HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

DmanDad1980 wrote:
Liked Leddy's play... He looked young at times, but he played steady, and did not look as slow as the other D all night...

Ummm.....Leddy got roasted on the first goal set up by Kesler.

Just saying.

OGEE OGELTHORPE wrote:

DmanDad1980 wrote:
Liked Leddy's play... He looked young at times, but he played steady, and did not look as slow as the other D all night...

Ummm.....Leddy got roasted on the first goal set up by Kesler.

Just saying.

Missed first half of 1st period, watched the rest of game... Did not see "roast" live... replay looked like Kessler made a no-look pass out front, Burrows buried it... did not notice, was Leddy on Burrows or on Kessler...?

Rest of game I saw live, he did not make the bonehead plays Seabrooke made all night, Keith made on the breakaway penalty shot, and Campoli made to lose the game... Seabrooke looked slow, slow as molasses on ice...

Thats all I'm sayin'...

DmanDad1980 wrote:

OGEE OGELTHORPE wrote:

DmanDad1980 wrote:
Liked Leddy's play... He looked young at times, but he played steady, and did not look as slow as the other D all night...

Ummm.....Leddy got roasted on the first goal set up by Kesler.

Just saying.

Missed first half of 1st period, watched the rest of game... Did not see "roast" live... replay looked like Kessler made a no-look pass out front, Burrows buried it... did not notice, was Leddy on Burrows or on Kessler...?

Rest of game I saw live, he did not make the bonehead plays Seabrooke made all night, Keith made on the breakaway penalty shot, and Campoli made to lose the game... Seabrooke looked slow, slow as molasses on ice...

Thats all I'm sayin'...

I just watched the replay of the first period goal and..."Upon further review" the call has been reversed.

It was Leddy's D partner that got roasted by Kesler, not Nick.

My bad.


My apologies to Mr. Leddy.

Leddy played ok yesterday night. But his par performance wasn't the deciding factor of the game. The goalies were.

Great game and congrats; however, I hope Nashville sends Vancouver home next series.

PuckU126 wrote:Leddy played ok yesterday night. But his par performance wasn't the deciding factor of the game. The goalies were.

Great game and congrats; however, I hope Nashville sends Vancouver home next series.

Agreed on all counts...

Leddy was a non-factor in the game, goalies were outstanding, and the sooner Vancouver is out the better...

Bump!

And so the Caps' postseason run comes to a flat, but not entirely unexpected, end.

Things aren't looking too good for Puck's Wings, either.

karl(east) wrote:And so the Caps' postseason run comes to a flat, but not entirely unexpected, end.

Things aren't looking too good for Puck's Wings, either.

Tough losses...

Each game has been close; two of them were OTs. The puck has been bouncing the Sharks' way and they're capitalizing on their chances.

Plus its too bad the Sharks are having a hot streak against my Wings for the past 10+ games...

But as a true fan, I still have faith in D-Twa; remember Philly and Boston last year? Or the Red Sox, Yankees in '04 (I know its not the same), but you get my point. A 3-0 lead can be overcome.

BTW the same wont happen for the Flyers this year.

Boston has their number this year and they are a different team compared to last year.

Go Wings!!

PuckU126 wrote:Or the Red Sox, Yankees in '04 (I know its not the same), but you get my point. A 3-0 lead can be overcome.

Had to bring that up, didn't you?

Chicago was a bounce away from pulling it off in the first round, so the possibility is definitely there.

And whatever else I may think of the Wings, I do appreciate the octopus.

karl(east) wrote:

PuckU126 wrote:Or the Red Sox, Yankees in '04 (I know its not the same), but you get my point. A 3-0 lead can be overcome.

Had to bring that up, didn't you?

Chicago was a bounce away from pulling it off in the first round, so the possibility is definitely there.

And whatever else I may think of the Wings, I do appreciate the octopus.

Yeah, I did.

Just for you, Karl.

PuckU126 wrote:

karl(east) wrote:

PuckU126 wrote:Or the Red Sox, Yankees in '04 (I know its not the same), but you get my point. A 3-0 lead can be overcome.

Had to bring that up, didn't you?

Chicago was a bounce away from pulling it off in the first round, so the possibility is definitely there.

And whatever else I may think of the Wings, I do appreciate the octopus.

Yeah, I did.

Just for you, Karl.

How kind of you.

