San Jose's window of opportunity has been open longer (and will close sooner) than Chicago's, but man they have some nice things doing in this final group. If they can get by Chicago (it'll be a huge task) then even San Jose fans will have to agree that the Sharks have exorcised some demons this spring.
Montreal plays the role of Cinderella this spring, with a goalie who has been dominant and a group of highly skilled free agents scoring when needed. Montreal's appearances in the final four should be regarded as extremely serious; the Habs are the darlings of the hockey Gods and have ridden long shots to victory many times.
Philadelphia. My brother-in-law is in Mexico right now, down there making a living for his family. If I could figure out skype he'd be getting updates on his team's unlikely run and I'd be able to tease him about the last time talked about the Flyers. He told me that his wish had been for the team to miss the playoffs so there'd be no excuses for management. Maybe next year.
I am torn in regard to which team should be my favorite to win it all. If I pick the Sharks--who are the modern incarnation of the Oakland Seals--then they will lose in four. If I pick the Flyers--who are the best team still standing in the east--surely the hockey Gods will not pass up another opportunity to kick me in the junk.
So it is under these circumstances that I choose to choose a Chicago-Montreal final. Hello 1971, good to see you 1973 and for the older group well look who's here it is 1961. Bless you boys. Make staying indoors all damn spring worthwhile, because it's a beautiful day.
- Montreal (11): '68, '69, '71, '73, '76-'79, '86, '89, '93
- Boston (7): '70, '72, '74, '77, '78, '88, '90
- Edmonton (7): '83, '84, '85, '87, '88, '90, '06
- Philadephia (7): '74, '75, '76, '80, '85, '87, '97
- Detroit (6): '95, '97, '98, '02, '08, '09
- New York Islanders (5): '80, '81, '82, '83, '84
- Pittsburgh Penguins (4): '91, '92, '08, '09
- Dallas (4): '81, '91, '99, '00
- New Jersey (4): '95, '00, '01, '03
- Calgary (3): '86, '89, '04
- Chicago (3): '71, '73, '92
- New York Rangers (3): '72, '79, '94
- St. Louis (3): '68, '69, '70
- Anaheim (2): '03, '07
- Buffalo (2): '75, '99
- Carolina (2): '02, '06
- Colorado (2): '96, '01
- Vancouver (2): '82, '94
- Florida (1): '96
- Los Angeles (1): '93
- Ottawa (1): '07
- Tampa Bay (1): '04
- Washington (1): '98
- Atlanta
- Columbus
- Minnesota
- Nashville
- Phoenix
- San Jose
- Toronto
I said preseason, Hawks/Flyers final.
ReplyDeleteI stuck with the Hawks all the way, but I left the Flyers for dead, then picked them to upset the Devils. Didn't believe they'd get past Boston with all the injuries, but here they are.
Like San Jose, wouldn't mind seeing them win it one bit, but I like the Hawks team depth a little bit better at forward and defense.
I have NO interest in seeing the Habs win the Stanley Cup again this year or anytime soon. Frankly, they're lucky to be here and I want this Cinderella run to turn back into a pumpkin ASAP. Philly's going to give them trouble I think.
With all that:
Hawks in six.
Flyers in seven.
And regardless of who plays in the Cup final, the west representative wins it in five games (yes, I'm calling that shot right now).
I just can't handle Pronger going to the finals again. Go Habs.
ReplyDeleteand I don't even hate Pronger for his 'request'. Rather just his attitude.
Oddly enough, my Pronger hate has passed. I'm more about anger at the guys running this organization for all the stuff they've messed up, and hey, the guy might be a giant douche, but he's also a future Hall of Fame defenseman who, even in his mid-30's, is still exceptionally good at what he does.
ReplyDeleteChris Mason hasn't looked good at all. 2nd goal that was completely stoppable.
ReplyDeleteRajala scored a nice goal and is running around like a madman. MBS strikes again.
ReplyDeleteThat was a nice goal, LT, although the keeper did duck his head out of the way.
