A good captain would never let his coach and GM make such a terrible decision in the first place.
This is a good point. I have no idea how the personalities in the room mesh but at some point someone needs to step up and be Jimmy Chitwood when the opportunity presents itself.
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc-Andre 7leury
Chances of overtime tonight are low.
So I gots thats going for me!
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We're going to go back to MN tied, with home ice advantage. Throw away the game tape, burn it, never talk of it again. Garbage performance all around.
Let's put on a good show for the home fans on Friday!
Anyone else going?
So, ride Gus for up to 7 games, per series, and tell you what. When he isn't up to task? "WHY DIDN'T YOU GIVE HIM A REST?!" I guarantee it. Game 2 was the best game to give the Flower a go.
When you tell somebody somethin', it depends on what part of the United States you're standin' in... as to just how dumb you are.
If Domi leaves the arena on his own feet, you might as well leave Reaves and Foligno in Dallas
Who is our backup backup goalie? Is he any good?
97 finally says f**k it and and goes after the punk domi, who should be embarrassed.
Methinks there may be a special night in the works for 97 on Friday.
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
97 finally says f**k it and and goes after the punk domi, who should be embarrassed.
Methinks there may be a special night in the works for 97 on Friday.
I'll bring my wild hat that I have no problem with leaving at the rink ?
97 finally says f**k it and and goes after the punk domi, who should be embarrassed.
He’s not embarrassed at all. This is exactly what he wants. It’s embarrassing for Reaves.
Foligno, Kaprizov, and Reaves all get misconducts.
Now Duhaime does too.
The Wild are 16-26 at home all time in the playoffs and have only won 3 of their last 15 at home.
Home ice advantage doesn't seem to apply for them lately.
Move along time.....
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys. No personal attacks. Come on. We're all better than that.
The wild thread could certainly use a ref once in awhile. 😉
Guys. No personal attacks. Come on. We're all better than that.
The wild thread could certainly use a ref once in awhile. 😉
I'm here to help...
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fleury gets a lot of praise for his playoff heroics, but it sure didn't feel like it tonight. He looked terrible on the breakaway that pretty much took them out of the game. Sometimes when a goalie makes a big save to keep his team in it, guys really pick it up.
One of my issues with him is that he's physically small and doesn't occupy enough of the net. When he's screened and can't see the puck, it helps to just get big. He can't do that.
The funny part of all of this is the fact that Fleury is a terrible playoff goaltenderFleury gets a lot of praise for his playoff heroics, but it sure didn't feel like it tonight. He looked terrible on the breakaway that pretty much took them out of the game. Sometimes when a goalie makes a big save to keep his team in it, guys really pick it up.
One of my issues with him is that he's physically small and doesn't occupy enough of the net. When he's screened and can't see the puck, it helps to just get big. He can't do that.
I’da went with what worked in game one, don’t play like you want this to go 7 or you have games like this to just throw around. Do everything you can to go up 2-0 on the road and keep Dallas feeling low. Throw fleury in up 3-1 in the series for a breather and go with gus at home again for game 6. That’s just me
Steel, Johansson, Foligno, Boldy, Zucc and Kaprizov were a combined -13.
Fleury SV% .774
Woof!
Only saw the first period, but obviously it was a full team effort shit show. That said, for me personally anyway, it's tough as a fan to fully invest in the Wild when I see the type of decision making such as the goalie choice last night. Evason saying "It's what we do; we've done it all year" rings so hollow. First of all, this is the playoffs now, not the regular season, and if you don't realize that I have no idea what to think. Second, no, you didn't do this all year. There were stretches all season where one goalie or the other might be in for 2-3 games in a row or 4 out of 5.
I was really hoping that game 2 wouldn't turn out as it did; not the loss itself, but how it unfolded. I've seen so many series across professional sports over the decades where the "underdog" takes game 1 on the road and then just folds up shop in game 2. Maybe Gus plays last night and totally craps the bed, but none of us will ever know. The playoffs are so much about momentum and Dallas has to be feeling very positive. No Pavelski, down a game and they just blew Minnesota out of the arena. It would seem obvious, but on the Wild's side we're back to "who's in the net for the next game?".
If your organization runs solely on metrics and sees the post-season just as it does the regular season, you probably don't have to worry about the trophy case getting too packed. It's so much about instinct and gut feeling and intangibles, and Evason and Guerin just don't seem to be able to grasp that. I'll be thrilled in a couple weeks to look back and have people say "See, it was fine. The Wild rallied and took out Dallas; why were you so worried?". Not feeling that way right now.
