Heroes of Hockeytown

I would say "dicking around" is more appropriate than "playing around."

Ha! I remember that. I think it was a game against Atlanta, he was at the point and tried to take a shot (or maybe it was even receiving a pass) and his stick exploded just as a rushing forward got to him, and he took it down the ice on the breakaway for the score. Then his stick blew up at an inopportune time in the next game, and everyone was just rolling their eyes at lady luck.

That was a fun game to watch. I don't have anything to say about the way it went down that I haven't already said, and that others haven't already said, so I'll let it be.

WHAT

Because the odds are still heavily stacked against you. Home ice is nice to have and I'd rather have it then not. It goes without saying that you can win without it, and that you need to be able to win on the road regardless.

Little Ball of Hate v2.0.

Well, if the question is "Can this line up win the Cup?" which it is, then yes. They already won the Cup, and they're better than ever. If it were "Can this level of play win the Cup?" that'd be a big ol' no.

If it helps improve the team's defense, do it.

Alabama-Texas and OSU-Utah would have been more entertaining/evenly matched games, in my opinion.

Ol' James is sittin' pretty with a 5-6-2 mark in the AHL, a 2.91 GAA and .891 SV%.

If you build it, I will come.

They were close in '06; Shanny had 40, Hank had 39, Homer had 29 and Pavel 28. The last time they actually pulled it off was '02; Shanny, Feds, Hull, and Luc all got 30+. And while it's nice to have a guy that's top 5 in scoring, or whatever, it's always seemed preferable to have balanced scoring. Some people are fretting about maybe Hossa or Datsyuk or Zetterberg not having enough points but the spread across the board works for me. 3.5 goals a game don't just score themselves, after all.

I'm happy we found a way to win, and as far as points go we're 2-0 against the Hawks, but head-to-head we've really only skated to a pair of ties. I really wasn't pleased with this game. The majority of it the Wings struggled all over the place, offensively and defensively. The defenders (and I will pick on Lebda specifically because I always caught him doing this) seemed to be content just to skate near the attackers rather than hit them when the opportunity came, or tie them up or seal them to the boards or anything. Watching the Hawks run around in circles in our zone cycling the puck was no fun. And I was livid watching Lilja coast back after getting beat on the pinch; while Dano was getting turned inside out and Conklin deked into oblivion, Andreas was strolling over the blue line. :nonono: Really, the Wings were off the ball for most of the game, then were totally great for 10 minutes to hang on for the win. Their record is great, but their play is still uninspiring. I'll take an ugly win, a comeback bid when I can get them, but to be honest I don't just want to see them win, I want to see them win like the Red Wings.

Well like I said for the first dozen games or so I thought they all played pretty poorly, so they probably racked up a big ol' minus deficit early on. The problems are two fold, for one... Plus/minus is a hugely overrated stat that isn't always useful for determining much of anything. If Lilja makes a bad play while Maltby and Draper or out there and they're doing their jobs they still get rung up for a minus. Two, they don't score as much as they used to. Which is to say, barely at all. I'm not excusing them for not chipping in offensively, but if you're not scoring, even when playing well defensively there will be a goal now and again and you'll slowly build up a deficit. Obviously these two are getting older and in a couple years will probably be phased out for guys like Helm, but in the meantime I'm still pretty content with how Maltby has been playing. Draper I'm not so sure of right now, but at least he's been excellent on draws.

You can't take headshots on quarterbacks because they bring home the NFL's bacon and so the league obsesses over their safety. You can hit anyone else as a tackle or block in pretty much any way you'd imagine, but the circumstances of a wide receiver blocking downfield are fairly unique in that the blocker has a lot of time to pick up speed and can hit a guy in his blindside.

Maltby has played well lately. It took him a while to come on, and early in the season I dreaded seeing he and Draper out there because it meant we were going to be hemmed in our zone and give up scoring chances until they managed to get off the ice. But Maltby especially has turned it around and has been playing solid hockey lately. Defending, hitting, cycling, he's done well.

Semantics. He was good enough to win before, improved his game, and won after.

It was a good goal, but Sanford really blew it on that play. He bit hard on the fake shot (or it just seemed like the threat of a shot, don't think Meech even made a fake) when the play was at a really poor angle. And like they pointed out on the replay, he was waaay off his post so he couldn't push off and even try to get over. To his credit, though, Meech made no mistake. He put that one into the roof.

When I see that picture in my peripheral vision, it looks like he's wearing a big ol' eyepatch. I'd roll with that look.

Incidentally, I reckon the Canucks got roughly fourteen goals from rebounds off the backboards against us in the season series. The defense is certainly struggling, and they're not getting any puck luck to help them along.

The culprit tonight was definitely letting off the gas... Either stack five guys in the neutral zone and trap the life out of them, or keep on keeping on and take it to 'em to kill the clock. Half-assing it only spots them a couple goals.

Souf Detroit.

If I were to be cut, red and white would flow freely from the wound. So no, I would not. I do not hold others to this standard.

Great work, man. No matter the conclusion, that's just a bang-up job right there.

Heh, nice, a photo of the two big players that aren't going to be in tonight's game.