ReplyDeleteOmark looks the best of the triumverate playing the WC game so far, IMO. Still, is he any improvement over Nilsson? He's been finding the open ice in the Ozone in this game, made some nice passes.
Eberle's line has had a couple of defensive miscues, struggled with face-offs.
I think MPS has been the class of the group. Hard to believe he's still a teenager.
ReplyDeleteMPS had a great shift against Eberle's line. I'm impressed with his effort along the walls, which is absolutely essential to playing wing in the NHL. He really looks like a solid prospect, skates very well, and his shot, while not sniper-like, is better than initial reports had it. His potential top end looks better than Eberle's and certainly Omark's.
ReplyDeleteAnyone know where to find IIHF boxcars?
ReplyDeleteloudog:
ReplyDeleteIt's all here
http://www.iihf.com/sk/channels10/iihf-world-championship-wc10/statistics.html
Just click on "game summary" at the bottom or "scores" for games in progress.
Rajala with another goal.
ReplyDeleteNiemi with an absolute stunner of a save. Wow.
ReplyDeleteRajala is just cruising.
ReplyDeleteOmark pulled a bad goal suck with five to go in a 3-1 game. Not too happy to see that sort of decision-making.
Man, you've got to feel bad for Moncton. They were cruising this time yesterday and now their Memorial Cup chances are down 3-0 in the second period against the home team.
ReplyDeleteThat is a tough break, they look like a very strong team.
I can't imagine how scary Moncton would be if Kabanov had lived up to his potential this season.
ReplyDeleteOmark cherry picking on the blue line in the dying minutes was a bit galling.
Right now the Sharks Hawks game is insane. The Hawks forward depth is ridiculous, they were swarming Nabokov for a bit there.
Thanks for the link LT!
ReplyDeleteMethinks Chicago wins the series cause of goaltending.
That was a softie on Nabakov, but he's always kind of been meh, no?
I don't think I could handle a Pronger vs Heatley final. Go Montreal/Chicago... never thought I'd ever say that...
ReplyDeleteMake staying indoors all damn spring worthwhile, because it's a beautiful day.
ReplyDeleteYou said it, LT. YEG is in the middle of a bee-yoo-tiful springtime and I am helplessly tethered to the idiot box. My trick? Make yourself too hungover to leave the house.
Ugh.
Finally caught up and saw Rajala's goals. He looks like a one-shot scorer. He still has one more year of junior eligibility right?
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I didn't really like about MPS, from what I saw (I wasn't watching very carefully throughout the game) was his play on the SWE 5 on 3. Didn't seem like he was reading the play very well.
ReplyDeletespeeds - I thought MPS looked slow making decisions today and it allowed the defenders to close on him.
ReplyDeleteSan Jose's top line is getting badly outplayed this shift. Man that can't happen at home.
ReplyDeleteRajala is almost certainly headed home next season to possibly serve his military requirement. He's still junior eligible but wants to head back home for a bit, I think a major reason for him coming over for this one season was the chance to play in the Memorial Cup.
ReplyDeleteThe Hawks are just a damn fine team. It's a shame they're going to get torn up a bit in the off season. I can't see Philly or Montreal getting past them. Yikes.
MPS had a wide open 2-on-1 with a great angle on the net and looked for the dish. A bit disappointing especially because the CAN defender read him going pass the whole way and easily broke it up with his stick. Hopefully he becomes a bit more aggressive/decisive with age...
ReplyDeleteBack in the NHL, I bet the Hockey God are positively salivating to implement the Hossa Curse in a CHI-MTL Final.
San Jose. Thornton had that goal on his stick. Man.
ReplyDeleteRajala with his second goal of the day.
ReplyDeleteBeen a good weekend for the prospects.
So it is under these circumstances that I choose to choose a Chicago-Montreal final. Hello 1971, good to see you 1973 and for the older group well look who's here it is 1961.
