|
Post by Skilly on Mar 4, 2015 15:04:41 GMT -5
I'd move Mitchell up on the third line ....DSP to the fourth
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Mar 4, 2015 15:32:55 GMT -5
Weise appears to be victim of a numbers game tonight.
Feels like a slight, all the same.
You want more depth, so you scratch a depth guy who's given you 100% since he got here?
I guess PAP needs to show that he can contribute some offence.
Not holding my breath.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 4, 2015 16:54:40 GMT -5
Lineups posted ... John Lu@JohnLuTSNMtl refers ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by frozone on Mar 4, 2015 17:02:38 GMT -5
Weise appears to be victim of a numbers game tonight. Feels like a slight, all the same. You want more depth, so you scratch a depth guy who's given you 100% since he got here? I guess PAP needs to show that he can contribute some offence. Not holding my breath. Yikes, poor Dale. He was one of the few bottom 6 players that was creating scoring chances. 9 goals, 24 pts and +18 just ain't enough I guess. EDIT: Never mind, looks like he's in tonight.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 4, 2015 17:08:05 GMT -5
Sekac has 2 assists in 4 games with Anaheim but he hasn't scored despite getting about 15 minutes of ice time. His goalless drought is now 25 games. I'm not melancholy about that. His highest goal total in the KHL was 11 in 47 games. So why do people think that will translate into a 20 + goal scorer in the NHL? And I'm wondering why Sekac is the only one you point to on this matter .... He is a rookie, in a new country, a new league, smaller rinks, playing on the third line and you expect him to score goals like he is a first liner??? That's a bit much. EDIT I brought up Sekac because he is the topic of conversation here. He's the one people are talking about. And where did I say I expected him to score like a 1st liner? I didn't know what to expect from him but I thought his numbers at the end of a calendar year were fine for a guy in his position. Others are predicting 2nd line status for him but I never have. As far as other players in prolonged slumps - I have talked about them in other threads - Parenteau in particular. But this thread & this game are naturally going to gravitate to Sekac & Smith-Pelly.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Mar 4, 2015 17:32:24 GMT -5
Like the lines going tonight Eller has to get going so does PAP don't like taking Weiss out though but we need goals so those GUIs need a chance to step up. Will be interesting if DLR is the guy going into the playoffs. The 4th line should be damn good....guys are going to have to step up and score some goals or it'll be a short lived run Tampa is going to be tough as hell Going to get a preview how we stack up with 3 games this month.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 4, 2015 18:11:11 GMT -5
And the craziest thing? Why wasn't Sekac used more often on the PP? The reason raised by a journalist or two was that Therrien didn't trust Sekac. Whatever that means. I saw Sekac make some good defensive plays and be disciplined in his own end. I also saw him try some high risk passes and have a few picked off. No worse than pretty well any of our players. So I don't understand what the trust issue was. Perhaps he was directed to play a certain way and didn't. It really made no sense to me why he wasn't tried in certain offensive situations, but as I've said before, it's really hard to figure out Therrien's reasoning. A lot of people say, "Yep, who can make sense of his moves, but they're winning so he must be doing something right". That to me, is an answer, but one without solid reasoning behind it.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 4, 2015 18:16:21 GMT -5
Back to the game itself and the line-up. I think we're going to be in an experimental phase for the next few weeks. We've added a lot of guys and it's going to be sink or swim time for the 8 or 9 possible guys who make up the bottom six. I think Prust, Weise and Delarose are safe and the rest are going to be put into Darwinian mode. Evolve or sit. It can be a cruel world sometimes. One or two of those guys may even move themselves up onto the top 6. MT is nothing if not unpredictable.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 4, 2015 18:26:04 GMT -5
