I can just see JSG after winning the Cup. He looks into the camera and says....
...I'm..uh... owned by Disney World?!
As for who to cheer... COMMON...at this point everyone who doesn't live in NY or NJ MUST root for the Ducks. Jersery has been to the Finals 3 of the last 4 years. You have to root for "Cinderella" (pun definitely intended).
Last night I was thinking as I watched the Senators slouch onto the ice and their bench after defeat... Swedes make lousy team leaders. Think about it. Alfredsson, Sundin, Naslund....
It's just a theory I have but it seems to me most elite Swedish hockey players do not carry their teams well during emotional or hard-fighting times. It must have something to do with their culture because you can see it in other sports as well. Stefan Edberg, Swedish golfers not named Jesper, etc. They're all very good technicians at their sports. Very sound fundamentals, highly skilled, but almost totally devoid of emotional strength it seems like.
Almost like they're TOO even-keeled. That when they need to get pissed off a little and fire up their mates, they just keep on plugging along. Never scowling, never smiling -- just there. Even Peter Foresberg is a little bit like this, though less so than the other three guys I named (and there are others). As I watched Alfredsson during this series, it just kept occuring to me that the guy has no heart -- or maybe no emotion is a better way to put it. Hence my comment above.
Rarely finished his checks, rarely seemed to notice whether his team was winning or losing. He's not alone, but those are not the marks of a guy who can lead his team to a Cup. I think that's why for example, guys like Brendan Shannahan or Yzerman lead the Wings and not say Niklas Lidstrom (who would have the C on almost any other team in the league). Lidstrom is an amazing defensman, but I bet he would not make a good team leader.
The Swedes just don't have it in them is doesn't seem like. Not to say you don't want them on your team. There are many superb Swedish players, but they are not superb leaders is what it seems like to me.
By the way, that's not a slam on Swedes. I have mucho respect for them. Just an observation of how well (or not) Swedish "stars" lead their teams. Maybe it's not so much just Swedes as all Scandanavians? You could probably make the same observations of Finnish players. Very low-key, highly skilled... Lehtinen, Kapannen, Numinnen, etc. I don't really see any of these guys as the type to lead their teams out of a hole -- do you guys?
Well, the unstoppable Giguere let a few by. see what happens when you keep screening him and get behind the defensemen? Next game is sure to be different, the Ducks did show rust. They were completely out-competed in the game, caught standing still a lot of the time, especially in the second period. Next game they'll be better, and if the series wears on, they might have more juice in the tank.
But I bet Friesen is feeling pretty damn good these days. Nothing like a small taste of vindication to make you feel that way, and he's got a scoring touch right now. I noticed the Devils played Tverdovsky too, the "meat" of last summer's trade. Didn't notice him much during the game (missed most of the third), but that's probably a good thing. Maybe playing against his old team will add some agression to his performance.
Must have been awful to watch if you're rooting for the Ducks though. The devils are just a little bit better at that game plan, and terribly frustrating to watch if you're not behind them.
Sure seems like it! Makes you wonder if his wife's actions have motivated him more than usual. Not that the possibility of winning a Cup isn't huge motivation. But he must be positively pissed to have his wife trying to take his kids away from him.
That was a good game. I hope the rest are that close... I still cannot believe the one Marty let through the five hole when he was trying to play the puck and dropped his stick. The Clucks are lucky to be at 2-1, even though they played a much better game. Honestly in a way NJ is lucky it wasn't 4-1 with no OT. There were so many flukey non-goal shots that should've gone in. I think the Ducks were just really tight in the NJ zone, they were shooting not to miss it seemed like, instead of ripping shots at Brodeur when they could.
Just as long as I don't have to watch Michael Eisner anymore. They showed the guy like four times. Once was too many, but ABC being the carrier it should not have surprised me. What a weenie.