ReplyDeleteLT: That '61 series was actually the semis. The Hawks beat Detroit in the SCF.
The Hawks and Habs did play in the '65 SCF, won (like the two in the '70s) by Montreal.
Bruce: Yeah, that 1961 series was legendary apparently. Dick Irvin Jr called it the best series he's ever seen, and he saw a ton of them.
ReplyDeleteThat was a bit of a crowded crease.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if anyone in Philly thought they'd have home ice advantage in the Conference Finals this year.
ReplyDeleteI still find this Montreal Philly series surreal.
Leighton better buy that horseshoe dinner later.
ReplyDeleteThat was a helluva play by Gionta, to hold up, get the pass off, and avoid getting pasted.
ReplyDeleteI thought he was going to get destroyed for sure, but instead he springs Gomez in for a near goal.
After watching the game this afternoon this is like watching another sport entirely.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don't mean that in a good way.
BDHS: lol.
ReplyDeleteDown four nothing and Halak is pulled. The Habs are underdogs once again and have Philly right where they want them.
ReplyDeleteuni - if Wirtz Jr. (is it Rocky?) really wanted to make the problem go away he'd bury Campbell and Huet in the minors. Huet only has one year left, Campbell's deal is just ridiculous, he's the fourth best Dman on the club.
But I think that would solve it. Of course its not my money.
I'd dig up BILL Wirtz and bury him in the minors in order to keep the team together.
ReplyDeleteLT - lol right back at you
ReplyDeleteSeriously though I count the Hawks being at 57.5 so they're already over and that's with the following players needing signing - Niemi, Hjalmarsson, Ladd, Eager, Madden, Burish, Hendry
These are the guys playing right now. They'll let Madden go and will likely have to give the first two big raises, especially if they win it all. The rest will be cheap I would guess. Not sure about Ladd.
Huet, Campbell and Sopel add up to fifteen million per.
They need to eat it. The money they make on playoff runs would pay for it or enough of it to make it worth it.
I still think Tallon knew he was on the way out and purposefully didn't send out the qualifying offers on time.
ReplyDelete"Have fun with that Bowmans!"
That would solve the cap issues for a while BDHS, but somehow I don't see Rocky swallowing 12.725 million in the minors.
ReplyDeleteI mean it took Bill Wirtz kicking the can to appease the hockey gods to lift the fog in Chi-Town, and after all Rocky is still a Wirtz, i.e. he has some business acumen.
Campbell is still signed to 6 seasons at 7.1 each, yikes. He does put up points like a machine though, 50+ points in a full schedule. But Seabrook & Keith are far and away better, and one could argue that poor Barker was just as good offensively and 3.85 million cheaper a year.
I don't see how any GM can let a guy like Sharp or Bolland for that matter walk.
BD: I don't quite have the extensive CBA knowledge some do but I recall there being a clause that you can only have a one-way contract in the minors for one year and have cap relief?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure someone will come around to clarify.
In any case Huet is around for two more years unfortunately. And Campbell lasts forever.
They could send Byfuglien down, which I suspect would mean some acrimony between him and the org. They can give the finger to Sopel though, I doubt it would matter.
They just need to trade one of the big two contracts and I suspect it will come at a very steep price. Chicago would be best off just trying to throw Huet/Campbell and all sorts of draft picks and minor league guys at a team like NYI. Though they are not in a position of strength at all, one suspects they will have to give up Sharp or Seabrook to make it happen. A CHI fan would hope for the latter, I imagine.
I don't feel bad for CHI management at all though, seems like a shitshow from an outsider's perspective.
I never say a contract is untradeable until reading Glen Sather passed on it. Bet he'd give something for Campbell.
ReplyDeleteLT, I'm sure he'd give Redden for Campbell in a heartbeat...in fact I'm sure he'd drive Redden all the way to Pittsburgh himself.
ReplyDeleteAlso after Sather traded Gomez and Kotalik in the same season, without having to give up any valued assets, I think he can give as well as he gets.