And I'm wondering why Sekac is the only one you point to on this matter .... He is a rookie, in a new country, a new league, smaller rinks, playing on the third line and you expect him to score goals like he is a first liner??? That's a bit much. EDIT I brought up Sekac because he is the topic of conversation here. He's the one people are talking about. And where did I say I expected him to score like a 1st liner? I didn't know what to expect from him but I thought his numbers at the end of a calendar year were fine for a guy in his position. Others are predicting 2nd line status for him but I never have. As far as other players in prolonged slumps - I have talked about them in other threads - Parenteau in particular. But this thread & this game are naturally going to gravitate to Sekac & Smith-Pelly. You think 7 goals in 700 mins is bad , most of which were third line minutes with defensive zone starts and against tough competition ... DD has 11 goals in 1100 minutes with PP time. Sekac is scoring on the same clip as one of our first liners with not as good ice time. So that's where I get you expect him to produce like a first liner. If you never expected him to be a second liner, why the angst with his goals? He was doing pretty well third liner duties I thought. I just wish he gave the kid a chance on the top lines or PP. The numbers don't lie
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 4, 2015 18:43:32 GMT -5
I brought up Sekac because he is the topic of conversation here. He's the one people are talking about. And where did I say I expected him to score like a 1st liner? I didn't know what to expect from him but I thought his numbers at the end of a calendar year were fine for a guy in his position. Others are predicting 2nd line status for him but I never have. As far as other players in prolonged slumps - I have talked about them in other threads - Parenteau in particular. But this thread & this game are naturally going to gravitate to Sekac & Smith-Pelly. You think 7 goals in 700 mins is bad , most of which were third line minutes with defensive zone starts and against tough competition ... DD has 11 goals in 1100 minutes with PP time. Sekac is scoring on the same clip as one of our first liners with not as good ice time. So that's where I get you expect him to produce like a first liner. If you never expected him to be a second liner, why the angst with his goals? He was doing pretty well third liner duties I thought. I just wish he gave the kid a chance on the top lines or PP. The numbers don't lie You're making assumptions. Honestly Skilly, I don't understand that leap re: 1st line expectations. I've never said that & I doubt I have even thought that about him.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on Mar 4, 2015 18:46:37 GMT -5
So to sum up your post. When the guys make it, they'd have made it anyways. When they don't its MT's fault. Almost . I'm trying to filter out the benefit that accrues to any coach for factors outside of their purview. If you're an average coach, with a goalie like Price, you're going to have a better than even chance of winning, almost despite how the rest of the team is. There are some players who could play for Mike Babcock, or for Peter Horachek and still be great players. I don't want to credit either Mike Babcock or Peter Horachek for guys like that. No matter what they'd do those guys would turn out well. As I said, that's a pretty small number of players and they have to be exceptional. PK is one guy because of talent and confidence and I added Galchy as well, though I'd accept an argument to the contrary with regards to him. Special players. Then there's the rest and that's what I'm asking. Give me some examples of players who have been delivered into Michel's hands who are now demonstrably better than when they arrived. I'm willing to have my opinion changed, but I need more than some employee of the Canadiens saying it's so to make it so. I hope that's clearer. I'm being objective but I don't want to credit or blame him for things in which he has had no impact. That's why I used Beaulieu as an example. I can't honestly say he was much better until Gonchar arrived then he was in any of of his stints in the past two years. His example is perhaps the most striking, especially when compared with other young defensemen who were paired up by other coaches with an excellent partner almost from the get go. That brought up the question, "Is Therrien placing these guys where they can succeed?". Was Sekac played where he would succeed or have we lost some asset value in a trade because the coach did not do a good enough job? As an aside, I think it was assumed by many people because Sekac was a skilled player that he was a scorer. Looking at his prior stats, it's obvious that he is more of a playmaker than scorer. The logical spot for him would be on a line with Patches and Pleks. Both are reasonable playmakers, but both can score, especially Patches. Why not put a playmaker with two guys who can score? That's a question you'd have to ask Therrien. To me that would be putting a guy in a position to succeed and unless one has superior options available, why not? Ask yourself if we had superior options? Then if he still only puts up 2 points in 20 games, yeah, it's not working. Unfortunately, we've seen Therrien's patience last a shift or two, not several games. Is that a good apprpoach? These are all questions I ask myself when judging a person's performance. I can't help it, I'm a serial analyzer. Anyway, I hope I answered your question. PS. I just remembered what Markov did for Komisarek. Talk about turning a sow's ear into a silk purse. At least until he left for Toronto. Well, if you don't want to see it, that's fine. However, I don't think you're being objective at all. We'll never know for sure, we can't view alternate timelines, in this one however the proof is right there. PK is one of the youngest norris winners ever, BGal received Calder votes, AGal is coming along nicely (his d game is miles ahead of where it was), NB is starting to look like a top 4, and we have a rookie kid as our 3rd line center. I guess if none of that happened you'd have a case, but it is what it is.... As for Sekac, I seem to remember some other kids showing a heck of a lot more while playing on Eller's wing.