Man, everyone hates NJ just because they're NJ. I mean, c'mon, Disney?! How about a real blue-collar, gritty, actual hockey-playing area and team? No matter, we'll kick your collective asses. No way Disney --er, I mean Anaheim will beat Marty four times in 5 games. They just have to pick on little sissy Giguere some more and get in this face some more.
Moogs, do you still think low-scoring games are boring?
My biggest goal is to see a real series. 7 games. I'm already starting to miss hockey and the season isn't done yet.
I have a lot of respect for the Devils, I just think they're boring as snot most games. Broduer may well end up besting a lot of Roy's numbers by the end of his career -- he is truly amazing. As for the Ducks, I will like them a lot better when dickhead Eisner isn't their "owner", but common -- how can you NOT cheer for them after how far they've come?
I mean, you could've gone to any Vegas bookie at the start of the season (or even the start of the playoff), and they would've given you 1000:1 odds that they would've swept the Red Wings and wound up in the Finals. This is about as Cinderella as it gets, Disney or no Disney ya know?
Some of those goals were shameful, but thems the breaks. Devils had a couple go against them the game before so it evened out. I am liking the series now. Definitely more interesting when the two teams open up and skate a bit more.
don cherry suggested getting rid of the centre red line as one means of eliminating the trap (to add offence). commissioner bettman seemed to downplay the value of such a move.
there seemed to be a lot less trapping in game 5. wide-open hockey is more fun.
The funny/lucky bounces come to you when you are agressive and put you and the puck on net. That's why these teams won their respective games, and why they got the "lucky" bounces in those wins. It's not as random as it would appear IMO.
Anyway, the north-soth game is fun for fans, but what hockey player likes their chances in a craps shoot like that? The stupidest thing I've heard is outlawing the trap, but the trap is such a basic setup, it would either get called way too often to give the game any flow or it would just not be respected. I wouldn't mind getting rid of the redline. College, junior and international hockey don't use it for offsides anyway. It wouldn't eliminate the trap, just make it less effective unless the next Lemaire invents the new great defensive strategy.
I could see raising the crossbar a few inches. It would make the butterfly goalies' jobs just a little less... predictable.
I would like to see icing called less, make the icing rules more strict. I say that icing should only be called when the puck is sent down 2/3 of the ice instead of 1/2 -- that a player has to send the puck from his defensive zone past the opposite goal line. Also, give the linemen more freedom to call off any icing if the player doesn't fetch the puck in a certain time. It punishes laziness (that's why I don't want automatic icing -- players give up on the play too easily) and rewards agressive chasers/forecheckers.
Lamorillo is suggesting that a player penalized should sit the entire penalty in the sin bin, regardless of whether the opponent scores. That's pretty radical.
One thing you won't see any time soon is making the rink wider. You lose the seats, and no GM would agree to lose seats!
But I don't think it solves everything, nor will any particular rule change do the job. The history of the NHL, like any other sports league has an ebb and flow between strong scoring champs and strong defensive ones.
Comments
must. resist. syrupy. disney. ending.
Go Ducks!
...I'm..uh... owned by Disney World?!
As for who to cheer... COMMON...at this point everyone who doesn't live in NY or NJ MUST root for the Ducks. Jersery has been to the Finals 3 of the last 4 years. You have to root for "Cinderella" (pun definitely intended).
Last night I was thinking as I watched the Senators slouch onto the ice and their bench after defeat... Swedes make lousy team leaders. Think about it. Alfredsson, Sundin, Naslund....
It's just a theory I have but it seems to me most elite Swedish hockey players do not carry their teams well during emotional or hard-fighting times. It must have something to do with their culture because you can see it in other sports as well. Stefan Edberg, Swedish golfers not named Jesper, etc. They're all very good technicians at their sports. Very sound fundamentals, highly skilled, but almost totally devoid of emotional strength it seems like.