By Pittsburgh I meant their neighbors Philadelphia.
ReplyDeleteAlso after Sather traded Gomez and Kotalik in the same season, without having to give up any valued assets, I think he can give as well as he gets.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure Gomez was the valuable asset.
Signed at 7 million a season for 5 more, I don't think there was much of a bidding war for Gomez. I'm surprised a team would take him on without getting something else to sweeten the pot.
ReplyDeleteThat Sather managed to get a fairly useful player in Chris Higgins AND the Canadien's best D prospect at the time in Ryan McDonagh makes that a damn fine trade for him.
"I never say a contract is untradeable until reading Glen Sather passed on it. Bet he'd give something for Campbell."
ReplyDeleteI'd at least make the call on Campbell for Souray, but with a deal like that I'm sure Campbell has an NMC and has little desire to come to Edmonton. But I'm sure Chicago will do everything it can to move Campbell along.
Leighton better buy that horseshoe dinner later.
ReplyDeleteI think he bought it earlier. The hard part comes later when he has to shit those horseshoes.
What a shitty game. BDHS is right that there is no comparison to the SJ-CHI thriller. I think this one was even worse than Canada-Sweden.
In the last 12 Habs games, the outshooting team has won exactly one of them.
ReplyDeleteSigned at 7 million a season for 5 more, I don't think there was much of a bidding war for Gomez. I'm surprised a team would take him on without getting something else to sweeten the pot.
ReplyDeleteThat Sather managed to get a fairly useful player in Chris Higgins AND the Canadien's best D prospect at the time in Ryan McDonagh makes that a damn fine trade for him.
Gomez is a difference maker. The Habs got the best player in that deal.
Back from the season opener in Baseball (Nice game even tough we lost). Boy, i hope they don't fuck around and come back with Halak. 1 Win in Philly and tonight means nothing. A W by 1 is the same as a W by 6.
ReplyDeleteFPB: Have no fear. The Pittsburgh series is your template.
ReplyDeleteI have another reason why I want the Hawks to win. The longest Stanley Cup drought is the Hawks - since '61.
ReplyDeleteThe next longest drought is Leafs - '67 and the two remaining winless '67 expansion teams - LA and St. Louis.
So, I would love to have Burkie read that every day in the paper all summer ... :o))
Gomez is a difference maker. The Habs got the best player in that deal.
ReplyDeleteYeah, but it's not just the best player in the deal, it's the contract and cap space.
Campbell is a fine defenceman, he eats up minutes given the chance and pops in 50 or more points while playing every single game a season (Ovechkin hits notwithstanding). Now is he worth 7.1 million for 6 more seasons? So if the Rangers trade Eric Christensen & Matt Gilroy or Dan Girardi for Brian Campbell, do the Rangers win because they get the best player?
Cause in the cap world I think they don't necessarily come out on top. I'm not saying Gomez isn't without value, he's a outscorer that plays the toughs and puts up 60pts a season, but is he worth 7.1 million of cap space for 5 more years to a lot of teams?
Habs have them where they want them.
ReplyDeleteGood news for the Hawks is that they have such a plethora of forwards and I think their best prospects are also forwards so they could actually drop one and not miss a beat.
Maybe?
Sharp, Bolland, Versteeg, Byfuglien. One of those guys. Sharp is UFA first but he's also the best of the bunch so if its about winning (duh!) then I think you have to keep him.
And Bolland can play the toughs and he's a big part of the PK.
I would think Versteeg would be the odd man out. He's a better player than Byfuglien but the big guy has that something something going on, the fat bastard.
Eat Huet's contract. Move Sopel. Move Campbell. Though who would take Campbell is beyond me. It would have to be Campbell plus picks and prospects to make it happen I think.
If they can do it, well you look at the rest of the west. SJ has Marleau and Nabokov UFA, Pavelski RFA. Lidstrom is almost done. The Canucks are the Canucks.
Keep that window open as long as you can.