I normally despise conspiracy theories, but I will insist for the rest of my life that the bloody sock was fake and a publicity stunt. If there is one thing on earth I can't be rational about, it's the Red Sox.

karl(east) wrote:I normally despise conspiracy theories, but I will insist for the rest of my life that the bloody sock was fake and a publicity stunt. If there is one thing on earth I can't be rational about, it's the Red Sox.

Come on Karl... really? A conspiracy? Schilling pitching a great Game 6 with a bloody/red sock is a conspiracy?

Lets define the word conspiracy, shall we?

con·spir·a·cy [kuhn-spir-uh-see]
–noun, plural -cies.
1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.

IMO poor choice of words; however, you probably meant to use "conspiracy" because only a Yankee fan would identify Schilling's performance as an evil, unlawful plan to beat the Yankees...

The Yankees had four games to shut the door on their arch rivals but they just... couldn't... close... it...

Just like Rivera, your "savior."

PuckU126 wrote:IMO poor choice of words; however, you probably meant to use "conspiracy" because only a Yankee fan would identify Schilling's performance as an evil, unlawful plan to beat the Yankees...

Nah, it was just an evil, unethical plan to make Schilling's comeback from injury look more dramatic than it really was.

Many enemies meance the forces of good in this world. Thankfully, history is on our side. Or at least it seems to be...











Did I remember them all? I lose track of them sometimes.

Yankees still suck.


How yah like them apples?

OGEE OGELTHORPE wrote:Yankees still suck.


How yah like them apples?

I'm guessing you like bitter ones.

Karl,

What you should've said was, "kiss the rings Bich"

Yes, I know I am missing the "t" in the middle.

PuckU126 wrote:Karl,

What you should've said was, "kiss the rings Bich"

Yes, I know I am missing the "t" in the middle.

*Sigh.* So many comeback options, and I just went after the apple comment. Oh, the troubles of being a Yankees fan.

karl(east) wrote:*Sigh.* So many comeback options, and I just went after the apple comment. Oh, the troubles of being a Yankees fan.

*Sigh* Oh, poor you and the other self righteous Yankee fans.

PuckU126 wrote:self righteous Yankee fans.

Isn't that statement kinda redundant?

karl(east) wrote:

PuckU126 wrote:self righteous Yankee fans.

Isn't that statement kinda redundant?

Is that statement redundant? Yes.

Is it true? Yes, it is for most fans.

It's redundancy obviously holds truth to most Yankee fans, much like some stereotypes. Fact are facts.

Here's a fun fact: What is the most popular logo among criminals?

The New York Yankees logo.

PuckU126 wrote:Here's a fun fact: What is the most popular logo among criminals?

The New York Yankees logo.

Well, there are more of us Yankee fans out there than there are fans of other teams, so it's not too surprising that there are more criminals who like them. They're based out of the South Bronx, which isn't exactly a shiny, happy place, and they also cater to our nation's finest white-collar criminals with all those thousand-dollar box seats. (Though at least our ownership didn't get caught up in the Madoff scandal, as the inferior New York team's did.)

And if you're going to be a criminal, you might as well have style, right?

BUMP!

PuckU126 wrote:BUMP!

Say Puck...time to change your sig line.

The Red Wings are out of it.


LGC

OGEE OGELTHORPE wrote:Say Puck...time to change your sig line.

The Red Wings are out of it.


LGC

No dice, Ogee.

I am avid Wings fan; it will remain the same.

They had a good year; I am looking forward to their off season moves.

And you, Ogee, dare to say LGC? Some wagon...

I can't stand Vancouver (just because they're the favorite), San Jose (they defeated my Wings and SJ shouldn't have a team...), and Tampa (same as SJ, shouldn't have a team).

I shall be rooting for the Bruins. Rather have them take the Cup than the other 3....

PuckU126 wrote:

OGEE OGELTHORPE wrote:Say Puck...time to change your sig line.

The Red Wings are out of it.


LGC

No dice, Ogee.

I am avid Wings fan; it will remain the same.

They had a good year; I am looking forward to their off season moves.

And you, Ogee, dare to say LGC? Some wagon...

I can't stand Vancouver (just because they're the favorite), San Jose (they defeated my Wings and SJ shouldn't have a team...), and Tampa (same as SJ, shouldn't have a team).

I shall be rooting for the Bruins. Rather have them take the Cup than the other 3....

No Wagon here....I hate the Cannucks more than most.

Strictly an office pool deal. $$$


Go Cannucks