Did you watch the first half of last season?
I watched the playoffs.
Granted, I could piss and moan all day about the flip-side of this coin - our goal-scoring issues.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:56 PM
Did you watch the first half of last season?
I watched the playoffs.
Granted, I could piss and moan all day about the flip-side of this coin - our goal-scoring issues.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:57 PM
Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:57 PM
If he played before 2002 then he was right
http://www.mnicehawks.com/
Hey, if I played for a team, I would say the team name wrong.
Good rule of thumb is always take an octopus everywhere. Better to have one and not need it than find yourself thinking, "Damn, I wish I had that octopus".
-Buppy
Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:58 PM
Ok so now you're arguing my point.... Or else we've been arguing the same point all night.
My argument is when you don't score on a 5-3 yet have the PP 5 times and don't score. You don't win hockey games. Not scoring on a 5-3 usually proves in the opposite direction. The last game vs the Wild was some sort of of a fluke. Don't worry I've laced up the skates many of times brah.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 09:58 PM
I think you can answer that question quite easily just based on his uninformed answer.
My uninformed answer. Ouch.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:00 PM
I watched the playoffs.
Granted, I could piss and moan all day about the flip-side of this coin - our goal-scoring issues.
Don't mean to belittle or anything, I think we both agree there are bigger problems.
Just saying, Howard has proved he can be an elite goalie for an extended period of time, that's all.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:01 PM
Aren't they the Rochester Ice Hawks?
Yes. Nick Fatis was my coach.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:02 PM
Is that true in the MnJHL?
My argument is when you don't score on a 5-3 yet have the PP 5 times and don't score. You don't win hockey games. Not scoring on a 5-3 usually proves in the opposite direction. The last game vs the Wild was some sort of of a fluke. Don't worry I've laced up the skates many of times brah.
Good rule of thumb is always take an octopus everywhere. Better to have one and not need it than find yourself thinking, "Damn, I wish I had that octopus".
-Buppy
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:03 PM
meh at least we got the point. Must win Tuesday night. And yo I love King Jims as much as anybody else here, but he has not been an elite goalie for an extended period of time....he played great tonight should have had the OT winner tho
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:04 PM
Hey, if I played for a team, I would say the team name wrong.
I don't really follow the (as what most call it around where I live) "The Jungle League". Although a friend (3rd string goalie for them) dad coaches the Minnesota Flying Aces and I was able to ride with the team down to Rochester to see a game 2 years ago.
I have gone to a couple Granite City LumberJacks games but they usually play at the same time State plays, so I will take college any day!
Edited by HadThomasVokounOnFortSt, 27 January 2013 - 10:05 PM.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:05 PM
Did you watch the first half of last season?
This team was a better team in the first half of last season than they are now. We got off to a good start last season from what I remember.
No one is saying Howard is bad, but he's not "elite". Teams who are lower seeds need elite goalies, like Kiprusoff in 2004 or Quick last season. I don't see Howard putting up those kinds of numbers. Do you?
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:05 PM
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:07 PM
meh at least we got the point. Must win Tuesday night. And yo I love King Jims as much as anybody else here, but he has not been an elite goalie for an extended period of time....he played great tonight should have had the OT winner tho
Last season he was top 3 in SV% and GAA first half of the year. What more did he need to do? Ended up 9th is SV% and 6th in GAA after the wings collasped towards the end.
How about 09-10 when he was in the top 5 of both SV% and GAA? Is that not elite for an extended period of time?
Look I'm not saying Howard is Brodeur or anything, but he's proven he can be an elite goalie, put him in St Louis's system facing 20 shots a night and watch him win a Vezina.
This team was a better team in the first half of last season than
they are now. We got off to a good start last season from what I
remember.
No one is saying Howard is bad, but he's not "elite". Teams who are
lower seeds need elite goalies, like Kiprusoff in 2004 or Quick last
season. I don't see Howard putting up those kinds of numbers. Do you?