Hawks v habs is my pick also.
ReplyDeleteMy luck continues, and one of them fails to make it.
Every team I have cheered for this playoffs has lost (with the exception of the Hawks).
ReplyDeleteGo Montreal.
It's pretty hard to visualize a real dynasty in the cap era. Winning is too expensive.
ReplyDeleteBruce,
ReplyDeleteit would not be hard to convince individual players of their value in a winning whole. But are there ANY GMs out there who have the kind of forward thinking to plan what happens if players step up and meet or exceed expectations and how to pay them as part of a salary plan. It literally involves planning 3-4 years ahead and guessing.
It is possible but the lure of the now has to be too much. Especially on July 1.
1. Can someone give me a good scouting report of how our kids looked today in the Can/Swe game? Two of our friends recently had babies so me and the LLF were out visiting today and I got to the last house by the start of the Sharks game but I didn't see any WHC action.
ReplyDelete2. For someone that wants to pay me;) I'd like to announce that I have called the result of each of the Hawks last seven games and today I got them at +165 in regulation.
3. I like the Hawks over SJ because first off if Chi had enjoyed the same health as SJ - big injuries to all of Bolland and Hossa and Campbell - they would have had HIA. That being said that team was 6-1 on the road heading into today so they should've been the favs in any case. And if Jonsson was healthy there would be an even bigger divide.
3. Nice to be able to Send Cuntreal related text messages this evening instead of receiving them. There's been a little bit of talk about how Philly's ruffian tactics present a new challenge and the other side is if luck goes against the habs the least little bit it could get ugly.
One thing I wonder about is how on earth will Montreal be able to make this ugly? Lapierre has some agitating ability and Gill is a big man, but Ryan O'Byrne (6), Moen (5) and Laraque (4) are the only guys who can really fight.
ReplyDeleteThey had a TOTAL of 32 majors this season, compared to Philly's 80. Laperriere (26) is injured, but Carcillo (17), Asham (14) and Hartnell (7) are regulars and Richards (5) can help there too.
How do the Habs toughen up the roster?
LT: I don't think it's an issue. They're not going to try to equal the toughness since everyone's pretty much gonna loose that game vs the Flyers. Just make theyr tough guys take penalties and cash in on the PP.
ReplyDeleteIf there is justice. Montreal gets beat down by the Flyers and goes out in five.
ReplyDeleteFPV, one of the great tragedies of the internet is that about 15% of people have started spelling the word 'Lose' as 'Loose'.
ReplyDeleteI know you are working in a second language so I am writing this to let you know that it is win vs lose and tight vs loose.
FPB: Well that only works if the refs are calling things. Philadelphia took 5 minors, Habs 6. Anyone who saw the game knows that isn't how it went down. If the refs don't call the grabs and slashes and after the whistle crap more closely, the Flyers are going to do some damage to those smaller players.
ReplyDeleteDennis: MPS looked good to me, lots of speed, pretty regular work and had his share of chances. He didn't cash, but did have a nice chance when shooting on a two-on-one (passed another time and it didn't work out).
Eberle wasn't as noticeable (CAN didn't have the puck much to my eye, although I was watching the SJ-CHI game too) but it was one of those games where nothing rhymed.
Rajala had a nice day, freewheeling like a bandit. Moncton seemed to me to be (there's a sentence) a pretty good junior team but they didn't have an answer for Rajala and after that the other two lines got rolling. But it was our kid who did the early damage.
Okay. I seriously i never paid attention to that one much, but heh thanks for the info, everyone spelled it differently so i was confused.
ReplyDeleteMon amie indiquer moi où est la bibliothèque.
LT: We're not going into that debate again (It went down in MTL). You don't need to be tough if the refs do theyr damn job. Georges Laraques was probably the worst player i ever saw lace up the skates of the Canadiens. I'm confident the Refs will adjust for game 2.