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Mar 4, 2015 19:40:46 GMT -5
I wouldn't like to see a bit more inspired play by DSP playing against his old mates. Not sure his conditioning is where it needs to be, but his motivation should be high. Same for Flynn and Mitchell as they start their audition. Having some internal competition for playoff roster spots is not a bad thing.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Mar 4, 2015 19:43:34 GMT -5
Back to the game itself and the line-up. I think we're going to be in an experimental phase for the next few weeks. We've added a lot of guys and it's going to be sink or swim time for the 8 or 9 possible guys who make up the bottom six. I think Prust, Weise and Delarose are safe and the rest are going to be put into Darwinian mode. Evolve or sit. It can be a cruel world sometimes. One or two of those guys may even move themselves up onto the top 6. MT is nothing if not unpredictable. The Habs will be in full audition mode now. It likely will be hard at first on the new guys to build some quick chemistry as I expect they may see some fluid MT line combos/juggling.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 4, 2015 19:52:16 GMT -5
You think 7 goals in 700 mins is bad , most of which were third line minutes with defensive zone starts and against tough competition ... DD has 11 goals in 1100 minutes with PP time. Sekac is scoring on the same clip as one of our first liners with not as good ice time. So that's where I get you expect him to produce like a first liner. If you never expected him to be a second liner, why the angst with his goals? He was doing pretty well third liner duties I thought. I just wish he gave the kid a chance on the top lines or PP. The numbers don't lie You're making assumptions. Honestly Skilly, I don't understand that leap re: 1st line expectations. I've never said that & I doubt I have even thought that about him. Jkr, I never said you did ... I compared Sekac to a first liner to show you, his goal production, (the issue you have - 20+ games without a goal you said) is on par exactly with one of our first liners
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 4, 2015 19:57:54 GMT -5
Almost . I'm trying to filter out the benefit that accrues to any coach for factors outside of their purview. If you're an average coach, with a goalie like Price, you're going to have a better than even chance of winning, almost despite how the rest of the team is. There are some players who could play for Mike Babcock, or for Peter Horachek and still be great players. I don't want to credit either Mike Babcock or Peter Horachek for guys like that. No matter what they'd do those guys would turn out well. As I said, that's a pretty small number of players and they have to be exceptional. PK is one guy because of talent and confidence and I added Galchy as well, though I'd accept an argument to the contrary with regards to him. Special players. Then there's the rest and that's what I'm asking. Give me some examples of players who have been delivered into Michel's hands who are now demonstrably better than when they arrived. I'm willing to have my opinion changed, but I need more than some employee of the Canadiens saying it's so to make it so. I hope that's clearer. I'm being objective but I don't want to credit or blame him for things in which he has had no impact. That's why I used Beaulieu as an example. I can't honestly say he was much better until Gonchar arrived then he was in any of of his stints in the past two years. His example is perhaps the most striking, especially when compared with other young defensemen who were paired up by other coaches with an excellent partner almost from the get go. That brought up the question, "Is Therrien placing these guys where they can succeed?". Was Sekac played where he would succeed or have we lost some asset value in a trade because the coach did not do a good enough job? As an aside, I think it was assumed by many people because Sekac was a skilled player that he was a scorer. Looking at his prior stats, it's obvious that he is more of a playmaker than scorer. The logical spot for him would be on a line with Patches and Pleks. Both are reasonable playmakers, but