Jump to content


rrasco's Photo

rrasco

Member Since 08 Oct 2010
Offline Last Active Aug 28 2014 02:31 PM
***--

#2389284 The Race for Eight: Blue Jackets, Stars, Wings

Posted by rrasco on 24 April 2013 - 11:58 PM

Edmonton is just so bad I don't see them really being a problem for such a desperate team...you never know though. I'm far more concerned with Columbus, and the possibilities tomorrow. If Columbus can lose in regulation, and Detroit wins, well clinch a playoff spot.

 

This needs to happen so I don't have a heart attack on Saturday.




#2389283 4/24 GDT: Kings 1 @ Red Wings 3

Posted by rrasco on 24 April 2013 - 11:57 PM

Sooooo....Wings need a win against Trashville and for Dallas to pull it out in regulation tomorrow.  That will allow the Wings to clinch tomorrow and I can take a breather at the game on Saturday.

 

Good win tonight.  If my brother didn't ruin it for me before I finished watching the recording it would have been more exciting but at this point I'm just glad they're figuring out how to win.

 

Tonight is over and tomorrow is beginning.  Need another 2 points and a ROW.




#2385625 Six outdoor games in 2014 for NHL

Posted by rrasco on 17 April 2013 - 12:28 PM

Perhaps you wish to take this to PM's? In this context, fairly novel should be taken to mean uncommon, rare etc... which would certainly apply, since you know, there are 1,230 total games in a regular hockey season, and we are talking about 6 games. FYI, I might have also used 'fairly unique', which also wouldn't make sense from a strict dictionary perspective, but to anyone not being purposefully obnoxious... would likely be taken to mean uncommon, rare, etc.

 

So that being said, since you stated you do in fact understand what I am trying to say, I am surprised you think that 6 games out of 1230 would not be considered uncommon or rare...?

 

I'm confused...are we talking about you or somebody else?

 

What's less common, 1 out of 1230 or 6 out of 1230?




#2383665 We control our own destiny...

Posted by rrasco on 12 April 2013 - 11:20 AM

Great, I'll be at the Dallas game....and a nervous f****** wreck.  I'm liable to hurt someone if it comes down to that and the boys don't  show up.  I've been fearing that scenario all year.




#2382761 ESPN: The 7 deadly sins of roster construction

Posted by rrasco on 10 April 2013 - 01:14 PM

I was going to read this, but I stopped as ES...




#2382391 NHL comes back stronger than ever

Posted by rrasco on 09 April 2013 - 09:28 AM

I just cannot stomach droping $400 on two tickets in prime seating (plus travel time, hotel, gas, food, etc) to see the Winter Classic.  The lockout left a very bad taste in my mouth.  I know that may people will be buying the tickets and it will sell out. but thats not the point.  I have been to the first outdoor college hockey Cold War and then the second Cold War at Michigan last year.  I enjoyed both of those games, and I am all about supporting college hockey because they didn't crap on their fanbase.  The NHL and NHLPA crapped all over the fanbase over the summer with rhetoric and finger pointing.  Both sides played the PR card hard, and as a result, turned me off as a fan.  I love hockey.  I watch hockey on TV.  I won't invest a dime in the NHL until I am over this bad taste in my mouth.  It may take a year or two, but I will be there.

 

I will take the $500+ that I save and have a big party at my place with friends in front of my 52 inch HDTV and enjoy the game just as much.

 

Even though I knew there was going to be a lockout, I bought WC tickets.  They went on sale in August last year, before the lockout was official, and there was no way I was going to chance missing it.  When I had the option after the game was officially canceled, I retained my tickets, because for me, this is a once in a life time opportunity.  People in Michigan have substantially more opportunities to attend Wings' games than I do, so when I get the chance and the means to go...I go.  I've been to 8-9 Wings' games and only one was at the Joe, so this is a big deal for me.  I'm just hoping they release the Winter Festival schedule so I can plan my trip already.




#2380889 Post your Red Wings video day

Posted by rrasco on 05 April 2013 - 06:46 PM

Wait, there is a day for BJs?  And I get a f****** steak?  Why didn't anyone tell me?




