i'm sorry to put it so bluntly but there's no way around statement above. we're talking about a guy who's been suspended twice for making throat-slitting gestures (once by his team, once by the league).... TWICE !!!! i hear he's a funny dude and a great guy to have around but he is clearly never gonna be a rocketscientist...
because roy has a history with the league, when he got into altercation in wednesday's pregame skate (to prove calgary's got a "big body presence" before puckdrop) then he's got to expect the heavy and confusing hand of the NHL law to step in. colin campbell isn't gonna overlook this one, andré... you're a repeat offender, pal...
which causes me to re-evaluate the lineup i posted yesterday... will keenan replace roy on the fourth line with a capable checking forward (dvdg) ? or will he insert a seventh defenseman (eriksson) and rotate him through the back six ? i would have to think keenan will go for the extra blueliner, at this point, if both conroy and langkow are out (and it sounds as if the latter is gone for the year). this way, guys like iggy, nystrom and glenX will get double-shifted through the bottom line, much like they did in roy's stead anyways in game 4.
nystrom - olli - iggy
bourque - squid - bert
glenX - boyd - moss
(eriksson) - lundmark - peters
vandermeer - sarich
phaneuf - leopold
aucoin - pardy
i think this is how it will go, and to be totally honest, i'm warming up to the idea. obviously i think eriksson stinks but if he plays roy-like minutes (4-6), then he can help keep leopold and phaneuf's minutes down. i think overplaying his blueliners is one of keenan's biggest faults, but another is overestimating the abilities of eriksson... so it's a bit of a catch-22 if #8 dresses....
on CBC's "after 40" last night, mclean, hrudey, milbury, and pj stock (who i am seriously starting to love with his crooked tie and 10pm shadow) were discussing joe thornton. i don't know if anyone's really been watching big joe lately but he's lookin' lazy and slow out there; he floats uselessly just like bertuzzi both offensively and defensively... in the same piece, pj pulled up some bertuzzi footage and made the comment that "he turns like an 18-wheeler," which cemented my adulation... anyhow. i feel pretty bad for sharks fans. if my team's highest paid guy played like bootuzzi every night, i'd be pretty bummed....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
I hate the CBC panel. I think they all predicted that Chicago would slaughter Calgary (and I'm pretty sure the reasoning was "younger and faster"). Now that the series is 2-2, they're saying that they're too young and playoff pressure is getting to them.
I'm tempted to say that the truth is in the middle, but the two extremes above are so ridiculous (except for perhaps the "faster" part of "younger and faster" - but to me that's a crutch similar to "big body presence") that it wouldn't even apply.
Word verification: impali. As in, I hope the Flames impali the Hawks tomorrow night.
Heh, PJ may be good-looking or whatnot but who goes by "PJ" as an adult? :P
Heh, I'm hemmorhaging posts but this one's actually on topic.
Assuming the roster you've shown is the one that ends up being played, I think we'll know by the end of the first period whether or not we're in trouble. Just by monitoring the TOI of Pardy vs. Eriksson. (caveat: unless we spend half the period on the PP).
re: RO comment #1:
i'm pretty sure the only ones predicting calgary were mcguire and maggie the monkey, so to base your love/hate of a panel on this criterion seems offbase. ron mclean is the best in the biz, and i think hrudey has come a long way.
i still think this series is a cointoss, but i don't (personally) chalk it up to either Y&F or BBP. i think it will be won/lost on coaching, goaltending, and which shutdown guys are more/less successful. period.
re: RO comment #2:
you are a few years behind on this but pj's not my type. i lean towards the swedes, preferrably ones with wolf eyes (read: forsberg). i enjoy pj cause he's goofy and lightens things up (comic relief styles).... which is precisely why his name is so perfect....
[i looked it up, though. it's phillip joseph. is that bigboy enough for you ??]
;)
re: RO comment #3:
i still think conroy might play, which would bump boyd down the chart and we could still see four actual forward lines. i would still not be shocked to see lundmark in the pressbox in lieu of eriksson, though, if that were to happen. but yeah. monitoring the TOI of those two will show us a lot after one.
Pretty sad to think that they would pull in Eriksson again. I would think it preferable to drop in DVDG on the plugger line. You've been telling me all year about how solid he is defensively, he's played a bunch with Peters and Lundy anyway, plus if this game goes like the last, the fourth line probably will only be used as relief and the top 3 will roll most of the time. He's less likely to make a mistake in my opinion.