both can score, especially Patches. Why not put a playmaker with two guys who can score? That's a question you'd have to ask Therrien. To me that would be putting a guy in a position to succeed and unless one has superior options available, why not? Ask yourself if we had superior options? Then if he still only puts up 2 points in 20 games, yeah, it's not working. Unfortunately, we've seen Therrien's patience last a shift or two, not several games. Is that a good apprpoach? These are all questions I ask myself when judging a person's performance. I can't help it, I'm a serial analyzer. Anyway, I hope I answered your question. PS. I just remembered what Markov did for Komisarek. Talk about turning a sow's ear into a silk purse. At least until he left for Toronto. Well, if you don't want to see it, that's fine. However, I don't think you're being objective at all. We'll never know for sure, we can't view alternate timelines, in this one however the proof is right there. PK is one of the youngest norris winners ever, BGal received Calder votes, AGal is coming along nicely (his d game is miles ahead of where it was), NB is starting to look like a top 4, and we have a rookie kid as our 3rd line center. I guess if none of that happened you'd have a case, but it is what it is.... As for Sekac, I seem to remember some other kids showing a heck of a lot more while playing on Eller's wing. IF you are referring to Galchenyuk and Eller ... Well il never understand why MT broke that line up - does that Go for or against the MT developing youngsters arguement? Back to that line, yep, Galchenyuk and Gallagher did produce with Eller. They got SECOND line minutes, PP time, and put in offensive zone situations .... Sekac did not have any of that.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 4, 2015 20:12:03 GMT -5
A lot of people say, "Yep, who can make sense of his moves, but they're winning so he must be doing something right". That to me, is an answer, but one without solid reasoning behind it. Nah ... they're just opinions ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 4, 2015 20:23:43 GMT -5
Sekac has 2 assists in 4 games with Anaheim but he hasn't scored despite getting about 15 minutes of ice time. His goalless drought is now 25 games. I'm not melancholy about that. His highest goal total in the KHL was 11 in 47 games. So why do people think that will translate into a 20 + goal scorer in the NHL? And I'm wondering why Sekac is the only one you point to on this matter .... He is a rookie, in a new country, a new league, smaller rinks, playing on the third line and you expect him to score goals like he is a first liner??? That's a bit much. Skilly - this is what I'm referring to. Sounds like you are saying that I expect 1st line production from Sekac. Was this just a general statement because that's not the way I saw it.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Mar 4, 2015 20:31:06 GMT -5
I think we can all agree that if Sekac starts putting up solid numbers in Anaheim--getting Top 6 and PP opportunities--then the finger points at Therrien…..be it his system or his acumen in determining how to get the best out of a player.
One could argue that Sekac didn't have a Perry or a Getzlaf here (presuming that's who Sekac succeeds with)….which isn't necessarily true. Pleks, Galchy, Pacioretty, Gallagher….those guys know how to play in the O-zone.
In other words, if Sekac becomes a Top 6 producer in Anaheim, he could've done it for the Habs as well. And that points to the coach.
Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 4, 2015 21:06:54 GMT -5
Well, if you don't want to see it, that's fine. However, I don't think you're being objective at all. We'll never know for sure, we can't view alternate timelines, in this one however the proof is right there. PK is one of the youngest norris winners ever, BGal received Calder votes, AGal is coming along nicely (his d game is miles ahead of where it was), NB is starting to look like a top 4, and we have a rookie kid as our 3rd line center. I guess if none of that happened you'd have a case, but it is what it is.... Point by point. PK is exactly the guy I said would be a Norris trophy winner if Therrien coached him, Babcock coached him or Horachek coached him. He's that good and his coach doesn't matter. Stamkos went from .64 in his first season to 1.16 in his second season, with Rick Tocchet as his coach. No one's trumpeting Tocchet as the great teacher, but Stamkos is that special player who would do well regardless, as I have tried to point out. Not giving Therrien credit for PK's development. BGal- .64 ppg in his rookie season, the shortened one. Went to .51 ppg in season 2 and is currently at .60 ppg. Defensively he may be a bit better, but he's no better than ok in his own end, IMO. No improvement from his first season in production. Galchy - I tried to say that I don't place him in PK's class because he doesn't have that amount of confidence