The only thing I can think is Dean knew Dallas would come out flying down one at home, his team was actually more banged up then we know, and so throw Fleury in and see what happens. If he steals one great. If they get a beatdown you go back home with the split and you put Gus back in giving the players a confidence boost. Not saying I agree with that decision but it at least gives a reason, albeit not a good reason in my mind.
I would've never started Fleury this game. To not get a single key save just killed us. Not that the entire team was great or anything, but you need your goalie to pick one up some of the time.
Whatever. Onto Friday. Gus back in net. Take that one and go up 2-1. We're not the first team to get blown out in a game in a series and we won't be the last.
@golden-fe-ranger It makes absolutely no sense, I know we are all trying to find the reasoning behind it but even what you said makes no sense.
No team would ever take out their red hot goalie who just got plenty of rest leading into the playoffs because they are up 1-0 and are afraid their opponent would come out flying. And essentially concede a game, its absurd.
Guerin loves himself some Flower. Apparently lessons not learned from last season. Cam Talbot's wife probably peed in all of her pants last night, laughing at the Wild.@golden-fe-ranger It makes absolutely no sense, I know we are all trying to find the reasoning behind it but even what you said makes no sense.
No team would ever take out their red hot goalie who just got plenty of rest leading into the playoffs because they are up 1-0 and are afraid their opponent would come out flying. And essentially concede a game, its absurd.
Like I said, I am not saying I agree with that logic or am even defending it. If the Wild come out with Gus and the full crew in game 3 and roll the Stars on the way to a five game series win I may reconsider. ?@golden-fe-ranger It makes absolutely no sense, I know we are all trying to find the reasoning behind it but even what you said makes no sense.
No team would ever take out their red hot goalie who just got plenty of rest leading into the playoffs because they are up 1-0 and are afraid their opponent would come out flying. And essentially concede a game, its absurd.
Looking at the NHL rule for high sticking:
A “high stick” is one which is carried above the height of the opponent’s shoulders. Players must be in control and responsible for their stick. However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion, or accidental contact on the opposing center who is bent over during the course of a face-off. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly.
It makes no mention of exceptions for a stick lift... yet we saw two different interpretations this week where one was ignored allowing a goal in overtime and one was called as a double minor.
What's your official take?
Looking at the NHL rule for high sticking:
A “high stick” is one which is carried above the height of the opponent’s shoulders. Players must be in control and responsible for their stick. However, a player is permitted accidental contact on an opponent if the act is committed as a normal windup or follow through of a shooting motion, or accidental contact on the opposing center who is bent over during the course of a face-off. A wild swing at a bouncing puck would not be considered a normal windup or follow through and any contact to an opponent above the height of the shoulders shall be penalized accordingly.
It makes no mention of exceptions for a stick lift... yet we saw two different interpretations this week where one was ignored allowing a goal in overtime and one was called as a double minor.
What's your official take?
Thanks for calling in! haha.
NHL standards, and the levels I have worked are different things, so I will start with that caveat. If you go for a stick lift, and your stick makes contact with that player's head/neck, or any other player's neck/head on the opposing team. That's a high stick. I think we can all agree on that.
There is the whole "You are responsible for your own stick" aspect. So I think what you are getting at is the situation where a player went for a stick lift, and the stick they were lifting, not their own, hit an opponent in the face. When I am calling it, I try to look at the actions. If a player's stick is being lifted, and his stick his someone in the face, I am going to have a real hard time penalizing him. However, if he is trying to slide off it, or fight it, and forcibly whacks a guy in the head -- I am much more likely, and probably will call that on him. Even though his stick is being lifted, he is now contributing to the action and has some level of control. If just the lift causes it to go directly into a player, he had little to nothing to do with it and someone else is trying to control their stick. Hard to find foul there.
As far as the lifter goes, if it is a forceable lift and goes directly into an opponents head forcibly -- probably calling them on it. They are partially assuming control there. If the stick glances of the side of an opponents helmet... gray area, probably no harm no foul. Directly in the teeth - I am definitely calling it.
Looking at the Martinook/Mayfield one form the Canes/NYI game. Mayfield lifts the stick which ultimately causes it to go into his face. Martinook only has one hand on it, and is trying to get away, looking the other direction, and there doesn't appear to be any intent to engage with Mayfield. Mayfield going for the lift, is likely the only reason it went into his own face. I'd have a real hard time calling a penalty on Martinook there - especially in playoff OT. You could make the argument Martinook only had one had on his stick, and needed more control.
