Thursday, January 12, 2006


Game Day [updated]

Ho hum. Flames score their usual two goals, get a lead, and lose.

The good news for Flames fans is that Jarmoe scored a goal. The bad news is that he was still a -1

Ho hum. The Oilers outshoot their competition in every period but still lose. I didn't see the game because I'm cheap, but from what I've seen on the highlights Jussi might not have been as bad as his SV% would suggest. Anyone?

The good news for Oilers fans is that Peca scored . . . twice. The bad news is that Smytty was -4. I haven't gone over all the stats, but I assume a bunch of those were on the PK.

Anyway, 3 out of 4 points on the road is pretty nice. Next up, two tough home games with the Sens and Sabres coming to town.


Pathetic. I stopped watching halfway through the third.
Missed passes. Turnover after turnover. Brutal effort from the forwards - Warrener and Phaneuf got fed up with their half-assed efforts clearing their end, so they started carrying the puck out themselves or just dumping it out. Seriously out of postion and bad coverage in their own end, which results in 13 shots (or whatever it was) per period against. "Get tough on the puck, like you know you should, dammit."

Guaranteed the next practice is nothing but skating and passing. Then more passing, followed by skating.

I'm probably being overy critical, expecting them to play great every game, as I lay on the couch, slurping down beer and popcorn.

Iginla was good but not great. Lombardi was terrific. Ference and Richie Regehr, on the other hand, were terrible. So was Tommy.

Yeah, I noticed Lombardi, which means he's doing something. (I didn't catch the first half of the first, so I can only comment from then on.)
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I. Hate. Ference. Nothing personal, mind you, but "trade him right fucking now" (to paraphrase Slapshot)

That loss hurt. It hurt bad. And Ference looked awful on that one goal.

This team has gotten a little bit harder to love in 2006. They seem to be trying to get by on about 45 minutes a night. Which the '89 Flames could often get away with most nights, but not the '06 Flames. These guys need to keep their legs moving all night to be successful.

jhuck is right ... they will be moving their legs a lot more at practice tomorrow ...

PS I see the Oilers have already gassed a 2 goal lead on Mark Messier night. Go Rangers!

We and our standings point will see you at Toots Shor's, mofo. And look! The price of a slave turns out to be two goals!

Ah, karma. What's with Captain Canada being a -4? Is he going to have to punch Peca in the dressing room and steal his mojo back?

PK? You don't get a minus on the PK, or a plus on the PP.

Peca su... huh?

Wow, maybe he's upped his value to 2/3 pe├ža. I wouldn't bet the house on it, though. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.

I agree, Jhuck, Ference Sucks. A lot. I've been saying it since October, and have grown more vocal every month. He's a team worst -8. He can't make a good decision to save his life. Further, his stupidity seems to be spreading to other players (see Leopold's performance from last night).

"his stupidity seems to be spreading to other players "

I've always believed stupidity to contagious. Everyone around me is an idiot, and I'll bet it's from talking to me.

PK? You don't get a minus on the PK, or a plus on the PP.

See? This is why I hate bringing stats into the equation. I don't know why I even bother -- all it ever results in is me looking like an ass.

Not as big of an ass as Smyth, apparently.

For my part, I have to admit that I wasn't super thrilled watching the Oilers try to sit on a 4-3 lead in Madison Square with a C-minus goalie for ballast. Leave the Flames tactics to the Flames, I say. When the Rangers tied it up, the lads were unable to get out of third gear, and they were awfully lucky to lose it 14 seconds into OT instead of 14 seconds before.

Still, at least we didn't lose in regulation to NYC's fuggin' B team, or anything. That woulda stung.

"Still, at least we didn't lose in regulation to NYC's fuggin' B team, or anything. That woulda stung."

Nice to see that you put "in regulation" in there. But a loss is a loss, remember, no more ties in THE NEW NHL.

I doubt we really want to go down the "you're-team-lost-to-that shitty-team" argument, because nobody will win that one.

Edmonton has lost games to sub-par teams such as Phoenix, Chicago, Boston, NY Islanders, and Minny - twice.

As for less-than-stellar teams the Flames have lost to - Anaheim, Phoenix, Chicago and Edmonton.

"Did the Oilers not get a point for last night's loss"

Yes. For the LOSS. It's not that confusing. Some losses get you 1 point, others nothing. They're all still losses, since they are not WINS, and there are no more tie games.

