assortment of Duck fan comments

[ducksfanforlife 0]

Hey no offense - but after 3 pages talking about a 2-1 game?

Please feel free to shoot it back in case of a Ducks 'W'.

:::::::EDIT::::::

make that 4

::::::END EDIT:::::

Sounds good bro.

[Elshupacabra 0]

It was fun when we were talking about the game on here instead of throwing out stupid insults in a not so creative battle of wits.

If you are really interested in talking about the game still:

You might want to try doing it here

Just trying to help.

[betterREDthandead 58]

Yeah...because Detroit really wants to win a cup more than Pronger, Selanne, Giguere.....nice try, Ducks have more determination....we'll see come Game 2

That's what Vancouver and Minnesota said.....I'm actually happy you're saying that...keep on doing it...seriously

The Ducks have more determination? Really? I'd like to know, just how much adversity have the Ducks got through to get this far, that shows how much determination they have? All I've seen is a couple OT games against Vancouver - big whoop.

In the first round the Wings had to deal with a team that resorted to cheap shots, sticks to the gut, and overall goonery.....not to mention the absolute toughest crowd on the road they could possibly have seen. Oh, and throw in some of the most magnificent goaltending in all the playoffs so far. Meanwhile the Ducks were yawning through a snoozer. In the second round, the Wings came back time and time again from two-goal deficits with absolutely clutch goals to win the crucial games.

Most people that pick Anaheim are doing so on the basis of the easy time they've had so far, which has some legitimacy to it. But in the determination category, the Ducks have proved nothing. Not a thing. The only determination the Ducks can be said to have is the same motivation everyone has to win the Cup....nothing less, nothing more. The Wings have faced FAR more adversity - to say the Ducks have more determination, you've got no backup for that.

As for "what Vancouver and Minnesota said"......HOOOOOOO don't make me laugh, most of you Ducks fans, and the Ducks themselves, are guilty of "that's what X and Y said" syndrome. As soon as you guys (and the team, in that stupid LA Times column) started opening your yaps about how all you had to do was be physical with the Wings and they'd fold like a newspaper, that's when we Wings fans knew you guys were scrooooooooood. Believe us, Calgary and San Jose thought so too. And yesterday's game is proof positive that that approach will not work.

[OpenLane 10]

Yeah...because Detroit really wants to win a cup more than Pronger, Selanne, Giguere.....nice try, Ducks have more determination....we'll see come Game 2

filppula

cleary

zetterberg

franzen

hudler

lang

calder

bertuzzi

samuelsson

lebda

quincey

schneider

yeah, you're absolutely correct ducksfanforlife....these guys don't want to win a cup at all for detroit. absolutely unmotivated to win.

Edited May 12, 2007 by OpenLane

[uncle ovipositor 6]

I'm not trying to piss you off, but the refs were not a factor tonight, because Detroit came out on top. Don't get me wrong, the refs missed calls both ways, but its hard to deny the Ducks didn't get the better of the calls tonight.

As a Shark's fan, I'm thinking of this as team zebra paying Detroit back for the last game against the Sharks. Not that it would have changed the outcome (the Wings CLEARLY had the Sharks figured out by that point and the series was done), but when the bench is allowed to say a call should have happened on a play 20 seconds ago that neither ref saw, well, you do have to wonder. Or when they have 9 men on the ice during a line change. Seems like that's the sort of thing a ref might notice - if not the first time then surely the second.

THAT was a horribly officiated game. This one slightly less so in that they were enforcing a set of rules on both teams (just not ALL of the rules). I don't think the refs are biased in hockey games, but I do think they can be overly human in their calls.

The problem with the Ducks PP is that it is too predictable. Everyone in the universe knows that it is either going to be Pronger on the point or Teemu on the left circle (or right if you are looking from the goalie's perspective). The Red Wings did a great job of putting bodies in the way of those two and as a result made the PP difficult for us. The best chance we got on the PP we put off the crossbar.

Yup. I give a lot of credit to Babcock and the Wings for scouting other teams well and being able to adapt to them. I'm not in the locker room so I don't know how much credit falls where, but this team has been stellar at taking away their opponent's game in the playoffs. The PK squad has been particularly good at this, and even if the Ducks changes the look of their PP dramatically, it's going to be hard for them to get it going. I'm not sure how dramatically they can change it, either - as you point out all season they've been playing it with these 2 shooting and everyone else trying to clean up.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

BE CREATIVE CLAPCLAPCLAPCLAPCLAP

Because Detroit has won 4 cups in 10 years....the Ducks meanwhile lost to NJD in 2003 and then unfortunately lost to a fake Oilers team last year in the WCF....also these guys are superstars(except Giguere) who haven't gotten what they deserve.

