GAME DAY: Buffalo Sabres @ Ottawa Senators - 7:30pm ET - Wed. Dec. 16th, 2009 - Sens win 2-0!

shabbs wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Okay, someone answer me this before I go to bed.

Ruutu's hit was not dirty in the least. That's how I saw it. Am I wrong?

I'd say it was a bit of a cheap shot, but certainly not worthy of a 5-min trip to the sin bin. Boarding for sure. It looks like Kaleta's head did hit the glass and that's what had the most impact.

Check the replay again. Shoulder to the head, Kaleta's head jerks *backward*, away from the glass. If it touched the glass it was much later. It *almost* looks like he was selling the hit; the head snapped back in almost the opposite direction -- at least in one camera angle -- to the direction of the hit. If it was an elbow then you could say he lifted the elbow just as the hit was delivered (snapping the head back) but it would be pretty hard to shrug the shoulder quickly enough to make the head snap back when Ruutu is traveling forward relative to the head.

Can you give yourself a concussion snapping your head back to sell a hit? If it's physiologically possible I certainly wouldn't put it past Kaleta to do that.

wprager wrote:

shabbs wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Okay, someone answer me this before I go to bed.

Ruutu's hit was not dirty in the least. That's how I saw it. Am I wrong?

I'd say it was a bit of a cheap shot, but certainly not worthy of a 5-min trip to the sin bin. Boarding for sure. It looks like Kaleta's head did hit the glass and that's what had the most impact.

Check the replay again. Shoulder to the head, Kaleta's head jerks *backward*, away from the glass. If it touched the glass it was much later. It *almost* looks like he was selling the hit; the head snapped back in almost the opposite direction -- at least in one camera angle -- to the direction of the hit. If it was an elbow then you could say he lifted the elbow just as the hit was delivered (snapping the head back) but it would be pretty hard to shrug the shoulder quickly enough to make the head snap back when Ruutu is traveling forward relative to the head.

Can you give yourself a concussion snapping your head back to sell a hit? If it's physiologically possible I certainly wouldn't put it past Kaleta to do that.

The replays I saw showed it hitting the glass, Ruutu even said it did himself... maybe his embellishing gave him a concussion... heh heh.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:Elliott is improving, he is obviously a hard worker because although his rebound control is still an issue, it is much better than last year. He made some great saves last night, especially that huge blocker save when the score was 1-0. Miller was sensational, but also the beneficiary of at least two posts where he was clearly beaten.

what the hell? The rebound control freaks the Dung out of me. I don't remember him doing that as much last year. Am I wrong?

That blocker save was a TSN turning point probably. Had that gone in, it could have been a whole different game. Kudos to him on that one for sure.

He made a few of those big game saving saves, that one was especially huge.

That's true too, that Kelly missed shot was ridiculous. wide open net, waited him out perfectly. I thought it was Kovalev the whole time. Those numbers mess me up sometimes.

Not the first time Kelly does that. Makes a beautiful steal and misses a wide open net after a nice move. Hands of Stone.

He does many things well. Sound fundamentals and above average speed and skating. Closing the deal isn't his thing. Trade him for The Wizard, please.

I thought it was Kovalev, so I was stunned that he missed. Had I known it was Kelly I would have taken a seat. I'm not saying that to be mean, it's just the way it is with him. Hands of stone is right. It's too bad really, because he is a really good hockey player.

strachattack wrote:Campoli-Hennessey-Shannon



That's a crazy 4th line. Will they play more than 5mins?

Wow... was I ever wrong. They had some strong and effective shifts last night and almost scored. Call me pleasantly surprised. I wouldn't want to ice this line on a permanent basis but they weren't bad. In fact, I was shocked to see how well Campoli played considering he hasn't played forward since he was 5. It was an added bonus for the 4 on 4 portion of the game.

Campoli's days on "D" may be numbered... Heh heh.

wprager wrote:

shabbs wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Okay, someone answer me this before I go to bed.

Ruutu's hit was not dirty in the least. That's how I saw it. Am I wrong?

I'd say it was a bit of a cheap shot, but certainly not worthy of a 5-min trip to the sin bin. Boarding for sure. It looks like Kaleta's head did hit the glass and that's what had the most impact.

Check the replay again. Shoulder to the head, Kaleta's head jerks *backward*, away from the glass. If it touched the glass it was much later. It *almost* looks like he was selling the hit; the head snapped back in almost the opposite direction -- at least in one camera angle -- to the direction of the hit. If it was an elbow then you could say he lifted the elbow just as the hit was delivered (snapping the head back) but it would be pretty hard to shrug the shoulder quickly enough to make the head snap back when Ruutu is traveling forward relative to the head.

Can you give yourself a concussion snapping your head back to sell a hit? If it's physiologically possible I certainly wouldn't put it past Kaleta to do that.

