2/3 of the forward core has 2 combined 5v5 goals in 10 games. Thats...really somethingGoals per 60 min of ice time at 5-vs-5 over the Bruins' last 10 games:
- DeBrusk - 0.00
- Wagner - 0.00
- Kuraly - 0.00
- Bjork - 0.00
- Studnicka - 0.00
- Krejci - 0.00
- Smith - 0.47
- Coyle - 0.51
It goes without saying, but this absolutely needs to improve.
I heard Idiot Freidman yesterday on the radio saying the Carlo hit was not bad. If it was not Wilson it would not even be talked about. Guy is such a leaf suck up, he rarely gives ant props to the Bruins, unless they beat someone 7-1. He feels the Caps have a point and it was not a head shot and NHL basically got it wrong and the refs on the ice got it right. This is my seeing blood interpretation of what he said. He was careful to dance around it but sided with the Caps 100%.
It isn't hard but I need to read the case and other docs and mark places where the answers to the questions areThat would be a bummer.
I don't miss the days of midterm papers.
One ugly statGoals per 60 min of ice time at 5-vs-5 over the Bruins' last 10 games:
- DeBrusk - 0.00
- Wagner - 0.00
- Kuraly - 0.00
- Bjork - 0.00
- Studnicka - 0.00
- Krejci - 0.00
- Smith - 0.47
- Coyle - 0.51
It goes without saying, but this absolutely needs to improve.
Good post.I unsubscribed from John Scott on YouTube due to multiple bad takes like this.
When a player shoots the puck over the glass, it's an immediate penalty, regardless of intent. 'Inadvertently' trip a guy or obstruct? Same thing - penalty.
Yet a vicious hit by a repeat offender who was head hunting his entire shift is somehow a 'clean hockey play?' If a 'legal hit' can put a player in an ambulance and in a hospital, we need to rethink what constitutes a 'legal hit.'
Have these guys not seen any of the docs on the tragic consequences due to concussions? I sort of understand it's self preservation for low talent thugs by John Scott, but what's Friedman's excuse?
I unsubscribed from John Scott on YouTube due to multiple bad takes like this.
When a player shoots the puck over the glass, it's an immediate penalty, regardless of intent. 'Inadvertently' trip a guy or obstruct? Same thing - penalty.
Yet a vicious hit by a repeat offender who was head hunting his entire shift is somehow a 'clean hockey play?' If a 'legal hit' can put a player in an ambulance and in a hospital, we need to rethink what constitutes a 'legal hit.'
Have these guys not seen any of the docs on the tragic consequences due to concussions? I sort of understand it's self preservation for low talent thugs by John Scott, but what's Friedman's excuse?
I heard Idiot Freidman yesterday on the radio saying the Carlo hit was not bad. If it was not Wilson it would not even be talked about. Guy is such a leaf suck up, he rarely gives ant props to the Bruins, unless they beat someone 7-1. He feels the Caps have a point and it was not a head shot and NHL basically got it wrong and the refs on the ice got it right. This is my seeing blood interpretation of what he said. He was careful to dance around it but sided with the Caps 100%.
Well said.Team is on notice as far as I’m concerned.
You want to be a skill team?
Too bad. You don’t have the talent top to bottom to get by on skill. Too too heavy.
If you’re not going to work your ass off, you sit.
Simplify the game and play heavier.
Volume of shots. Take it to the dirty areas and crash for rebounds.
The schedule is brutal down the stretch.
Can’t afford to piss away games in hand.
The cushion you built up?
It’s vanishing.