The Middleton one I feel similarly about, but slightly different... The difference here is Middleton has one arm into the Dallas player's body/arms also causing him to fight off the contact, he isn't trying to get away, he is actively engaged. Dallas player also goes for a stick lift, and it's likely the only reason his stick makes contact with the Dallas player's (Domi?) face. Having the lovely benefit of replay's from multiple angles, I don't like the call. The Dallas player's stick lift contributed MUCH more to the facial injury, than Middleton's one hand/lack of stick control. The Dallas stick lift was also forceful, and not just a stick bump. (was any of that due to Middleton's arm being in his midsection? who knows) I also don't really see Middleton (or Martinook for that matter) exerting much force in resisting the lift. I'd have preferred to see no call there, if it were me.
The game, especially at the NHL is extremely fast and these things happen in the blink of an eye, and you have to make a call, sometimes not seeing the whole picture. I can sympathize with that and see why the call may have been made at real speed. I'd love to see the NHL chime in on the comparison between the two plays, but we all know that isn't going to happen. As you alluded to, it also isn't in the rulebook, so it would be hard for the NHL to say one is right and one is wrong without a grievance from the official's union.
A supervisor, who I greatly respect, would also review calls with me and ask "what's the spirit of the rule?" So here we have to ask, is the spirit "You must always be in control of your stick" via the Middleton call, or are there reasonable exclusions/exemptions from that via the Martinook non-call? I personally think there are reasonable exceptions to a lot of rules, and that the Middleton call would fall into that (with the hindsight of replay, different angles, etc.) I also tell me who scream "Just call the rules as they're written" to be careful what you wish for... While I'd like to see a stronger enforcement of several things at the NHL level (cross-checking anyone?), you don't want the game called to the letter of the rulebook.
What say you? and others?
The funny part of all of this is the fact that Fleury is a terrible playoff goaltenderFleury gets a lot of praise for his playoff heroics, but it sure didn't feel like it tonight. He looked terrible on the breakaway that pretty much took them out of the game. Sometimes when a goalie makes a big save to keep his team in it, guys really pick it up.
One of my issues with him is that he's physically small and doesn't occupy enough of the net. When he's screened and can't see the puck, it helps to just get big. He can't do that.
I had to look it up, and was a little surprised. It is hard to find an NHL goalie that has played as many playoff games as him, with that low of a SV%... MAF has played in 168 Playoff games, posting a .911 sv% and 2.57 GAA.
He's got 92 wins, which is tied for 3rd all time (behind Roy's incredible 151, Brodeur's 113, and Fuhr's 92 done in 150 games).
The 168 playoff games played is 3rd all time. Behind only Brodeur (205) and Roy (247)... Roy's playoff sv% was .918 and Brodeurs was .919. Roy, Brodeur and MAF all played in 17 NHL "playoff" seasons. MAF will add one more if he plays in the playoffs next season.
4th on the list is Ed Belfour. He played 161 playoff games. With a .920 sv% and 2.17 GAA.
Then we get into guys like Grant Fuhr, Mike Vernon and Andy Moog. All sitting below .900 (.898, .896, and .890 respectively) and 2.92, 2.68, and 3.04 respectively in GAA.
Looking through the stats, there aren't that many who can do it over a long period of time in the playoffs. Guys will catch lightning in a bottle for a season, maybe 2, but not much more than that. Tukka Rask was a fantastic playoff goalie - .925 and 2.22. But only won a single cup. Losing in 2019 to an average Jordan Binnington (.914 / 2.46 that playoff season) while posting a .934 and 2.02. That's pretty interesting...
Vasilevskiy right there with Rask, but still active. 105 GP, .923 sv% and 2.31 GAA. He has a chance to rival the best.
Igor Shesterkin has had a pretty great start to his playoff career. 22Gp, .929 sv%, 2.54GAA.
Dominik Hasek was unreal in the playoffs - .925 and 2.02 in 119 GP. That's unreal, to post that, over that period of time, when the stakes are the highest.
Calbot has a career .921 and 2.51 in the playoffs. Good thing we left him on the bench last year...
I am curious who you think the good playoff goalies are, other than some of the greatest of all time. Most of the Stanley cup winning goalies are putting up pretty pedestrian numbers of .914 - 2.50 GAA, etc. They maybe had one really good run, and maybe one really bad run.