I agree completely. I also think he hurt himself on that hit, it had nothing to do with Ruutu. Is he even actually hurt though? I think Ruff may have been embarrassed by the whole thing and told him to stay in the room. No way he can come back out after that. Nothing will come of this, Campbell will look at it and say it was a blown call, plain and simple.

SensGirl11 wrote:
I thought it was Kovalev, so I was stunned that he missed. Had I known it was Kelly I would have taken a seat. I'm not saying that to be mean, it's just the way it is with him. Hands of stone is right. It's too bad really, because he is a really good hockey player.

That's ok. According to Gord Wilson the first goal was all because Kelly won the faceoff.

shabbs wrote:Campoli's days on "D" may be numbered... Heh heh.

Man, you're right. What a great game by him yesterday. He was making Spezza-esque passes. Very impressed. He was buzzing like a bee.

shabbs wrote:Campoli's days on "D" may be numbered... Heh heh.

Schubert II

From Garrioch:

Chris Kelly deserves credit on the winner by Alex Picard for winning the faceoff in the Buffalo zone

Scan the same article and see if you can find the words "Jesse" or "Winchester" anywhere, who won 65 percent of his faceoffs by the way... What a tool.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Ottawa/2009/12/16/12186576.html

SeawaySensFan wrote:From Garrioch:

Chris Kelly deserves credit on the winner by Alex Picard for winning the faceoff in the Buffalo zone

Scan the same article and see if you can find the words "Jesse" or "Winchester" anywhere, who won 65 percent of his faceoffs by the way... What a tool.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Ottawa/2009/12/16/12186576.html

That is so dumb. Wow. I wonder about them sometimes, well, all the time really. I have a hard time reading anything by them and taking them seriously anymore. Apparently he was at 80 some percent up until the 3rd. He's by far and away our best faceoff guy.

strachattack wrote:

shabbs wrote:Campoli's days on "D" may be numbered... Heh heh.

Schubert II

Indeed.

SensGirl11 wrote:That is so dumb. Wow. I wonder about them sometimes, well, all the time really. I have a hard time reading anything by them and taking them seriously anymore. Apparently he was at 80 some percent up until the 3rd. He's by far and away our best faceoff guy.

They have their favorites and they'll trash or ignore the good play of other guys to elevate the apples of their eye. Dung on Corvo was a good example since it was all part of trying to make that piece of Dung Redden look good.

How about Winnie or Pooh? Are they in the article?

Cap'n Clutch wrote:How about Winnie or Pooh? Are they in the article?

That is for you, esteemed GMHer, to find out for yourself.

I'm sure ShabbsConnected has a chart to answer any other questions you might have.

From the Ottawa Sun in actual post game article - Favourites indeed.

Jesse Winchester did not at all look out of place subbing for Spezza on the first line, between Milan Michalek and Daniel Alfredsson.

“Just because we’re missing some key guys we don’t want to try and step up and do too much, either. Just stick to our good team game,” said Fisher. “Winny stepped in on the top line and played really well. (Josh) Hennessy and Kelly’s line played really solid. That’s exactly what we need. Doesn’t matter how we do it. It wasn’t pretty at times, or entertaining, but we got the job done."

"I tried to play the same way," said Winchester. "Alf just told me to do what I do, play strong, play physically in the corners. I think we had a pretty good game all around. We didn't score but we generated lots of chances.

"It's always fun to play in those types of games. Moving forward, we're just going to have to rely on the system like we did tonight."

http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/2009/12/16/12182466.html

Cap'n Clutch wrote:From the Ottawa Sun in actual post game article - Favourites indeed.

Jesse Winchester did not at all look out of place subbing for Spezza on the first line, between Milan Michalek and Daniel Alfredsson.

“Just because we’re missing some key guys we don’t want to try and step up and do too much, either. Just stick to our good team game,” said Fisher. “Winny stepped in on the top line and played really well. (Josh) Hennessy and Kelly’s line played really solid. That’s exactly what we need. Doesn’t matter how we do it. It wasn’t pretty at times, or entertaining, but we got the job done."

"I tried to play the same way," said Winchester. "Alf just told me to do what I do, play strong, play physically in the corners. I think we had a pretty good game all around. We didn't score but we generated lots of chances.

"It's always fun to play in those types of games. Moving forward, we're just going to have to rely on the system like we did tonight."

[url=http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/2009/12/16/12182466.html

http://www.ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/2009/12/16/12182466.html[/quote[/url]]

That was from CheapShots Brennan. Garrioch was part of the panel that was Dung on Winchester pre-game and Wing Dang Doodle about the fact that Hands of Stone Kelly wasn't on the top line. So I stand by my statement about Garrioch and his favouritism.

strachattack wrote:

shabbs wrote:Campoli's days on "D" may be numbered... Heh heh.

Schubert II

Better from what I saw. He's not as physical, but still throws his body aroudn a bit.