that PK does. In his first season, he had .56 ppg, then down to .54 and now up to .64 ppg. That's a reasonable improvement. FRankly I expected him to be higher by this point in his career and perhaps it's my expectations that have me disappointed in his progress. With Beaulieu, you're making my point. He was a distracted, inconsistent guy who was neck and neck with Tinordi. Along comes exactly the type of guy I suggest should play with our youngsters, a quality, smart veteran (Gonchar) and Beaulieu sprouts his wings. It didn't happen before that. It happened after Gonchar arrived and Beaulieu was paired with him. I don't think I should credit Therrien with teaching Beaulieu anything. It was probably luck or Therrien's typical juggling that brought that pair together, thank god. So, I've provided some examples and solid numbers to back up my argument. PK is special. Gallagher is not more productive after 2 /2 year. Galchy is moderately so. Beaulieu is remarkably better, but only immediately after the typical molding of our young players was broken in his case. Your serve.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Mar 4, 2015 21:09:03 GMT -5
I wouldn't like to see a bit more inspired play by DSP playing against his old mates. Not sure his conditioning is where it needs to be, but his motivation should be high. Same for Flynn and Mitchell as they start their audition. Having some internal competition for playoff roster spots is not a bad thing. On tsn690 they played an interview after the sharks game and mt said dsp needed to get into better shape (paraphrasing)
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Mar 4, 2015 21:12:00 GMT -5
I think we can all agree that if Sekac starts putting up solid numbers in Anaheim--getting Top 6 and PP opportunities--then the finger points at Therrien…..be it his system or his acumen in determining how to get the best out of a player. One could argue that Sekac didn't have a Perry or a Getzlaf here (presuming that's who Sekac succeeds with)….which isn't necessarily true. Pleks, Galchy, Pacioretty, Gallagher….those guys know how to play in the O-zone. In other words, if Sekac becomes a Top 6 producer in Anaheim, he could've done it for the Habs as well. And that points to the coach. Time will tell. And chances are MB will be peeved about it... i know i would be if i was him
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Mar 4, 2015 21:15:32 GMT -5
Well, if you don't want to see it, that's fine. However, I don't think you're being objective at all. We'll never know for sure, we can't view alternate timelines, in this one however the proof is right there. PK is one of the youngest norris winners ever, BGal received Calder votes, AGal is coming along nicely (his d game is miles ahead of where it was), NB is starting to look like a top 4, and we have a rookie kid as our 3rd line center. I guess if none of that happened you'd have a case, but it is what it is.... Point by point. PK is exactly the guy I said would be a Norris trophy winner if Therrien coached him, Babcock coached him or Horachek coached him. He's that good and his coach doesn't matter. Stamkos went from .64 in his first season to 1.16 in his second season, with Rick Tocchet as his coach. No one's trumpeting Tocchet as the great teacher, but Stamkos is that special player who would do well regardless, as I have tried to point out. Not giving Therrien credit for PK's development. BGal- .64 ppg in his rookie season, the shortened one. Went to .51 ppg in season 2 and is currently at .60 ppg. Defensively he may be a bit better, but he's no better than ok in his own end, IMO. No improvement from his first season in production. Galchy - I tried to say that I don't place him in PK's class because he doesn't have that amount of confidence that PK does. In his first season, he had .56 ppg, then down to .54 and now up to .64 ppg. That's a reasonable improvement. FRankly I expected him to be higher by this point in his career and perhaps it's my expectations that have me disappointed in his progress. With Beaulieu, you're making my point. He was a distracted, inconsistent guy who was neck and neck with Tinordi. Along comes exactly the type of guy I suggest should play with our youngsters, a quality, smart veteran (Gonchar) and Beaulieu sprouts his wings. It didn't happen before that. It happened after Gonchar arrived and Beaulieu was paired with him. I don't think I should credit Therrien with teaching Beaulieu anything. It was probably luck or Therrien's typical juggling that brought that pair together, thank god. So, I've provided some examples and solid numbers to back up my argument. PK is special. Gallagher is not more productive after 2 /2 year. Galchy is moderately so. Beaulieu is remarkably better, but only immediately after the typical molding of our young players was broken in his case. Your serve. 17, you forgot to mention that Carey has also improved since MT arrived. Let's face it: MT is a wizard!
