LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
I dont even want it for me as a fan.
I want it for Giroux.
I hear ya but it’s going to be a shitshow again.
I dont even want it for me as a fan.
I want it for Giroux.
I dont even want it for me as a fan.
I want it for Giroux.
I get some people need to defend the coach, but why Hakstol? The guy is a *****. He chooses to play boring, conservative hockey. He chooses to overplay the Filppulas, the MacDonalds,the Haggs, and the Mannings. At least the people that defended Doug Pederson last year defended a coach that was ultra aggressive and took chances.
I dont even want it for me as a fan.
I want it for Giroux.
Same nonsense I read every game.
Top players got all the minutes, and face it, Manning was better than Sanheim, both made a bad mistake that lead to a goal, but Manning at least generated some offense. Ghost showed why he can't play in front of the net on the Atkinson goal and Gudas blew a line change.
Anyone notice that whoever you put with Laughton, it looks the same, lots of O-zone time but never a good scoring chance.
This should lay to rest the idea that replacing Filppula with Laughton would make a difference.
Patrick and Lindblom are still learning, but boy are they going to be good.
The real problem, as it's been most of the year, is goalie play.
Fleury outplayed Mrazek the other night, Bob out played him tonight.
Starting to think they should just start Lyon and limit the damage to a 4th rd pick (since Mrazek only has 4 wins).
Imagine if Hextall could only find a young goalie who had upside!
The levels of blame are minuscule, with the entire picture in play.Hasn't been for awhile now imo, but he is a god among men in some posters eyes.
Where does the Filppula line spend most of its time? "Lots of O-Zone time" wouldn't be progress from that? You just negated your own argument before you made it.Anyone notice that whoever you put with Laughton, it looks the same, lots of O-zone time but never a good scoring chance.
This should lay to rest the idea that replacing Filppula with Laughton would make a difference.
Is Stolarz really an option for next year? Hasn't exactly been good in his AHL career so far
Just another game to throw in the garbage disposal.
was Mrazek that bad, or was this like the Pittsburgh game. He had no chance,.
The funny thing is Hakstol did everything everyone asked this game
The funny thing is Hakstol did everything everyone asked this game, and it made no difference, played Sanheim, reduced Filppula's minutes, put Laughton with the 3rd line wingers, etc.
And that's because the talent simply isn't there, and the goalies are bad.
Look at Darling and Ward drag down Carolina, look at Mrazek kill our playoff chances.
Laughton, Filppula, Read, Lehtera (Weise, Leier), MacDonald, Gudas, Manning.
Raffl and Simmonds would be fine if they were paired with real centers. They're just not good enough to carry dreck.
And even then, if we just had an average goalie, we'd be a 95+ point team.
I’m not mad, I’m disappointed.
Yup. Same here. Must win game and that happened
I’m not mad, I’m disappointed.
I was at the game with my buddy, after the first goal I started hysterically laughing as the Filp line was put right out there with Manning and Gudas pairing.
He looked at me like I was crazy. I just said “Watch.”
I don't understand this comment. What do you mean by "not mad" - are you saying it's possible to not be angry about something? This does not compute with me. In fact, it makes me angry just thinking about it. However, I am glad you didn't jump off the mezzanine.
No, no, no. There are two appropriate frog analogies in our present situation. The first is that this is what Filppula, Lehtera, Hagg, Manning and MacDonald look like in practice:
And this is how they look during a game:
The second analogy is the frog put in water that is raised in temperature 1 degree at a time, and finds out way too late that it is being boiled alive.
Okay, three frog analogies.