscore anyone anymore. It's supposed to be the way to compete when you're not as skilled as everyone else. Yet it seems like when we get the lead and try to play that game we struggle, give up the lead, and when we win it's only because we somehow manage to score our way out of the jam.

We haven't lost since Franzen made is statement. Coincidence? I don't think so.

He didn't really do much good or bad last game, and he was good today. Keep doing that and I'm happy. I'm all for Smith turning into something good, it's not like I want the kid to fail. I just don't see any need to make excuses for him when he's playing badly. I get the feeling that some fans feel like if they say "Smith is playing like s***" that he'll magically disappear. It's ok to criticize him when it's appropriate. It's ok to praise him when it's appropriate too. Go look at the GDT and you'll see a big "atta boy" to Smith with my name on it. If he keep it up he'll get more. And if Quincey has another stud game like he did in Pittsburgh, and plays almost thirty minutes with HUGE pk time, I'll praise him too. Because it's not against the law to say something good about Quincey either.

Boooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

You're new, so let me break off a piece of advice for you. This is sort of frowned upon around here. Disagree all you want, Lord know I do, but don't act like this. It creates a combative atmosphere that has a tendency to spiral out of control. We don't want this forum turning into the comments section on Mlive.

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Jesus Christ, that dude can shoot his face off. He reminds me soooo much of Phil Kessel.

We probably agree on lots of things, I'd imagine. Just not Brendan Smith.

Sheahan is a hellish good passer.

Apparently Mickey is drunk or has finally completely lost it.

I'm not sure you're making the point you think you're making. If Quincey doesn't get PP time, and he's terrible (as you're not so subtly insinuating), and Smith needed powerplay time to catch Quincey, then what does that say about Smith? Why don't we just say it was a good goal and leave it at that. I'd hate to have to suffer through another of your ham-handed attempts at being clever.

Atta boy Smith!

Na, the penalties were enough. The fines were within reason. A suspension would have been over the top.