I could see them relaxing & congratulating themselves after their second goal and knew they were in trouble & actually stopped watching after the BJ's second goal I figured it was going to be bad-not that bad though.
How about them Canucks!
- Thread starter #juan
- Start date
yes, that did happen, then they couldn't recover, they were stuck in neutral for the rest of the night,
and columbus got very excited and played great. columbus is a very good team, who have had a very
bad season, good goaltending has arrived, at least for now.
Last edited:
Good to see the Canucks have addressed the lack of shots on goal-if anything it keeps the fans interested (!)
yeah, but it was much easier against arizona than l.a., but the trick with l.a. is to get ahead of them,
then they won't shut it down, as they need goals, when they shut it down, its like the wall of china
right around, and keeps teams on the outside.
yeah, i was hollering at them to find the goal And stop the passing, times a wasting.
of course we know that they have strategies on the power play that having passing
as part of it, but we also can see when they have failed to have any success with
the strategy, so shoot the bloody thing, find the net, crash the net, anything,
just get creative.
At times I feel the same, I think there has to be a balance somewhere between the real chance of scoring and surrendering the puck to the opponent. I suppose they think it's good to keep control of the puck until the perfect opportunity. It's probably better than the alternative of getting "too trigger happy"
I don't think they are technically in yet but chances are pretty good after the win last night.
Yeah, for all intents and purposes they are "in". Wouldn't hurt my feelings too much if L.A. got knocked out. When the Canucks are playing smart and not acting stupid, they are probably one of the top five teams in the league. They can usually be able to win when they have to.
in your eyes, what are players doing when they are acting stupid, just curious.
last nights game certainly wasn't winning when they have to, it was a battle royal between two
great goalies, then one team getting one more goal than the other after overtime and a shoot out.
l.a. could have easily won that game with a slight difference in shoot out players.
my opinion of the league this year, is that many teams are quite capable of very good play, or not.
the stanley cup champions this year could be a choice of many teams, and yes the canucks could be
one of them, they aren't really talented enough, but that doesn't mean they won't do it, just means
'everything' will go their way, they will meet certain teams that they can manage somehow to beat,
and others will have some bad luck, injuries or whatever.
they have lost to many teams this year they should have beaten, and didn't, then rose to the occasion
and won games against teams we thought they shouldn't.
if they had of won all the games against 'so-called' weak teams, (but really aren't), they would have
clinched playoffs long time ago.
willie desjardin has picked this team up by the scruf of the neck many times after poor games, shook
them up and sent them back out next game to win.
there are a handful of teams that i think are the top teams, but the key to winning begins with
goaltending, and that is what both teams last night had going for them, and it just happened, that
pass from henrik to daniel and the shot from daniel found the back of the net, or canucks would
have another loss, it is such A fine line between winning and losing.
canucks play arizona tomorrow, they lost to them last time when they had to beat them. they hsve made
things harder for themselves by losing key games.
tonights program of games is very interesting for us scoreboArd watchers, and when calgary and l.a. play,
it will be also very interesting in a few days, as calgary and l.a. are in a battle for 8th spot right
now, along with winnipeg.
i'm droaning on, have a nice day.
I think you just answered that question yourself.-
"canucks play arizona tomorrow, they lost to them last time when they had to beat them. they hsve made
things harder for themselves by losing key games."
I think you just answered that question yourself.-
"canucks play arizona tomorrow, they lost to them last time when they had to beat them. they hsve made
things harder for themselves by losing key games."
so that means they are stupid? they still played to win, and the other team outplayed them, or had
a hot goalie, whatever,so they
lost, that is sports, not stupidity.
if one checks out the wins for all the teams who did not make the playoffs, or are down near the
bottom of the stat sheet, there are a number of teams who lost to those teams, one example is
columbus, a very good team, who did not make the playoffs, their injury list has been very
long this season, very good players who have missed a number of games, so they suffered on the
win loss stats, now that they have had those players back for a while, they are strong again,
but too late to climb the ladder, unfortunate, but people who don't pay any attention to other
teams think their own team should never lose to that team, and don't know the details, also
unfortunate.
Is there a person on the planet who hasn't done something stupid at some point?
The league has never had the parity it has now. In the old days if the Habs were playing the California Golden Seals it was guaranteed to be an absolute whitewash. Those days are over. Anyone can beat anyone anytime. The differences between the best and the worst are modest.
of course there is, but not an athlete trying to have a victory, either for him/herself or with another
apponant, they are never stupid just because they don't win all the time.
i hAve heard you call them stupid because they couldn't find a way to beat Another team, not so.
in fact, the word stupid should be very carefully thought out before it is ever used, it is belittling
and very cruel.
you are so so right, very modest indeed, i wish many others would see that fact, many people just check
quickly over the stat numbers, then assume there is a huge gap between top and bottom, WRONG
I never meant it in that sense, just little things like the defensemen getting caught too far up ice, so the opponent slips past them and the poor goalie has to do it all himself or taking a penalty for obstructing an opponent who is a 100' away from the puck- no cruelty meant at all, just constructive criticism.
yeah, constructive criticism is good, but the word stupid doesn't ever fit into that thought, the
things you mentioned are 'mistakes', and 'wrong decisions', by plAyers, doesn't make them stupid,
gmes are won and lost sometimes on a mistake by a goalie or any other player, none of them are stupid,
or they would not have made the team to begin with.