I will give you that MAF has been a marginable playoff goalie. He had one really good run, his first year with Vegas, but other than that not much.
In terms of active goalies, we have Shesterkin and Vasilevskiy who have put of great postseason numbers over more than one playoff season. Everyone else, average for the most part. Who would you look to put in the net for a playoff series right now other than those 2? This isn't a rhetorical question or something, or I am trying to 'get you' or something. Honestly curious. You're way harder on goalies than I am, and I am too soft on them. I was just really surprised at how pedestrian most goalies numbers were in the playoffs, including several recent cup winners like Binnington mentioned above. Ben Bishop and Jake Allen have some solid post-season numbers -- where are they now? I believe both are back-ups. Martin Jones and Varlamov have respectable playoff numbers, but I don't know that I'd want them on my team going forward. Jones was AHL quality for a few seasons.
Hellebuyck seems solid in the playoffs generally. Quick and Price are both solid, but Carey Price could be done and Quick is at the very end of his career.
Anyone else only has a handful of playoff games, or is posting something in the range of a .904sv%...
Here's the quickest and easiest way I can convey how bad of a playoff goalie that I believe MAF is-The funny part of all of this is the fact that Fleury is a terrible playoff goaltenderFleury gets a lot of praise for his playoff heroics, but it sure didn't feel like it tonight. He looked terrible on the breakaway that pretty much took them out of the game. Sometimes when a goalie makes a big save to keep his team in it, guys really pick it up.
One of my issues with him is that he's physically small and doesn't occupy enough of the net. When he's screened and can't see the puck, it helps to just get big. He can't do that.
I had to look it up, and was a little surprised. It is hard to find an NHL goalie that has played as many playoff games as him, with that low of a SV%... MAF has played in 168 Playoff games, posting a .911 sv% and 2.57 GAA.
He's got 92 wins, which is tied for 3rd all time (behind Roy's incredible 151, Brodeur's 113, and Fuhr's 92 done in 150 games).
The 168 playoff games played is 3rd all time. Behind only Brodeur (205) and Roy (247)... Roy's playoff sv% was .918 and Brodeurs was .919. Roy, Brodeur and MAF all played in 17 NHL "playoff" seasons. MAF will add one more if he plays in the playoffs next season.
4th on the list is Ed Belfour. He played 161 playoff games. With a .920 sv% and 2.17 GAA.
Then we get into guys like Grant Fuhr, Mike Vernon and Andy Moog. All sitting below .900 (.898, .896, and .890 respectively) and 2.92, 2.68, and 3.04 respectively in GAA.
Looking through the stats, there aren't that many who can do it over a long period of time in the playoffs. Guys will catch lightning in a bottle for a season, maybe 2, but not much more than that. Tukka Rask was a fantastic playoff goalie - .925 and 2.22. But only won a single cup. Losing in 2019 to an average Jordan Binnington (.914 / 2.46 that playoff season) while posting a .934 and 2.02. That's pretty interesting...
Vasilevskiy right there with Rask, but still active. 105 GP, .923 sv% and 2.31 GAA. He has a chance to rival the best.
Igor Shesterkin has had a pretty great start to his playoff career. 22Gp, .929 sv%, 2.54GAA.
Dominik Hasek was unreal in the playoffs - .925 and 2.02 in 119 GP. That's unreal, to post that, over that period of time, when the stakes are the highest.
Calbot has a career .921 and 2.51 in the playoffs. Good thing we left him on the bench last year...
I am curious who you think the good playoff goalies are, other than some of the greatest of all time. Most of the Stanley cup winning goalies are putting up pretty pedestrian numbers of .914 - 2.50 GAA, etc. They maybe had one really good run, and maybe one really bad run.
I will give you that MAF has been a marginable playoff goalie. He had one really good run, his first year with Vegas, but other than that not much.
In terms of active goalies, we have Shesterkin and Vasilevskiy who have put of great postseason numbers over more than one playoff season. Everyone else, average for the most part. Who would you look to put in the net for a playoff series right now other than those 2? This isn't a rhetorical question or something, or I am trying to 'get you' or something. Honestly curious. You're way harder on goalies than I am, and I am too soft on them. I was just really surprised at how pedestrian most goalies numbers were in the playoffs, including several recent cup winners like Binnington mentioned above. Ben Bishop and Jake Allen have some solid post-season numbers -- where are they now? I believe both are back-ups. Martin Jones and Varlamov have respectable playoff numbers, but I don't know that I'd want them on my team going forward. Jones was AHL quality for a few seasons.