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 4, 2015 21:30:53 GMT -5
True. He should start wearing his pointy hat to complement his suits. Let's hope the boys have a good game tonight. It will be tough as Anaheim's got a lot of talent.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on Mar 4, 2015 21:51:52 GMT -5
Well, if you don't want to see it, that's fine. However, I don't think you're being objective at all. We'll never know for sure, we can't view alternate timelines, in this one however the proof is right there. PK is one of the youngest norris winners ever, BGal received Calder votes, AGal is coming along nicely (his d game is miles ahead of where it was), NB is starting to look like a top 4, and we have a rookie kid as our 3rd line center. I guess if none of that happened you'd have a case, but it is what it is.... Point by point. PK is exactly the guy I said would be a Norris trophy winner if Therrien coached him, Babcock coached him or Horachek coached him. He's that good and his coach doesn't matter. Stamkos went from .64 in his first season to 1.16 in his second season, with Rick Tocchet as his coach. No one's trumpeting Tocchet as the great teacher, but Stamkos is that special player who would do well regardless, as I have tried to point out. Not giving Therrien credit for PK's development. BGal- .64 ppg in his rookie season, the shortened one. Went to .51 ppg in season 2 and is currently at .60 ppg. Defensively he may be a bit better, but he's no better than ok in his own end, IMO. No improvement from his first season in production. Galchy - I tried to say that I don't place him in PK's class because he doesn't have that amount of confidence that PK does. In his first season, he had .56 ppg, then down to .54 and now up to .64 ppg. That's a reasonable improvement. FRankly I expected him to be higher by this point in his career and perhaps it's my expectations that have me disappointed in his progress. With Beaulieu, you're making my point. He was a distracted, inconsistent guy who was neck and neck with Tinordi. Along comes exactly the type of guy I suggest should play with our youngsters, a quality, smart veteran (Gonchar) and Beaulieu sprouts his wings. It didn't happen before that. It happened after Gonchar arrived and Beaulieu was paired with him. I don't think I should credit Therrien with teaching Beaulieu anything. It was probably luck or Therrien's typical juggling that brought that pair together, thank god. So, I've provided some examples and solid numbers to back up my argument. PK is special. Gallagher is not more productive after 2 /2 year. Galchy is moderately so. Beaulieu is remarkably better, but only immediately after the typical molding of our young players was broken in his case. Your serve. Everything you have said there is opinion though. There are no guarantees. There's been plenty of no brainer, can't miss guys, who did. You can't prove that they would've become what they did anyways, because, well, we live in the real world. Alternate timelines don't exist. Plenty of guys have come into this league, looked promising and faded away. The fact that these guys have become useful nhlers is enough to prove that MT can develop youngsters. It's really quite simple.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Mar 4, 2015 21:54:24 GMT -5
And I'm wondering why Sekac is the only one you point to on this matter .... He is a rookie, in a new country, a new league, smaller rinks, playing on the third line and you expect him to score goals like he is a first liner??? That's a bit much. Skilly - this is what I'm referring to. Sounds like you are saying that I expect 1st line production from Sekac. Was this just a general statement because that's not the way I saw it. It's more along the lnes of the general "you" ... But 7 goals in 700 mins = 11 goals in 1100 mins ....so if people expect more from Sekac, wouldn't it be fair to say that they expect first line goal scoring (at the least high second line) from Sekac and he had to do it from the third line. Because I've heard people say that he needed to produce more on the third to get promoted.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 4, 2015 22:04:28 GMT -5
The fact that these guys have become useful nhlers is enough to prove that MT can develop youngsters. It's really quite simple. or that they developed in spite of him. who knows? and here I said I was staying out of this particular discussion.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 4, 2015 22:11:19 GMT -5
totally outside of any of our discussions . . .
(preface: I know that we can be huge homers, and I know that they are huge homers, but . . . )
they were talking Norris considerations on Ottawa sports radio today . . . Doughty, Letang, Weber . . . and now with the resurgence of the Sens, shouldn't Karlsson be in the mix? of course, look at what he is doing!
not a mention of PK, surprise surprise (don't expect him to win, really, but to have Karlsson as #3 with a bullet and no PK? c'mon!)
|
|
|
Post by 24andcounting on Mar 4, 2015 22:18:14 GMT -5
Oh boy. Ducks looking good already.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Mar 4, 2015 22:18:54 GMT -5
Prust Maroon. Early scrap of sorts.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Mar 4, 2015 22:19:46 GMT -5
Ottawa's gonna win again....this time over Winnipeg. They need a goalie injury. Sekac is on the third line tonight? With Rackell and Etem. Both are averaging just over 12:00 per game....as per ESPN's site. We'll see if he gets PP time.
|
|