#2380154 Nyquist, Tatar, dekeyser

Posted by rrasco on 04 April 2013 - 11:03 AM

Like when he gave Brunner a beauty of a pass last game and helped him snap a 16 game goal drought.  I certainly like that pair.

 

That's the one I was referring to.  The best part was Brunner skating to Nyquist, that smile and hug said it all "Thank you, you crafty son of a *****."




#2379787 Nyquist, Tatar, dekeyser

Posted by rrasco on 03 April 2013 - 05:01 PM

Nyquist had some great hustle/ethic on that goal he made happen on Monday.




#2375210 Calle Jarnkrok to play for GR Griffins

Posted by rrasco on 28 March 2013 - 01:54 PM

Haha, I will do my best.  How much I remember will depend on how much I tip back, but I've been a lot better about that lately.




#2375025 3/28 GDT : Red Wings 0 at Sharks 2

Posted by rrasco on 28 March 2013 - 10:24 AM

I have a bad feeling about this game after 3 solid wins it seems like the Wings are due for a stinker (judging by this seasons patterns) I hope I'm wrong.

This is one of the only times I like a later start time because it means I can watch the Griffs game to see Iron Hook play his first game in NA and still have time to watch the wings. :lol:

 

IIRC He was drafted as a forward and then converted to D, and recently they've put him back at forward.

 

Yes!  I'm glad it's a late game because I'll be at said Griffins game and I don't go to AHL games on nights with Wings' games, because the score is unavoidable there.  Excited to see Mraz and Jarnkrok.  Last time Griffins were here, it was Mrazek's first game with them, but he didn't play, and McCollum sucked it up as usual.  I kind of want to make a Tinky Winky sign too, but I'm gonna let that go by the wayside for Riley's sake.




#2374280 3/25 GDT : Red Wings 3 at Coyotes 2

Posted by rrasco on 26 March 2013 - 09:31 AM

Did anyone notice after the Brunner goal how Yandle flipped his stick over and speared him in the back?




#2372056 Frk

Posted by rrasco on 22 March 2013 - 07:31 PM

No, that's Frking amazing!




#2372013 3/20 GDT : Wild 4 at Red Wings 2

Posted by rrasco on 22 March 2013 - 02:54 PM

Really?!? Suter is a -2, not very good for a defensive defenseman at a 7.5 million cap hit. Parise didn't even show up in that game, and has 23 points in 29 games, which normally would be pretty good, but for 7.5mil a year, I laugh at you. I am glad we missed out on the olsen twins, Suter is garbage without Weber, and Parise is good but they are both wayyy over payed and were way over hyped. Have fun always having a mediocre team that cannot win a cup :)

 

You should just ignore him.  I ran across a few of his posts on another board and the persona he is trying to hide here comes out in true color.  He was totally right about Suter/Parise (because nobody saw those two come out of left field) and he's right, we missed the playoffs (because the playoff race is over, right?).  He's just trolling these boards and it's been allowed for some reason.  The best way to get rid of him is to just ignore him.  No matter how much I want to lash out, it will only feed the troll.  I still find it funny during the offseason when he was all: I'm a Wings' fan but Minny has the best prospects evar!




#2371776 3/20 GDT : Wild 4 at Red Wings 2

Posted by rrasco on 21 March 2013 - 09:31 AM

Dammit Harold.  Couldn't I have at least got my post in before your warning?  I'll zip it.

 

I recorded the game and watched it starting around midnight.  That no-goal call was absolutely wrong.  I didn't understand why they wouldn't review it, but it's because the call on the ice was a high-stick with contact made by another player, not a high-stick goal.  Had the puck gone in without Toots touching it, they would have reviewed it for height/contact.  The fact that Toots helped the puck across the line meant that the play was whistled down prior to the goal, not because of the goal.  In the current set of rules, that is a non-reviewable goal and theoretically, by the book, they got it right.  However, I think anytime the puck ends up in the back of the net, it should be reviewed.  What's more important: having stupid rules or getting it right?  Even Edzo got that part right, which I was kind of surprised to hear him continue on about how that should have been reviewed.

 

Was that a Kronwalling or no?  I kind of want to update my site and that counter that's approaching 1 year.