3 Cups in 10 years. They need that fourth!

As a Shark's fan, I'm thinking of this as team zebra paying Detroit back for the last game against the Sharks. Not that it would have changed the outcome (the Wings CLEARLY had the Sharks figured out by that point and the series was done), but when the bench is allowed to say a call should have happened on a play 20 seconds ago that neither ref saw, well, you do have to wonder. Or when they have 9 men on the ice during a line change. Seems like that's the sort of thing a ref might notice - if not the first time then surely the second.

THAT was a horribly officiated game. This one slightly less so in that they were enforcing a set of rules on both teams (just not ALL of the rules). I don't think the refs are biased in hockey games, but I do think they can be overly human in their calls.

Yup. I give a lot of credit to Babcock and the Wings for scouting other teams well and being able to adapt to them. I'm not in the locker room so I don't know how much credit falls where, but this team has been stellar at taking away their opponent's game in the playoffs. The PK squad has been particularly good at this, and even if the Ducks changes the look of their PP dramatically, it's going to be hard for them to get it going. I'm not sure how dramatically they can change it, either - as you point out all season they've been playing it with these 2 shooting and everyone else trying to clean up.

This is totally irrelevant. Whether the Wings got the better of the calls in Game 6 of the SJS series (which I'm not going to get in a debate out) *should* hold no bearing on Game 1 of the next series. As for last night, you and I will have to agree to disagree. I'm not one to complain about the reffing, but last night the Wings absolutely got the short end of the stick.

It turned out to be a non-factor because the Wings won the game. Simple as that.

[uncle ovipositor 6]

In the first round the Wings had to deal with a team that resorted to cheap shots, sticks to the gut, and overall goonery.....

And now you've got another. I just don't get it - they have some extremely talented players who can do some great things, but they tend to fall back on a cheap game more often than not. They could (and during the regular season often do) play hockey on a par with anyone out there. But if they're being beat or if it's the playoffs they don't think skill will get them through.

Scott Thornton was on the Sharks last year and was a dependable offensive forward. Now his job is to pick fights with d men and not much else. He can do both, but one's a lot more interesting to watch. Pronger can pull off some magnificent plays, but he's just as likely to resort to stick work when the going gets tough.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha, of course they don''t, Holmstrom is one SKILLED hockey player, to deflect all those pucks, going a 100+ MPH, out of mid air,

I've said it before and I'll say it again: having a big ass in clown pants isn't particularly impressive. It's the fact that he's got such incredible skills that sets him apart. I didn't pay much attention to him before, but there were a couple of great opportunistic goals I've seen him score in the post season that were unreal.

Whether the Wings got the better of the calls in Game 6 of the SJS series (which I'm not going to get in a debate out) *should* hold no bearing on Game 1 of the next series.

Right, but games *should* be called fairly to begin with. Should doesn't mean much.

But I also don't think the refs should or did allow previous games to influence calls in this one. I just thought it was funny that the wings got so fabulously screwed by the refs. Thankfully it wasn't a decisive factor in the outcome of the game.

As for last night, you and I will have to agree to disagree. I'm not one to complain about the reffing, but last night the Wings absolutely got the short end of the stick.

I agree that the Ducks got away with a lot. I hope the officiating gets better because it's surprising that this wasn't a decisive factor in the game.

[Heroes of Hockeytown 694]

cleary

This guy alone has enough determination to lead his team to a Stanley Cup... the way he was jumping up and down and freaking out after Homer's goal, you could tell he's starting to sense that big silver mug coming his way. And I can't think of a guy who deserves it more than old Dano.

[Mudvayneowns91 0]

3 Cups in 10 years. They need that fourth!

This is totally irrelevant. Whether the Wings got the better of the calls in Game 6 of the SJS series (which I'm not going to get in a debate out) *should* hold no bearing on Game 1 of the next series. As for last night, you and I will have to agree to disagree. I'm not one to complain about the reffing, but last night the Wings absolutely got the short end of the stick.

It turned out to be a non-factor because the Wings won the game. Simple as that.

