General Hockey Talk - Injuries, signings, factoids + other news from around the league

TheAvatar wrote:Is that who that guy was? I gotta find the "funny" article about Redden

Yeah, Larry Brooks is the nemesis of Tortorella. There's a classic youtube clip of a post game scrum when Torts was coaching Tampa. They've clashed before...

[

wprager wrote:Wow, Lundqvist got pulled -- who the heck is M. Zaba?

Zaba-daba-doo!

wprager wrote:Wow, Lundqvist got pulled -- who the heck is M. Zaba?

Devils came back from 0-2 and won; Bruins only got as far as 9th, but tied in points with the Isles.

Lou's backup flavour of the year apparently.

hemlock wrote:

wprager wrote:Wow, Lundqvist got pulled -- who the heck is M. Zaba?

Devils came back from 0-2 and won; Bruins only got as far as 9th, but tied in points with the Isles.

Lou's backup flavour of the year apparently.

Sather you mean?

Sorry for changing the topic....can anyone recommend a good file sharing service? (ie other than Limewire?)

here's a random tidbit: The Hurricanes would have to go the equivalent of 27-5-0 or better to hit 91 points and likely make the playoffs. That hasn't stopped them from putting a beatdown on the Bruins---I'd say they shake off the losing streak soon...it can't get much worse than this, can it?

The Laffs, with 29 games remaining, would have to go something like 24-5 to hit 92 points. Man does that Kessel trade look worse by the day or what?

The Flames are horrendous. They can't score, they can't do anything. They're lucky to still be in a spot, does Sutter have the stones to make the BIG move needed?

We'll see...

Gohan wrote:here's a random tidbit: The Hurricanes would have to go the equivalent of 27-5-0 or better to hit 91 points and likely make the playoffs. That hasn't stopped them from putting a beatdown on the Bruins---I'd say they shake off the losing streak soon...it can't get much worse than this, can it?

The Laffs, with 29 games remaining, would have to go something like 24-5 to hit 92 points. Man does that Kessel trade look worse by the day or what?

Diddle, does it ever. The Bs get Fowler or Hall? No thanks.

Sens4thecup wrote:Sorry for changing the topic....can anyone recommend a good file sharing service? (ie other than Limewire?)

I only use bittorrent. Limewire and other stuff have too many fake files.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Gohan wrote:here's a random tidbit: The Hurricanes would have to go the equivalent of 27-5-0 or better to hit 91 points and likely make the playoffs. That hasn't stopped them from putting a beatdown on the Bruins---I'd say they shake off the losing streak soon...it can't get much worse than this, can it?

The Laffs, with 29 games remaining, would have to go something like 24-5 to hit 92 points. Man does that Kessel trade look worse by the day or what?

Diddle, does it ever. The Bs get Fowler or Hall? No thanks.

I don't think there's any doubt anymore that they will get one of the big 3. And if the trend continues, they might get Gormley as well. Fack.

From TSN:

The Flames have lost six in a row and are winless in their last seven

Can somebody explain to me WTF is that supposed to mean?

marakh wrote:From TSN:

The Flames have lost six in a row and are winless in their last seven

Can somebody explain to me WTF is that supposed to mean?

They have lost 6 in a row in regulation, and a 7th game in OT/SO (where they gained a point). Subtle distinction.

rooneypoo wrote:

marakh wrote:From TSN:

The Flames have lost six in a row and are winless in their last seven

Can somebody explain to me WTF is that supposed to mean?

They have lost 6 in a row in regulation, and a 7th game in OT/SO (where they gained a point). Subtle distinction.

Because there are no ties though, wouldn't that just mean they lost their last 7? I makes no sense to say lost 6, but winless in last 7 unless they tied (which they didn't)

tsn should really be saying "lost six in a row and pointless in their last seven" shouldn't they?

hemlock wrote:tsn should really be saying "lost six in a row and pointless in their last seven" shouldn't they?

More like, lost 7 in a row, and pointless in their last 6.

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:tsn should really be saying "lost six in a row and pointless in their last seven" shouldn't they?

More like, lost 7 in a row, and pointless in their last 6.

Umm, yeah that's what I meant.

Now would be the time for a Phaneuf/Spezza trade, but I'm not 100% on that at all.

Phaneuf has a lot of intanglibles Spezza will never have and is very raw defensivly. I would take Phaneuf 100 times over Spezza at this point but I am not all that hot on Phanuef. A lot more potential then Spezza though plus a winners mentality, he's just been given too much too young, a lot like Spezza was.