I'm still trying to figure out a way to ship you a pocket dawg during the game on Saturday. I'll spring for the sausage if you and your dad promise to cook them up during intermission.
By the way... thanks again for finding my phone, you're a lifesaver (yes, I am comparing you to a small, toroidal, crunchy candy).
toroidal is a big word for a guy with a two day hangover....
it's so obvious i'd prefer dvdg to eriksson, but i like to think i know my coach by now, and he usually does the exact thing i wouldn't do.
Maybe Langkow isn't so bad, after all.
The second day is more shame than actually being over hung...
Sad that you are so confident that Iron Mike is going to work against the best interests of the team. Here's to hoping the Eriksson will play minimal minutes and not f*ck up royally (yes, I'm shooting jager at my desk to cement the toast).
By the way, I really like PJ Stock, but I have to agree, "PJ" is kind of a douche name for a grown man. Not that I can see him as a "Phil" or "Joe" necessarily either. Maybe in Atom it would have been okay, but can you picture playing juniors with a guy and yelling, "Hey PJ, pass me the puck!" That guy would get strung up in the showers.
RC:
the word on langkow is, obviously, good news. the rest seems like gamesmanship. we ALL know the line combinations will be different tomorrow...
the ones on the ice today make no sense to me otherwise.... greentree making an appearance in the actual lineup would shock me in that he didn't even make the initial "black aces" list, and his short tenure with the big club had "failure" written all over it. i see dvdg/eriksson ahead of him in the depth chart, unless keenan's lost his mind...
which is, of course, possible...
;)
which is, of course, probable...
Just wanted to fix that spelling error.
yes, yes. i should proofread my stuff...
;)
Now that I'm done being a smart-ass, I'm in accord with you because if Keenan dresses another of the QC forwards as opposed to Eriksson and that forward looks over-matched, he rides the pine. Not good, but the damage can be mitigated. Keenan doesn't have that same self control with Eriksson. RO hints at the right thing, sadly, vis-a-vis Pardy vs. Eriksson. If Langkow and 1 of the 2 others can go, Lundmark can draw back in and the disruption is minimized. Here's hoping.
is it still technically correct to call them "QC forwards" ? or should we simply refer to them as "farmkids" or "baby flames" since we have no clue where they'll end up playing next year ?
just sayin'.
"farmkids" "baby flames"Those are better than "A-Flames in waiting, or they would be if we could ever figure out what the hell we were doing with our farm team".
Or shorter, at any rate.
speaking of "that team," i'm kindof excited cause they'll have a new and presumeably better logo (how could it be worse ??!?) PLUS a whole mess of guys coming up from junior who could be seriously exciting...
i'm pretty stoked at the strides made by bouma, aulie, and backlund this year.
I'll format this right if it kills me.
whole mess of guys coming up from junior.
Backlund, Bouma, Wahl, Nemisz, Aulie, Negrin, and T.J. Brodie.
Did I get them all?
This group looks like they might have some skill, which the Flames could use, because other than Boyd and Phaneuf, the other recent draftees have been lacking. If the cap-ocolypse of 2010-2011 occurs, they could provide a needed injection of young and cheap.
"I'm hesitating because there's so many (injuries)," said Keenan after a 10-second pause. "Our response is that they're day-to-day. Some are more days than others.
"(But) Daymond will play."Keenan as per TSN. Better than a kick in the arse with a frozen mukluk, I'd say.
blogger has some new formatting issues. i'm not sure where they came from but i noticed you figured out my trick: putting the punctuation IMMEDIATELY after the html code. seems to work that way...
Backlund, Bouma, Wahl, Nemisz, Aulie, Negrin, and T.J. Brodie.
i would imagine bouma, wahl, brodie and nemisz will take another go in juniors due to age (18/just 19), but the first three (at least) are looking exciting at this point... i'm not sure if nemisz is actually a good player, or if his numbers were inflated from being on a ridiculously good team....
graduates of the chl into the A next year SHOULD include aulie, backlund, grantham and negrin. all very different and potentially exciting prospects...
but, yeah. the "capocalypse" (genius term, btw) is coming and we will need to promote from the A to the N next year. i see pelech and/or palin making the jump, peters/dvdg potentially staying on, and backlund getting another good look in camp. behind them, i think if john armstrong (my favorite) has a good camp, i could see him getting a good look as well....
Post a Comment