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

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.

SensGirl11 wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If Kaleta hit Ruutu in the same manner and knocked him out of the game, I would think a 5 minute penalty would be in order. It was dirty, borderline but dirty. You can't suggest that Ruutu wasn't going for the melon. It was pretty clear.

What was dirty? How was it dirty? I don't understand. Did we see the same hit? There's no chance I would call it a 5 minute penalty even if it did happen to Ruutu. I wouldn't call anything. Too bad the guy got hurt on a clean check. Boo hoo.

Ruttu's shoulder connected directly with Kaleta's head. It was dirty, maybe not a penalty under the rules, but still dirty. I have no problems with the call, as long as that is called both ways.

I may have missed something, but from the live hit I saw and the replay on our terribly sad screen at SBP. It looked okay to me.

Here it is again. Doesn't look bad from the first angle... wait until the third replay. It was a nasty shot. Worthy of a penalty...

[

Wonder if they might try Regin on that top line?

SeawaySensFan wrote:

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.

You gave the impression that the Ottawa Sun writers had their favourites. Also that article you posted was about Spezza's injury and the fact that their wouldn't be a trade made to bring in re-enforcements and only touched on the game. Do you think Winchester was the best thing about that game last night? If so I could see him mentioning his name in the one paragraph or what ever it was that he wrote on the game in that case.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:You gave the impression that the Ottawa Sun writers had their favourites. Also that article you posted was about Spezza's injury and the fact that their wouldn't be a trade made to bring in re-enforcements and only touched on the game. Do you think Winchester was the best thing about that game last night? If so I could see him mentioning his name in the one paragraph or what ever it was that he wrote on the game in that case.

Did I? Sorry I gave that impression.

Was he the best thing in that game? No.

Would it have been fair to mention that he played a good game after spending considerable time on the pre-game show criticizing the decision to have play on that line? Probably.

Is it interesting that Garrioch's beef was not having Chris Kelly on that line in the first place and he followed it up by crediting Kelly with the game winner in his article? I thought so.

Do people post their opinions here? I thought so.

Will we always agree? Probably not.

Is it still OK for me to have an opinion? I wonder.

MurderOnIce wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If Kaleta hit Ruutu in the same manner and knocked him out of the game, I would think a 5 minute penalty would be in order. It was dirty, borderline but dirty. You can't suggest that Ruutu wasn't going for the melon. It was pretty clear.

What was dirty? How was it dirty? I don't understand. Did we see the same hit? There's no chance I would call it a 5 minute penalty even if it did happen to Ruutu. I wouldn't call anything. Too bad the guy got hurt on a clean check. Boo hoo.

Ruttu's shoulder connected directly with Kaleta's head. It was dirty, maybe not a penalty under the rules, but still dirty. I have no problems with the call, as long as that is called both ways.

I may have missed something, but from the live hit I saw and the replay on our terribly sad screen at SBP. It looked okay to me.

Here it is again. Doesn't look bad from the first angle... wait until the third replay. It was a nasty shot. Worthy of a penalty...

[

I don't know, I still don't think it looks bad. Maybe 2 minutes...still not convinced.

SensGirl11 wrote:I don't know, I still don't think it looks bad. Maybe 2 minutes...still not convinced.

I'm even more convinced now that Ruutu didn't even touch Kaleta's head.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:You gave the impression that the Ottawa Sun writers had their favourites. Also that article you posted was about Spezza's injury and the fact that their wouldn't be a trade made to bring in re-enforcements and only touched on the game. Do you think Winchester was the best thing about that game last night? If so I could see him mentioning his name in the one paragraph or what ever it was that he wrote on the game in that case.

Did I? Sorry I gave that impression.

Was he the best thing in that game? No.

Would it have been fair to mention that he played a good game after spending considerable time on the pre-game show criticizing the decision to have play on that line? Probably.

Is it interesting that Garrioch's beef was not having Chris Kelly on that line in the first place and he followed it up by crediting Kelly with the game winner in his article? I thought so.

Do people post their opinions here? I thought so.

Will we always agree? Probably not.

Is it still OK for me to have an opinion? I wonder.

Maybe Kelly deserved credit on the game winner because he got the assist on it and actually got credit?

We all have our opinions and are welcome to voice them. I was just pointing out that the article you sited only had a small part to do with the game so It's possible not to have mentioned Winchester in there and not have mean anything. Just my opinion.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Maybe Kelly deserved credit on the game winner because he got the assist on it and actually got credit?

We all have our opinions and are welcome to voice them. I was just pointing out that the article you sited only had a small part to do with the game so It's possible not to have mentioned Winchester in there and not have mean anything. Just my opinion.

Right. Which means he's essentially claiming Kelly should have got the goal. And if you heard Driftwood and Garrioch on the pre-game you might be more inclined to share my opinion. It was that bad.

I'm gonna need my Delissio picture soon.

shabbs wrote:

Gohan wrote:

shabbs wrote:My only question... why was Ruutu out there with less than 2 min to go? Really...

you do know he kills penalties, right?

Yes, but after taking a few boneheaded ones in a very tight game... I question that...

Ditto - especially when the refs were watching him very closely. I wasn't impressed with Clouston's choice of having him out there at that point at all.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:Maybe Kelly deserved credit on the game winner because he got the assist on it and actually got credit?

We all have our opinions and are welcome to voice them. I was just pointing out that the article you sited only had a small part to do with the game so It's possible not to have mentioned Winchester in there and not have mean anything. Just my opinion.

Right. Which means he's essentially claiming Kelly should have got the goal. And if you heard Driftwood and Garrioch on the pre-game you might be more inclined to share my opinion. It was that bad.

I'm gonna need my Delissio picture soon.

I didn't get to listen to much of it on the drive to the game because my daughter decided she needed her classical music. 15 month olds tend to have that kind of control over the in car entertainment.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:

I didn't get to listen to much of it on the drive to the game because my daughter decided she needed her classical music. 15 month olds tend to have that kind of control over the in car entertainment.

She'll like Baby Einstein videos then.

strachattack wrote:
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.

Yeah man, more people should be impressed with Campoli's efforts last night. He looked dangerous as a forward.

strachattack wrote:

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

Schubert II

But with some offensive and creativity.

SpezDispenser wrote:

strachattack wrote:
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.

Yeah man, more people should be impressed with Campoli's efforts last night. He looked dangerous as a forward.

He was credited with 3 hits. I'm thinking it may have been more since he got 2 on one shift. Reminded me of Donovan, actually.

MurderOnIce wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

SensGirl11 wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:If Kaleta hit Ruutu in the same manner and knocked him out of the game, I would think a 5 minute penalty would be in order. It was dirty, borderline but dirty. You can't suggest that Ruutu wasn't going for the melon. It was pretty clear.

What was dirty? How was it dirty? I don't understand. Did we see the same hit? There's no chance I would call it a 5 minute penalty even if it did happen to Ruutu. I wouldn't call anything. Too bad the guy got hurt on a clean check. Boo hoo.

Ruttu's shoulder connected directly with Kaleta's head. It was dirty, maybe not a penalty under the rules, but still dirty. I have no problems with the call, as long as that is called both ways.

I may have missed something, but from the live hit I saw and the replay on our terribly sad screen at SBP. It looked okay to me.

Here it is again. Doesn't look bad from the first angle... wait until the third replay. It was a nasty shot. Worthy of a penalty...

[

Murder....now I'm 100% convinced that that wasn't even a penalty, let alone a 5 minute. Weird how we all see it differently. Oh well...the only guy who matters is Campbell I guess.