Goalies are usually benefited by their team's you are right. And I have seen him put up those numbers, 09-10, and last season's first half.
Edited by Carman, 27 January 2013 - 10:08 PM.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:07 PM
Even though we lost I still liked the game that we played as a team. Our D seemed alot less leakey, we werent giving up great scoring chances.
We also had the puck alot more then Chicago did. If we cash in on our PP I think this is definitly a win for us, give them some more time to work on it and I think if we see effort like tonight we will win alot more games then we lose.
PS and we didn't even have Helm either.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:08 PM
Is that true in the MnJHL?
I understand what you are arguing, I just happen to disagree with that argument. One bad powerplay means nothing, several bad powerplays is what results in losses.
I don't play in the MnJHL anymore. I was a fighter when I played then. However I've been a Wings fan long before I was playing junior hockey. Just saying you only watch Wings games or what? Need to send you a link where it shows teams who that don't score on a 5-3 lose the game in the NHL? It's seriously scary. Can't find a link tho at the moment looking...
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:08 PM
I don't understand why it was Brunner's fault. Where was the D? If the D was in the right position, Brunner wouldn't have had to attempt to get his stick in the way. I know Kronner was taking the guy with the puck but who and where was Kronner's partner?
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:09 PM
I don't understand why it was Brunner's fault. Where was the D? If the D was in the right position, Brunner wouldn't have had to attempt to get his stick in the way. I know Kronner was taking the guy with the puck but who and where was Kronner's partner?
It's his fault because during 4v4 situations you play man to man. It was a 3 on 3, and he had the late guy.
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:11 PM
I don't think this loss is that bad. No matter how tired, outplayed, beaten up, or injured the hawks are the past few years they always seem to have our number. We got a point out of it at least, and lets avenge the loss tuesday against the stars
Posted 27 January 2013 - 10:11 PM
meh at least we got the point. Must win Tuesday night. And yo I love King Jims as much as anybody else here, but he has not been an elite goalie for an extended period of time....he played great tonight should have had the OT winner tho
why is it we are turning on Jimmy? as a fellow goalie myself i know his already beating himsself up its are offense guys nothing is coming except that game with the wild look at all the others this year 6-0 4-3 2-1 5-3 and 2-1 11 GF not good we need to get it going or else its going to be over
try to get something by me i dare you
| Topic | Forum | Started By | Stats | Last Post Info | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pinned WCSF Game 2 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Blackhawks 1 - (Series Tied at 1)
|
General Discussion | Hockeytown0001 |
|
|
|
Red Wings don't belong in the same rink as the Hawks? |
General Discussion | MidMichSteve |
|
|
|
Pinned Round 2 Photoshop War: Chicago Blackhawks
|
General Discussion | Matt |
|
|
Hockey Discussion Forums →
General Discussion →
WCSF Game 2 GDT : Red Wings 4 at Blackhawks 1 - (Series Tied at 1)Started by Hockeytown0001, Yesterday, 11:22 PM |
|
|
||
GDT
Hockey Discussion Forums →
General Discussion →
WCSF Game 1 GDT : Red Wings 1 at Blackhawks 4, (CHI leads series 1-0)Started by Hockeytown0001, 14 May 2013 |
|
|
||
GDT
Hockey Discussion Forums →
General Discussion →
WCQF Game 7 GDT - Red Wings 3 @ Ducks 2 - (DET wins series, 4-3)Started by FlashyG, 11 May 2013 |
|
|
||
GDT
Hockey Discussion Forums →
General Discussion →
WCQF Game 6 GDT : Ducks 3 at Red Wings 4 (OT) - (Series Tied 3-3)Started by Hockeytown0001, 09 May 2013 |
|
|
||
GDT
Hockey Discussion Forums →
General Discussion →
WCQF Game 5 GDT: Red Wings 2 @ Ducks 3 (OT) - (ANA leads series 3-2)Started by L3T5G0W1NG5, 08 May 2013 |
|
|
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users