C-TownWing

I think he was looking for games from our last Stanley Cup season...made convenient by the fact that TV had actually been invented by the last time we won.

I didn't miss out on them Two of them were PP, which actually helped me out a lot--I have a slim lead in PP points this week, and the guy I'm playing has Zherdev and Hainsey, who both collected a PPP on the Jackets' goal last night against your Ducks. Thanks Kovy!

I'll chip in an RCS endorsement...I used all my HS graduation money to buy an authentic Yzerman in 1998, complete with the Stanley Cup and VK/SM patches. Even after 10 years of regular wear, still looks great, no defects in workmanship or anything like that. And of course, they used the correct lettering/numbering. Crap like that bothers me too

Us, no. Wings are remarkably selective with that--consider that with all of our recent success, Yzerman and Lidstrom are the only ones who played a part in that likely to go up. Not that this changes that, but this kind of surprised me... Cheli's career GP by team: Montreal: 402 Chicago: 664 Detroit: 493 (includes this season so far) Chicago's a no-brainer when you look at it objectively with the pair of Norrises there, first and second-team all-star selections every year, he was captain for a while, etc. Problem is, he didn't leave there on the greatest of terms (which is why we were able to get him in such a great deal) so there still might be some bad feelings there. It wasn't exactly a Bourque-to-Colorado type of thing.

Thanks! Fat guy has bad wheels, but unmatched grit and a blistering shot that can ricochet off the boards back and forth across the length of the rink about six times. He may be available in a 2-for-1, as his team's always looking to add that elusive fifth skater.

That's exactly the reason I'm calling Blues. Both teams are off to solid starts, but my gut says that Chicago's legit and St. Louis isn't. So I'm rooting against the stronger challenger to the division title (not to mention the one that already has 4 points against us head-to-head).

That's exactly it to me--he didn't come anywhere close to the vicinity of the expectations placed upon him when he came into the league. The word "bust" seems kind of harsh for someone with his resume though. As someone who sort of liked the Nordiques until they became the Avalanche, that whole mess always left a bad taste in my mouth and pretty much poisons my opinion of Big E.

Really. If we're ever at a point where that qualifies as a "bad" ESPN oversight, we will have made significant progress with them.

Obviously, I'm a huge Cheli fan, but logic's on your side: 1 (10 games after the trade), 3, 0 (24 games), 6, 2, 2, 4, and 0 goals with the Wings. His one goal that some have referenced was in the playoffs. But like you said, for what he is and what we ask of him, that's fantastic. If he keeps killing penalties like someone half his age, we don't need a single goal from him.

Here's my lame check-in reply.

HATE that guy. Oooh, he can point really fast. BFD. On the point, I went to a CHL game back in March. Youngstown Steelhounds, just for the shoutout. Anyway, this guy behind me taps me on the shoulder and says "you look like a hockey fan (I was wearing a Wings hat, so naturally he'd think that), this is my first time, how many periods are in a game?" It's about the most basic question one can ask, but I didn't get mad at him. Why would I? He was there, which means he's somewhat interested in becoming a fan and it making some kind of effort at it. Hopefully he enjoyed the game and will be back for more. And maybe next time he asks someone a question, it'll be about hand passes or something a little more advanced. I just hope that that guy is nice about it and answers the question, instead of laughing at him for not being a hockey lifer. I think hockey fans tend to be our own worst enemy when it comes to drawing new fans in, we tend to be kind of elitist about things like that.

Option 2. Go Sens go! I for one have never bought into the idea of "we can say we lost to the champs." When does anyone actually use that? Only two reasons I can think of. #1. Arguments with other teams' fans. Sens and Ducks have advanced past us, so I don't think it would work on them. 26 other teams didn't make it as far as we did, I wouldn't think you'd need to resort to it. So I guess that leaves Buffalo. If the Ducks win, next time you get into an argument with a Sabres fan, go ahead and use the "Oh yeah? Well the team we lost to beat the team you lost to, so there!" After he's done laughing at the lame argument, he'll cite their President's Trophy and you'll shake hands and have a beer together. #2. To make yourself feel better about losing. Doesn't make me feel better, but if that's your cup of tea, have at it I guess. I suppose you also rooted for the Avs in 1996 then, right?

I was in a cubby this year. BRUTAL. Fortunately, I was in the very last row so I could stand (the last row in 213B is 27, according to my ticket). But the thing is, if you stood up all the way (I'm 6'0") the top of the cubby roof blocked the other end of the ice. So I had to do this kind of half stand-half squat thing and lean against the back wall. If there's no cubby in 213A, you're in pretty good shape, 25's the last row except where there are cubbies. Sightlines should be fine, and you can stand (fully) if they aren't. But I have a feeling there is one, in which case you may be in trouble. If it weren't for my ability to stand-squat, I wouldn't have been able to see a thing.