They did indeed. I remember last night when we were on a powerplay and they had too many men on the ice. Sure, it should have been a 5-3 for us, but it didn't happen. Also, there is no way you can be perfect on the calls. At least it's not like the NBA refs where their whole basis on fouls are based on how popular or good you are. ie spurs... I am just thankful that the nhl isn't anywhere near the pathetic calls of the nba.

[Duckboy6 0]

My buddy the Kings fan. Well, he's a Ducks fan now says to me; "Ugly, lucky, etc... goals from the Wings. The Ducks outplayed them, etc..." I say; "Wow. That's interesting that you only scored one goal." He says; "Well Dom played awesome that's for sure." I say; "Don't you think a team can create those bounces or chances where the puck ends up in the back of the net?"

Create those bounces????? are you saying zett deliberately tried redirecting it off beauchemin?? and lidstrom and holm planned it on getting stuck in giggys pad and falling out into the net???

Hasek was outstanding, but i dont think the Wing "created" those bounces

[Yemack 1]

As a Shark's fan, I'm thinking of this as team zebra paying Detroit back for the last game against the Sharks. Not that it would have changed the outcome (the Wings CLEARLY had the Sharks figured out by that point and the series was done), but when the bench is allowed to say a call should have happened on a play 20 seconds ago that neither ref saw, well, you do have to wonder. Or when they have 9 men on the ice during a line change. Seems like that's the sort of thing a ref might notice - if not the first time then surely the second.

Read the rule book, linesman can call penalty after the stoppage if refs missed it. If San Jose scored during that time, it is nullified. I was kinda wondering at first as well but someone on TSN crew took out the rule book and read it off during intermisson show.

I'm sure a lot of people here can also point out many calls went unnoticed by refs during that game. But IMO blaming on refs are 'usually' for losers. Stop blaming on your players, GM, coach, refs, NHL, terrorists, universe and what not. When all things are considered, you guys just didn't have it this year against Wings. Next year maybe but in most cases, success just doesn't happen overnight. It usually takes years and years of seasoning.

[Guest REDWINGS4LYFE]

so far the calgary fans have been the best! ducks fans are a bunch of whinny losers

[Mors 201]

Create those bounces????? are you saying zett deliberately tried redirecting it off beauchemin?? and lidstrom and holm planned it on getting stuck in giggys pad and falling out into the net???

Hasek was outstanding, but i dont think the Wing "created" those bounces

"I believe in this game you create the bounces that go for you," Giguere said.

Yahoo Sports

[Heroes of Hockeytown 694]

Create those bounces????? are you saying zett deliberately tried redirecting it off beauchemin?? and lidstrom and holm planned it on getting stuck in giggys pad and falling out into the net???

When people talk about making their own bounces, they don't mean deliberately putting pucks off of defenders into the net; obviously, that's impossible.

What they mean is creating power plays (both goals were PPGs) and getting traffic in front. If you can do one of those things, or both, there's a good chance you'll get a bounce to go your way.

Anaheim had power plays and traffic, too, but yesterday the defense was up to the task of blocking shots and closing off lanes, and Hasek was Hasek. But I don't doubt that over the course of this series that both teams will continue to make their own bounces and score a few goals on 'lucky' plays...

[dw185 0]

The most incredible part of the game is how much obstruction the Anaheim D got away with when the wings would dump it into the zone. Not to mention the few jabs to the head when macdonald was trying to do a snow angel on top of hasek in the 1st and then someone on the wings got called for something stupid. Most of the penalties against the ducks were glaringly obvious calls. It seems like it has been this way the whole playoffs for the wings.

Not only are the wings playing against another hockey team, but they are playing against the refs too... Compare calls side by side and the wings get called for more penalties that didn't affect the play at all and shouldn't be penalties in the first place than the ducks. The ducks get called for things that should be obvious and a 4th grader could call. Somehow the refs seem to miss chelios getting cheap shot and perry's embelishment in order to try and get a call on someone. Somehow the refs also missed macdonald punching chelios, as they missed lebda getting punched. It's pretty obvious most of the refs are going to call bad calls against the wings and not against whoever the wings are playing. for whatever reason they have a rooting interest against the wings.

I find it incredible that so far the wings have overcome these cheap calls by the refs and have made it this far!

[Duckboy6 0]

"I believe in this game you create the bounces that go for you," Giguere said.

