Well, he was the top scorer on the Canucks last year.
More than Hank???????? That IS a surprise!
Well, he was the top scorer on the Canucks last year.
Canucks and Penguins tied at 3 all going into overtime.........
Holy smokes, I was planning on watching this game at 4 P.M. -![]()
I posted the time last night so everyone would know the time, shame shame lol
Oilers beat Senators 3 to 1. Good
I heard the penalty shot on the radio-I was in a knife shop @ a local mall and had to put down the unit I was admiring in case there was a goal and I inadvertently cut m'self.
Lack just stunk the joint out-completely flubbed a simple stop-he must be watching Luongo too closely.
lack didn' stink anything out, he was fine, just give the blue ribbins to the person who deserves them,
and that is curtis mcIlhaney.
Canucks generated so many shots in the first half of that game, without scoring, maybe we need to look
at that aspect, again McIlhaney.
and playing luongo would not have guaranteed anything, as canucks still would have had to put the puck
past mcIlhaney, luongo can't score goals and neither can lack.
just one of those games where the team was stoned by the opposition goalie, that is reality.
columbus 3 vancouver 1,
Actually, Luongo should have been in goal, you don't want to leave what should be sure points to chance, save the iffy ones for Lack. Like Talloola says, all the teams are fairly even in talent. Play Lack against S.J. then if he loses it, it's no big deal and if he wins it, it really bolsters his confidence.
Had Vancouver's score been 0, I'd agree with you 100% but all they had to do was shut the other team out which I think with Lu would have been possible.
there is 'no' sure thing, and that analogy concerning playing san jose is totally wrong, you play your
best against the best, and you don't play any game figuring you'll probably lose so play the backup,
that is ludicrous.
didn't you watch how the other goalie played? lack only let in 2 goals, and you think if luongo had
of played it could be 0.
the team needs to score more than one goal, and even that goal was suspect, if it had of been against
canucks, we would have been screaming 'no' goal, and it easily could have been.
goals are scored in games, to expect to see many games with no goals scored, you should switch to
soccer.
just give the nod to the other team, their goalie stoned the canucks,kukos to him, it happens.
Nope, I didn't watch the game, I was all set to and then found out we don't get that channel.
Santorelli is laying @ Top Form the Sedins did well as did Kesler-I heard Booth's name once when he cleverly set someone up for a penalty.
unbelievable, after your comments. there is only one critcizm after this game, our forwards who are
expected to score, aren't, and that is apparent right from the first game. we got goals from
santorelli, good for him, he wasn't one of the players I was referring to.
mcIlhaney could have at least let in two shots, but he was like a brick wall, and the shot that
higgins missed near the end, should have gone in, higgins didn't hit it clean, it was bobbling,
so another criticizm toward the shooter, if that shot had been quick and clean, mcIlhaney would
not have had a chance, no goalie would have.
coaches and players never ever play with a strategy that they will probably lose, that is a weak
approach to any game, doesn't matter if you are a weak team, and I still see the canucks team
as a middle of the road team, nothing elite at all, and that is ok,
the post game radio show commmented how well lack played, and canucks are doing well to have him
as a backup, so that backs up my comments about him, and the comment that he stunk out the place
is so far from the facts it is comical.