Boston

"scamper" <hank.drew.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192382349.563513.94020@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 14, 4:56 am, tack <thetac....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:

...Stuff deleted

> Agreed. That's how I want to see the sharks play (just a bit more in
> the net).
>
> I was really getting sick of that "ting" sound by the end of the
> night.
>

If Friday night's game proved anything - it's that the Sharks can't hit the
broad side of a barn. I saw a graphic during the game with something about
25 missed shots at the net!!!

They finished with only 27 shots on goal. If they get half of those shots
on net maybe another one goes in and they play overtime instead of losing.

DW - get someone who can shoot the puck from the point stat!

-MM
 >> Stay informed about: Boston 

On Oct 14, 4:56 am, tack <thetac....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ugghhh....the Sharks must have done something to anger the hockey
> gods.
>
> Usually, it's easy to explain Sharks' losses in terms of their own
> mistakes or lack of effort, but that didn't apply last night. The
> Sharks moved the puck very well, dominated play almost entirely, hit
> the posts so many times that they'll need repainting, and, finally,
> after tying it up, were deprived of the game by a fluke bounce off a
> referee.
>
> It's one they'll have to forget as quickly as possible because
> replaying that one in their heads won't make anybody happy.

Did I see Carle getting beat more than a few times on break aways? Was
he out of position, without help, or just slower?
 >> Stay informed about: Boston 

On Oct 15, 2:48 pm, Happy Phantom <beck... DeleteThis @my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Oct 14, 4:56 am, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ugghhh....the Sharks must have done something to anger the hockey
> > gods.
>
> > Usually, it's easy to explain Sharks' losses in terms of their own
> > mistakes or lack of effort, but that didn't apply last night. The
> > Sharks moved the puck very well, dominated play almost entirely, hit
> > the posts so many times that they'll need repainting, and, finally,
> > after tying it up, were deprived of the game by a fluke bounce off a
> > referee.
>
> > It's one they'll have to forget as quickly as possible because
> > replaying that one in their heads won't make anybody happy.
>
> Did I see Carle getting beat more than a few times on break aways? Was
> he out of position, without help, or just slower?

Carle may have seemed to get beaten, and he did once or twice, but,
mostly, his play has been more evident because he's the guy out there
handling the puck the most and making things happen. I don't worry
about him.

Vlasic didn't have one of his better games, and while his play has
still be satisfactory, he's had a small touch of the sophomore slump,
or whatever, its seems to me. he just hasn't seemed to have his head
in the game, quite as much as the was the brilliance he displayed
routinely last year. He has whacked the puck up the boards mindlessly
a few times this year, when, last year, he would have exercised
greater care and thought. (In fact, that play off the referee that
cost the game, didn't look like a good idea, even absent the ref's
intervention.)

Maybe, he just feels more secure, and isn't, in fact, trying quite as
hard. In any case, his level of play has room for return to last
year's brilliance.

As a general statement, I'd say that the Sharks, as a whole, are far
to eager to give up possession of the puck.
 >> Stay informed about: Boston