Yahoo Sports

ok let me restate. The Red wings made it happen and for that they get the win. however i think that they getting two "ugly" goals in one game was quite a break and i dont think they will be able to rely on those types of goals to keep occurring.

As far as the "head jabs" they werent much and red wings did push mcdonald onto hasek so i think their half way responsible

Edited May 13, 2007 by Duckboy6

[Guest jaytan]

As much as I'd like to gloat and laugh at the Ducks fans, some of them do have a point. Game one really could have gone either way, and while I wouldn't use the word "lucky" to describe why the Wings won, they did take better advantages of the opportunities that presented themselves.

Still, I feel about the same after winning the first game as I think I would if we'd lost a similarly close game. I have no expectations of seeing the Wings win this one with ease. If they are able to pull it off, it's going at least six games, and there will probably be some OT in there too. No matter what happens in the next two, I think Game four will be the big one for Detroit, whether we're up 2-1, down 2-1 or magically have a 3-0 lead.

[uncle ovipositor 6]

Read the rule book, linesman can call penalty after the stoppage if refs missed it. If San Jose scored during that time, it is nullified. I was kinda wondering at first as well but someone on TSN crew took out the rule book and read it off during intermisson show.

I didn't know that about the linesman, but if I remember correctly the ref went to the Detroit bench first, then made the call. I don't blame Babcock because it's exactly what he should have done, and there was a penalty on the play, but it was pretty fishy.

I'm sure a lot of people here can also point out many calls went unnoticed by refs during that game. But IMO blaming on refs are 'usually' for losers. Stop blaming on your players, GM, coach, refs, NHL, terrorists, universe and what not. When all things are considered, you guys just didn't have it this year against Wings. Next year maybe but in most cases, success just doesn't happen overnight. It usually takes years and years of seasoning.

I'm not blaming anyone. Detroit won. And even if the refs had made horrible calls that affected the outcome of the game (which they didn't in that game or the first against the ducks), Detroit still would have won. Bad calls are as much a reality as bad ice - something you'll get to see a lot of when you play in Anaheim. You've got to hope that on the whole it's going to affect both teams evenly, and generally it works out that way.

Detroit had won the series against the Sharks by the start of that game, and I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. They had the Sharks figured out, and while it wasn't the most exciting game to watch it was pretty clear who was in charge. The Sharks tried a lot of different attacks and the Wings adapted effortlessly. Having watched that series, I'm pretty sure they can beat the Ducks - not because they have more stars on the roster (this might arguably tip to the Ducks), but because they are so skilled at playing as a team and executing strategically. During the regular season when you see any given team at most 8 times over 6 months this is pretty useful, but in a playoff series it can be the deciding factor. To my eye that's what tipped the series against the Sharks and I bet it's going to tip this series as well.

Edited May 13, 2007 by uncle ovipositor

[glasgowcelticwing 18]

ok let me restate. The Red wings made it happen and for that they get the win. however i think that they getting two "ugly" goals in one game was quite a break and i dont think they will be able to rely on those types of goals to keep occurring.

As far as the "head jabs" they werent much and red wings did push mcdonald onto hasek so i think their half way responsible

At time's luck is with you , but the facts are the Wings got in the position's to score those goals,so they deserved them.The Ducks also got "quite a break " with a lot of the bogus calls during the game.I don't think they can rely on those throughout the series.

[Wild Wing 0]

I just want to add, I've only been consistently been watching hockey for a few years, but I am a sports fanatic. Luck in a sport like basketball, baseball, or football is a big deal. Sometimes, you witness extraordinary things. Last night, I didn't consider either of those goals "lucky," as nothing extraordinary really happened. The fact of the matter is, there is a lot of traffic in front of the net, and the puck is so small, that these things happen. That being said, aside from this whole series, this happens consistently in hockey. Deflections happen all the time. Sucks it happened in the playoffs, but both teams were playing tight defense, and although there was a fortunate bounce in the Wings favor, the box score doesn't reflect that, as other posters have stated.

Who knows, maybe we will get some bounces in game 2!

[betterREDthandead 58]

Scott Thornton was on the Sharks last year and was a dependable offensive forward. Now his job is to pick fights with d men and not much else. He can do both, but one's a lot more interesting to watch.

One nitpick: the Ducks' Thornton is Shawn, not Scott. Scott plays for the Kings. (Lot of Thorntons in the league Scott is related to Joe but Shawn is related to neither.) Shawn Thornton is never going to be depended on to score goals, but I'd really love to have him on the Wings, he plays with a lot of guts and never takes a shift off.