Almost like they're TOO even-keeled. That when they need to get pissed off a little and fire up their mates, they just keep on plugging along. Never scowling, never smiling -- just there. Even Peter Foresberg is a little bit like this, though less so than the other three guys I named (and there are others). As I watched Alfredsson during this series, it just kept occuring to me that the guy has no heart -- or maybe no emotion is a better way to put it. Hence my comment above.
Rarely finished his checks, rarely seemed to notice whether his team was winning or losing. He's not alone, but those are not the marks of a guy who can lead his team to a Cup. I think that's why for example, guys like Brendan Shannahan or Yzerman lead the Wings and not say Niklas Lidstrom (who would have the C on almost any other team in the league). Lidstrom is an amazing defensman, but I bet he would not make a good team leader.
The Swedes just don't have it in them is doesn't seem like. Not to say you don't want them on your team. There are many superb Swedish players, but they are not superb leaders is what it seems like to me.
Seriously...
Well, the unstoppable Giguere let a few by. see what happens when you keep screening him and get behind the defensemen? Next game is sure to be different, the Ducks did show rust. They were completely out-competed in the game, caught standing still a lot of the time, especially in the second period. Next game they'll be better, and if the series wears on, they might have more juice in the tank.
But I bet Friesen is feeling pretty damn good these days. Nothing like a small taste of vindication to make you feel that way, and he's got a scoring touch right now. I noticed the Devils played Tverdovsky too, the "meat" of last summer's trade. Didn't notice him much during the game (missed most of the third), but that's probably a good thing. Maybe playing against his old team will add some agression to his performance.
Must have been awful to watch if you're rooting for the Ducks though. The devils are just a little bit better at that game plan, and terribly frustrating to watch if you're not behind them.
MAR - TY'S BET - TER!
MAR - TY'S BET - TER!
Yet another Ducks game heading [Dan Patrick]tooo: OHHH-ver-time[/Dan Patrick].
Thank GOD, I have to get up early tomorrow. heh
Moogs, do you still think low-scoring games are boring?
I have a lot of respect for the Devils, I just think they're boring as snot most games. Broduer may well end up besting a lot of Roy's numbers by the end of his career -- he is truly amazing. As for the Ducks, I will like them a lot better when dickhead Eisner isn't their "owner", but common -- how can you NOT cheer for them after how far they've come?
I mean, you could've gone to any Vegas bookie at the start of the season (or even the start of the playoff), and they would've given you 1000:1 odds that they would've swept the Red Wings and wound up in the Finals. This is about as Cinderella as it gets, Disney or no Disney ya know?
there seemed to be a lot less trapping in game 5. wide-open hockey is more fun.
Anyway, the north-soth game is fun for fans, but what hockey player likes their chances in a craps shoot like that? The stupidest thing I've heard is outlawing the trap, but the trap is such a basic setup, it would either get called way too often to give the game any flow or it would just not be respected. I wouldn't mind getting rid of the redline. College, junior and international hockey don't use it for offsides anyway. It wouldn't eliminate the trap, just make it less effective unless the next Lemaire invents the new great defensive strategy.
I could see raising the crossbar a few inches. It would make the butterfly goalies' jobs just a little less... predictable.
I would like to see icing called less, make the icing rules more strict. I say that icing should only be called when the puck is sent down 2/3 of the ice instead of 1/2 -- that a player has to send the puck from his defensive zone past the opposite goal line. Also, give the linemen more freedom to call off any icing if the player doesn't fetch the puck in a certain time. It punishes laziness (that's why I don't want automatic icing -- players give up on the play too easily) and rewards agressive chasers/forecheckers.
Lamorillo is suggesting that a player penalized should sit the entire penalty in the sin bin, regardless of whether the opponent scores. That's pretty radical.
One thing you won't see any time soon is making the rink wider. You lose the seats, and no GM would agree to lose seats!
But I don't think it solves everything, nor will any particular rule change do the job. The history of the NHL, like any other sports league has an ebb and flow between strong scoring champs and strong defensive ones.