By definition:
n 1: the act of losing; "everyone expected him to win so his loss was a shock"

I'm confused jhuck. Did anyone say that the Oilers won?

Or are you actually suggesting that losing in regulation isn't worse than losing in overtime?

You guys sure get confused easily.
Nobody said Edmonton won last night. I'm not even talking about the Oiler/Rangers game.

-Colby Said, "at least we didn't lose in regulation to NYC's fuggin' B team"

-I replied the Oilers lost to that same team, even though it was in overtime, so it's not much better.

-then I get an argument that OT/SO losses aren't actually losses.

-I still believe that they are indeed losses, since they aren't wins, and there are no more ties, and they are called OT/SO "losses".

-then you set up a straw man, suggesting I don't think OT losses are different than regular losses, even after I clearly stated that those losses get a team 1 point.

My whole point is that both the Flames and Oilers have lost to some sub-par teams (the same teams for the most part) and that an OT loss is not a win. It's a loss, not a TOTAL loss, but a loss just the same.

I hope I made myself clear, as it'd be embarrassing for yet another Oiler fan to have to admit to his mental incompetence.

A loss is a loss is a loss. I've started calling the single point 'getting a result' like they do for soccer ties. Missing the 3 points in soccer is a big deal some times, but the fans can still claim to have gotten a result.

The Flames and Oilers were both losers last night, but the Oilers got a result.

Clearly my Saskatchewanian friend was calling attention to the unseemliness of gloating over the difference between losing by a goal in regulation and losing in a shootout, particularly against a team that both the Flames and the Oilers ought to have beaten handily.

Related: is their any team that wants to enter a shootout less than the Oilers right now? They started off winning their first 3, but with the goalie situation now... that Brodeur v. Conky shootout was the most lopsided one I've seen all year.

Of course, I meant "temporary" mental incompetence. I don't want to sound like a TOTAL asshole, just hoping to salvage 1 point.

All of you clowns who think that a loss is a loss is a loss are delusional.

You can, if you like, call everything that isn't a win or a tie a "loss", but it seems to me that the NHL has already taken care of that nitpicky little problem with the term "Loss" by using adjectives. Perhaps you've heard of those handly little grammatical devices.

See, you can actually modify the meaning of a noun with them. GASP! Hence, we have "Regulation Losses" and "Overtime Losses". See the distinction? I know it must be confusing for those of you who only read one word at a time, but I'm sure you'll catch on to sentences soon.

The importance, of course, is that the Oilers gained a point on the Flames. I know that must really burn your butt if you are a Flames' fan, but thems the facts.

"the NHL has already taken care of that nitpicky little problem with the term "Loss" by using adjectives"

You almost had it there.

Those "adjectives" are used to describe a LOSS.

Sergei- "Hey, Igor, check out my new ride."

Igor- "Dude, it's a Lada."

Sergei- "Well, yeah, but it has a new paint job, new wheels, and a sweet Wankel Rotary engine under the hood. I have a COOL Lada. A SWEET Lada."

Igor- "It's still a Lada."

Sergei- "You're just jealous 'cause your Lada is a piece of shit."

Igor- "Actually, both our Ladas are shit. You just don't like the fact that Ivan the Useless somehow picked up that chick we were both eyeing, in his ugly Zaporozhets ZAZ-968M no less. Any other night she would have been ours, and we each almost had her. Hell, you even copped a feel, but in the end she went home with Useless."

I always found it pretty convenient to just call them Regular Time Losses and Overtime Losses because, well, that's what they are.

But hey, if you find it too confusing to distinguish between two different kinds of losses, then pick your euphemism -- I see Peter likes "result" instead of Overtime Loss. It seems kind of obscure to me, but whatever.

You apparently like the phrase "TOTAL loss" (do we have to keep it all in capitals?), so I assume there must be something like an "IMCOMPLETE loss" in your worldview? Sure. Knock yourself out.

Incidently, you've clearly never spent any time in Russia. If you had, you would know that the Lada is indispensible because of its lego-like construction and abundance of spare parts. Our Toyota didn't fare well.

And thus ends (I hope) perhaps the lamest comments discussion in the history of BoA. I think I'm going to go take a shower.

Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?