[uncle ovipositor 6]

One nitpick: the Ducks' Thornton is Shawn, not Scott. Scott plays for the Kings. (Lot of Thorntons in the league Scott is related to Joe but Shawn is related to neither.) Shawn Thornton is never going to be depended on to score goals, but I'd really love to have him on the Wings, he plays with a lot of guts and never takes a shift off.

Heh. I've made that mistake before, too. Just like the Baldwins, I can't keep track of all the Thorntons.

[ducksfanforlife 0]

filppula

cleary

zetterberg

franzen

hudler

lang

calder

bertuzzi

samuelsson

lebda

quincey

schneider

yeah, you're absolutely correct ducksfanforlife....these guys don't want to win a cup at all for detroit. absolutely unmotivated to win.

I'm going to do a rating from 1-10 on how much they need to win the cup this year:

Filppula: is a rookie or a sophomore I forget....therefore he still has 10-15 years to win a cup......rating: 5

Cleary: Is 28/29 years old....in the prime of his career...hasn't really dealt with coming close to a cup(correct me if I'm wrong because I hadn't followed Cleary until this year)....7

Zetterberg: 26 years old and relatively new to the NHL.....at the same time has had some disappointment in the playoffs so we'll give him a 7

Franzen: Same deal with Filppula, Zetterberg....Rating: 5

Hudler: Even worse then Filppula because doesn't play day in and day out......Rating: 4

Lang: Veteran...probably has hoisted the cup with Detroit before but I forget: Rating: 6

Calder: been through a lot this season...28-30 years old or so I think and has been with a crappy team.....Rating: 6

Bertuzzi: Probably wants to win a cup pretty badly...was in Vancouver when they made the playoffs and didn't make it past the first round for a while.....Rating: 8

Samuelsson: Comparable to Calder: 6

Lebda: Young has long way to go: Rating: 5

Quincey: would be incredible to be called up and win a cup: Rating: 5

Schneider: has won many a cup but would always like another: Rating: 6

The Ducks have more determination? Really? I'd like to know, just how much adversity have the Ducks got through to get this far, that shows how much determination they have? All I've seen is a couple OT games against Vancouver - big whoop.

In the first round the Wings had to deal with a team that resorted to cheap shots, sticks to the gut, and overall goonery.....not to mention the absolute toughest crowd on the road they could possibly have seen. Oh, and throw in some of the most magnificent goaltending in all the playoffs so far. Meanwhile the Ducks were yawning through a snoozer. In the second round, the Wings came back time and time again from two-goal deficits with absolutely clutch goals to win the crucial games.

Most people that pick Anaheim are doing so on the basis of the easy time they've had so far, which has some legitimacy to it. But in the determination category, the Ducks have proved nothing. Not a thing. The only determination the Ducks can be said to have is the same motivation everyone has to win the Cup....nothing less, nothing more. The Wings have faced FAR more adversity - to say the Ducks have more determination, you've got no backup for that.

As for "what Vancouver and Minnesota said"......HOOOOOOO don't make me laugh, most of you Ducks fans, and the Ducks themselves, are guilty of "that's what X and Y said" syndrome. As soon as you guys (and the team, in that stupid LA Times column) started opening your yaps about how all you had to do was be physical with the Wings and they'd fold like a newspaper, that's when we Wings fans knew you guys were scrooooooooood. Believe us, Calgary and San Jose thought so too. And yesterday's game is proof positive that that approach will not work.

First of all never mention me and Helene Elliott(writer for LA times) in the same breath: I hated that article

2nd of all I never thought the wings would fold....I thought it would give the Ducks a SLIGHT edge...which it has so far...even though the Wings won

3rd of all....determination doesn't come from one year of facing tough teams and WINNING....it comes from losing, and getting so close and not getting it....

[cupcrazy 13]

The Wings win but the ducks beat themselves.

Have we played a game yet where the other team didn't beat there self going by there fans? We havent out played anyone yet,going by other teams fans!

But here we are,in the Western Finals up one game to none!

Edited May 13, 2007 by cupcrazy

[Defenseman13 0]

The Wings beat the SHarks thanks in part to a nationwide referree conspiracy and deliberate tampering of the ice surface at the tank. And you guys didn't win.... we let you. Thornton is in serious debt becasue of some bad bets he placed in the Kentucky Derby, that's why we threw that last game.