ReplyDeleteFPB: Your written English is excellent, I don't think anyone misunderstands your meaning. I'm always impressed when someone can articulate so well in another language, it must be very difficult. I've never attempted it, which isn't exactly courageous. :-)
ReplyDeleteAnyway, "loose" versus "lose" isn't a French-English thing, I think it is as bookie suggested (an internet thing).
FPB: Habs may have gotten a break with Pronger injury (I haven't seen an update).
ReplyDeleteG2 will be interesting.
LT: Thank you. I also possess a good knowledge of Spanish. I think learning French is harder than learning English (Do we capitalize the languages?), so I think that's why there's very few English (First Language)-French bilinguals. But heh once you get the beat of it, everything has a logic (In the grammatical rules).
ReplyDeleteI think German would be easier for you guys since there's no genres for every nouns. (They use Neutral like English)
LT: They'l definitly suffer from the big man's loss. Theyr defense is shaky without him eating up 27:00 minutes.
ReplyDeleteBut heh, even if we lose this series, i'l be happy, we exploded odds and expectation, and defeated the SC champions without our best player (Andrei Markov). I hope he can come back late in the series to give a hand. I've seen so few players excell on both ends of the ice like Markov.
Re: Al Arbour...
ReplyDeleteGolly geez whillikers, you mean a man could wear eye glasses playing hockey back in the day? Had they never heard of Scott Stevens?
Philadelphia took 5 minors, Habs 6. Anyone who saw the game knows that isn't how it went down.
ReplyDeleteLT: Is that you? Saying the Habs got the stiff end of the stick (so to speak) from the refs?
It's true (today, certainly not always!), but it just doesn't fit your usual narrative. Are you softening up? Or do you Really hate Philly?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbHfBfCWCOg
ReplyDeletedo the captains wear gold helmets? what the destro is going on in finland?
Well, I can't see MTL get that much of the shaft from the refs tonight. To my eye this wasn't worse than what's been going on ever since the WSH series. Just take your eyes off the puck and watch Gill and Gorges work. Gorges, especially, is getting away with murder. The habs are anything but saints when it comes to crossing the lines.
ReplyDeleteI don't watch anything but the Habs these days, but it sure looks like the Oilers are getting a bunch of pretty good kids up front in the next few years; methinks you guys may resurface earlier than you think, especially if the west comes back to earth.
Pronger hurt, really?
I'll believe it when I see the dirty bastard out of the lineup come game time.
It's quite stunning how the hawks pounded the Sharks at EV; anybody recording chances for those games?
It's quite stunning how the hawks pounded the Sharks at EV; anybody recording chances for those games?
ReplyDeleteZona at the www.CopperNBlue.com is doing it, although he had mentioned earlier that the Sharks had brutally outchanced the Hawks through the first two periods. No breakdown of EV/PP though, so likely a ton of that was due to the multitude of man advantages San Jose had.
Plus Chicago rained terror down in the third period. It was unholy.
I think Derek tweeted final chances at something like 23-13 Sharks, although as R O says that 5-0 edge in powerplays would have a lot to do with that edge. But the Hawks were a little fortunate to still be in the game after 40 minutes.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt there will be a detailed post up on C&B in the next day or so, as Derek and Scott are recording scoring chances for both CFs. I'm particularly interested to see how Scott's take on the eastern series squares with Olivier's. I'm confident enough in the method to expect them to be fairly close, but it'll be an interesting test.
Bruce: It's never that close. There is a surprising amount of borderline calls and there is a very real grey zone. Usually, you'll get close enough chances counts, but the actual chances counted will diverge significantly.
ReplyDeleteTyler is reviewing my recordings over at MC79 for the Pitt series and you can see he disagrees from time to time.
Basically, a lot of the stat's validity rests on the recorder's ability not to stray away from his standards and score the game the same way day in day out.
That's my understanding of the whole shibboleth, anyways.