Hellebuyck seems solid in the playoffs generally. Quick and Price are both solid, but Carey Price could be done and Quick is at the very end of his career.
Anyone else only has a handful of playoff games, or is posting something in the range of a .904sv%...
Career GSAA in the playoffs (goals saved above average)
MAF - -27.3 yes that's negative 27.3. The worst number I have been able to find of any goaltender in NHL history
Patrick Roy - 107.7
Martin Brodeur - 35.8
Dominik Hasek - 49.7
Grant Fuhr - 3.9 (although it's 21.7 for his time in Edmonton)
Ed Belfour - 52.8
Andrei Vasilevskiy - 20.4
Tuukka Rask - 27.1
Cam Talbot - 4.9
What that stat is saying is that over the course of his career in the playoffs, Flower has given up 27.3 more goals than a replacement level goaltender would've been expected to allow.
https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/fleurma01.html
To add to the Fleury smear campaign, here's the numbers for games 1 and 2 so far.
Interesting to note that the numbers say that the Wild actually played better for Fleury than they did for Gustavsson.
Gus gave up 2 goals with an expected goals allowed of 4.63
Fleury gave up a touchdown with an expected goals allowed of 3.17
I’ll be there tomorrow night, ready to be hurt again.
I think a small team meeting is occurring down the street right now. Zucc driveway has some Audi and Porsches in it that don’t belong to him
Here's the quickest and easiest way I can convey how bad of a playoff goalie that I believe MAF is-
Career GSAA in the playoffs (goals saved above average)
MAF - -27.3 yes that's negative 27.3. The worst number I have been able to find of any goaltender in NHL history
Patrick Roy - 107.7
Martin Brodeur - 35.8
Dominik Hasek - 49.7
Grant Fuhr - 3.9 (although it's 21.7 for his time in Edmonton)
Ed Belfour - 52.8
Andrei Vasilevskiy - 20.4
Tuukka Rask - 27.1
Cam Talbot - 4.9
What that stat is saying is that over the course of his career in the playoffs, Flower has given up 27.3 more goals than a replacement level goaltender would've been expected to allow.
"I cannot hear what Jeremy is saying because my Stanley Cup rings are plugging me ears." - Patrick Roy. The guy just had another gear in the playoffs most years. (yes, there were some bad moments; the statue of liberty, but holy cow were there a lot of great ones). Pretty sure he is the only 3-time Conn Smythe winner.
One thing, I believe the GSAA is a comparison directly against league average sv%, which is not replacement level (in my mind at least). I'd be shocked if you could sign a FA goalie to a league minimum contract and get league average SV%, and I think replacement level has been defined as a "freely available player" who would likely sign for at or near league minimum. Maybe I am misunderstanding, but I believe that is how that works. -27.3 to league average is bad, don't get me wrong, but -27.3 to replacement level would be... catastrophic?
So who's in between the pipes tonight? Kevin Gorg??
So who's in between the pipes tonight? Kevin Gorg??
I heard they wanted to give Hunter Jones a game, get him some experience.
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To add to the Fleury smear campaign, here's the numbers for games 1 and 2 so far.
Interesting to note that the numbers say that the Wild actually played better for Fleury than they did for Gustavsson.
Gus gave up 2 goals with an expected goals allowed of 4.63
Fleury gave up a touchdown with an expected goals allowed of 3.17
I believe the shots on goal were 15-17 in favor of Dallas when the Wild crawled back to make it 3-4 and were playing "horrible."
Its amazing what poor goaltending can do to everyone's perspective. You could break down every scoring chance and find flaws and blame to go around for the 5 skaters, just like a goal. Of course life moves on quickly after a null scoring chance.
Now imagine being critiqued in the same manner after your goalie repeatedly allows in none scoring chances.
Wednesday reminded me of the Dubnyk/Stalock tandem at the end of Dubnyk's career. Almost worst in the league goaltending if not the worst at one point playing behind one of the best defensive teams. Yet hockey savant Russo and fans alike would bicker at how the team needed to be doing so much more. Honk.
There's some strange logic in Minnesota hockey that the goalie can never be blamed for anything. It seems to cover all ages and levels of hockey. It’s almost like the exact opposite of the logic used to critique quarterbacks.To add to the Fleury smear campaign, here's the numbers for games 1 and 2 so far.