No great story here, I was just at my parents' house in Solon, OH watching it as part of killing off the LONG couple months between my graduation from PSU and moving out on my own. I seem to remember having to duck yardwork to watch it, but I could be wrong about that.

I have zero problem with people getting up, I wouldn't myself, but I don't expect all 20,000 people to all stay glued to their seats until intermission. That said, when watching on TV, I sometimes catch myself almost yelling "sit down, I can't see!"

I say good for Sean Avery. I too cannot stand when people lose then come back with the "well, I was playing hurt." It's a prima donna-ish thing to do, it's BS, it's a lame excuse, and I'm glad Avery called them out. Yzerman played hurt pretty much every single game the last 5-7 years of his career. Did he ever complain or use it as an excuse for losing? No. As for Shanny, he'll always be one of my favorites and I'll always wear my #14 Wings jersey proudly. I'm glad he's found an ideal situation in which to wrap up his HOF career.

Cover of The Hockey News during the Olympics last year: Shooting for 50! Captain America aims to play 'til his 50th birthday...really" I've become a believer--if anyone not named Gordie Howe can pull it off, it's Cheli.

I've never seen it firsthand, but les Quebecois have a reputation that they'd rather the Habs miss the playoffs with a team entirely made up of people with names containing "Le," "-eur" or "-ault" than win the Cup with a bunch of Euros and those filthy English speakers.

Funny, I actually thought that's what this was going to be about... I don't mind that everyone mentions his age--they're just doing it because he doesn't play like it. When a player hangs on to a dead career beyond all rational thought <cough> Sean Burke <cough>, his age never gets mentioned because everyone pretty much knows that the guy's old. Not that they don't know that Cheli's old, it's just that people aren't as easily reminded of it by his play.

No disrespect to Bobby Lang, I actually think he's fine for what he is, but how are his name and "legit 1 or 1A center" in the same paragraph?

This is more or less what I was going to say too...you could even go back to when Y/Shanny were still around--we were pioneers in bringing Russians over with Fedorov and eventually putting together the Russian Five. Then later on, it was (and still is) the Swedes. Probably the five best-known players on our team right now: Lidstrom (SWE), Datsyuk (RUS), Zetterberg (SWE), Hasek (CZE), Chelios (USA). The Wings have probably been less reliant on Canadians than any recently successful team, and maybe any team period. It irks Canadians to no end when it's suggested that there are people from other countries who can play decent hockey too. The Hockeytown thing bothers them too, I agree (although technically, it's "Hockeytown USA," not sure why they'd have a beef with that). Old rivalries with the Leafs and Habs. And people always hate teams that are good every year, it's human nature. We're probably the most hated team in all of hockey right now when you add it up (non Leafs and Habs fans in Canada hate those two more, but the US is completely indifferent to them).

I am sooo excited. I'm moving, finally got out of the grasp of Time-Warner, and my new provider actually carries Versus. Cable guy came by yesterday afternoon, and I actually made a special trip there with a little TV to watch the game last night in a mostly empty apartment. Not to gloat, but I can't say that I care about CBC vs. TSN now. Actually, I don't get CBC anyway, and I still won't at the new place even with the pretty decent package I got just for Versus. Either way, this TV package is still crap. This is the conference finals and a combined TWO games are on a channel that mainstream America actually gets.

Yeah...as much as I WANT the Wings-Hawks rivalry back, that's a pretty ridiculous statement. Colorado: 2002 WCF was the last gasp for that one. Chicago: Hawks haven't been relevant in 10 years. St. Louis: Would've been a top 3 rival just before the lockout when they were the 2nd best team in the Central, but certainly not now. All of which begs the question: who ARE the Wings' top 3 rivals? Nashville probably. Who else? Calgary? Meetings in two of the last three playoffs, with some bad blood between the teams. Kind of ridiculous to call it a rivalry though. Columbus? Only in their minds. Can't be anyone from the East, we only play them every three years. Nobody else in the West jumps out at me as having any kind of argument, let alone a good one. Conclusion: we don't HAVE three rivals. Even the one semi-legit one we do have really only goes back to the 2004 playoffs.

You are correct, sir. Thanks and hanta yo baby!

I'd probably drop Datsyuk's play on Nabby's gaffe in Game 5 in there (eventually held up as the GWG, for what that's worth), but looking at the list, it's pretty much impossible to bump one of yours.