Olivier: J'espere que vous n'est pas confus par mes critiques de votre travail. Je pense que vous etes tres coherent en classifiee les tires commes chances ou pas chances. Il y a quelques fois ou je pense different mais, en tout, je pense que vous etes correcte comme 90% du temps. Je suspecte qu'il y a peut-etre une probleme avec les temps sur quelque chances mais c'est ne pas signicatif. Je suis parlee avec quel-q'un (?) qui a me dites qu'il pense qu'il y a beaucoup de travail a prendre les photos; je suspecte que c'est rien compare a compte les chances.
ReplyDeleteYeah, this is a lot harder than it looks. I suspect the french guys will be giggling at that.
Oh, just thought I'd mention that Omark didn't look half bad in the Can-Swe game. He does protect the puck in the offensive zone well, and the play doesn't seem to die with him (there was one instance where he was double teamed and coughed up the puck). He's a shifty little blighter, and had a few very nice passes, including drawing in a defender then making a sweet saucer right on the tape of his trailing team mate for a shot on goal. Didn't notice him anywhere outside the offensive zone though, and in the dying minutes of the game with Canada swarming the Swedish net he was cherry picking on the blue line waiting for a breakout pass, and nearly had a breakaway; still galling though.
ReplyDeleteAlso I'll mention that Oliver Ekman Larsson had a heck of a game by my limited eye. Solid positionally, closed gaps very quickly, played the body when the opportunity arose without putting himself out of position, and jumped into the rush a few times as warranted. Was noticeably good. Looked like a solid top 10 draft pick for sure.
I think German would be easier for you guys since there's no genres for every nouns. (They use Neutral like English)
ReplyDeleteActually, they've got three genders, with no more rhyme nor reason for what word is what gender than French has. And their articles (direct and indirect) change depending on whether the noun to which they apply is a subject or an object and, if the latter, whether it's a direct or indirect object and, if the latter, what preposition precedes it.
I've tried to learn both, and French is much easier than German.
I had forgotten that Al Arbour played with glasses. What other players wore glasses?
ReplyDeleteNot only was he playing with glasses, but he was doing so while checking Bobby Hull and the likes. That's a bad ass motherfucker rignt there, if you ask me.
ReplyDeleteMC: Your french isn't that bad, really. The point you are making is perfectly clear. It's all about practice; us frenchies have a leg up on that aspect, with all the thing aout being a couple of millions spot in the middle of a 300+ million pool of anglos... The thing is, at some point you get good enough that people don't mind your foreign-y style and stop making remarks. That's when you get more confident, communicate more and find some kind of a voice.
But you always keep a certain tone-deafness; see, those comments on scoring chances and people looking over my shoulder were meant to be tongue in cheek, self deprecating humor. I try it from time to time but fall flat on my face doing it more often then else.
Steve: They taught us Latin in the first 3 years of secondary school and that helped tremendously when I tried my hand at German; it's actually fairly easy in written form, but I was too lazy to practice it reading "Bilde" and watching "Deutche Welle" so all I remember now is "Er arbeite be Siemens" or something like that.
But it's always the same thing: practice practice practice.
What other players wore glasses?
ReplyDeleteHal Laycoe wore glasses for part of his career. Laycoe's claim to fame was being the object of Rockey Richard's wrath in the incident that led to his suspension in 1955 and ultimately the Richard Riot.
There have been a select few others but not for many many years. Arbour was the last, and I think he was the only one in my time.
Thanks for the scouting reports, boys.
ReplyDeleteWell, I can't see MTL get that much of the shaft from the refs tonight. To my eye this wasn't worse than what's been going on ever since the WSH series. Just take your eyes off the puck and watch Gill and Gorges work. Gorges, especially, is getting away with murder. The habs are anything but saints when it comes to crossing the lines.
ReplyDeleteI'll agree with this. Three of the first four goals (the ones that weren't Subban flubbing a simple face-off pass) came off mind-bendingly stupid penalties by (IIRC) Gomez, Lapierre, and Kostitsyn, respectively.
You play stupid hockey, you get burned.