Interesting to note that the numbers say that the Wild actually played better for Fleury than they did for Gustavsson.
Gus gave up 2 goals with an expected goals allowed of 4.63
Fleury gave up a touchdown with an expected goals allowed of 3.17
I believe the shots on goal were 15-17 in favor of Dallas when the Wild crawled back to make it 3-4 and were playing "horrible."
Its amazing what poor goaltending can do to everyone's perspective. You could break down every scoring chance and find flaws and blame to go around for the 5 skaters, just like a goal. Of course life moves on quickly after a null scoring chance.
Now imagine being critiqued in the same manner after your goalie repeatedly allows in none scoring chances.
Wednesday reminded me of the Dubnyk/Stalock tandem at the end of Dubnyk's career. Almost worst in the league goaltending if not the worst at one point playing behind one of the best defensive teams. Yet hockey savant Russo and fans alike would bicker at how the team needed to be doing so much more. Honk.
Russo might be the worst at it, mostly because he sees Fleury as a meal ticket. No, the Wild don't need to completely overhaul their entire defensive structure and scheme. They just need a goalie that will make the occasional save.
It is funny. We hear players so often say things like “He’s just so calm back there and it gives us confidence.” with Gus. But when we see Fleury back there flopping like a crappie on a dock in the sun, we figure “Oh, that’s just Fleury haha! Work around it, everyone!”
It is funny. We hear players so often say things like “He’s just so calm back there and it gives us confidence.” with Gus. But when we see Fleury back there flopping like a crappie on a dock in the sun, we figure “Oh, that’s just Fleury haha! Work around it, everyone!”
This conjured up live Steve Martin for me. Possibly the cat handcuffs bit. ?
Anybody catch Russo with Barreiro yesterday? A friend just said that Russo implied that playoff games were apart of Fleury's contract negotiations, and Guerin was a big part of the game 2 decision.
I'm 50% factual and 50% sarcastic. When you get to know me, you will know which is which.
Anybody catch Russo with Barreiro yesterday? A friend just said that Russo implied that playoff games were apart of Fleury's contract negotiations, and Guerin was a big part of the game 2 decision.
I listened to it. I think Russo was implying that last year part of the reason Fleury played all the way through game 5 was because of the contract negotiations. Definitely an interesting conversation.
Russo also brought up how Motzko must be kicking himself for not starting Faber or the top line in Overtime. That one still hurts, ugh.
Anybody catch Russo with Barreiro yesterday? A friend just said that Russo implied that playoff games were apart of Fleury's contract negotiations, and Guerin was a big part of the game 2 decision.
I listened to it. I think Russo was implying that last year part of the reason Fleury played all the way through game 5 was because of the contract negotiations. Definitely an interesting conversation.
Russo also brought up how Motzko must be kicking himself for not starting Faber or the top line in Overtime. That one still hurts, ugh.
Yep. Good synopsis. Russo said it was LAST year and no mention that it involved this year. Also, I think Guerin has always been involved in the decision making. Both Russo and Dan agreed that the goalie choice was mind boggling.
I'm 50% factual and 50% sarcastic. When you get to know me, you will know which is which.
Jamie Benn is a member of the Robbie Earl driving club.
I'm 50% factual and 50% sarcastic. When you get to know me, you will know which is which.
There's been some spicy back and forth between the coaches about diving. Evason needs to worry less about that and ensure the Wild step up their mental fortitude for this game. Sadly a 930 am start means I won't be watching. Ugh
Just listened to it. Have to give Russo credit on this one. He buried Fleury and Evason pretty hard.Anybody catch Russo with Barreiro yesterday? A friend just said that Russo implied that playoff games were apart of Fleury's contract negotiations, and Guerin was a big part of the game 2 decision.
I listened to it. I think Russo was implying that last year part of the reason Fleury played all the way through game 5 was because of the contract negotiations. Definitely an interesting conversation.
Russo also brought up how Motzko must be kicking himself for not starting Faber or the top line in Overtime. That one still hurts, ugh.
Yep. Good synopsis. Russo said it was LAST year and no mention that it involved this year. Also, I think Guerin has always been involved in the decision making. Both Russo and Dan agreed that the goalie choice was mind boggling.
Lineup tonight. Fluery in goal... Just kidding. Gus the Bus in net
I'm 50% factual and 50% sarcastic. When you get to know me, you will know which is which.
Eks night appears done after 19 seconds on the ice.
Hard to imagine a scenario where the gloves don't come off at some point tonight