GAME DAY: St. Louis @ Ottawa, 7:30PM, Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Big Ev wrote:

Riprock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:Konopka is also a useless POS. Every fight he has, the other team scores right after. Exaggerating but it seems to happen a lot.

We get that you simply just don't like some players, but how can you possibly think that Konopka doing his job, trying to energize HIS team and HIS home crowd has ANYTHING to do with the Blues scoring? That's ridiculous dude.

Well it NEVER works, so you tell me. You don't need to start a fight to energize your team when they already had a lot of energy. The energy sank after his fight, actually.

This team doesn't need a fighter like that IMO.

I guess you are choosing to ignore the Boston game. Bruins are up 1-0 and Knopka and then Neil drop the gloves. Sens play better and score late, then two more in the 2nd to take a 3-1 lead. Maybe you are forgetting because they ended up losing that game, but those two fights *definitely* energized them and turned the game around. And even though the Bruins ended up winning, they won by *1* goal on a fluke shot from center ice, and they did not try to take liberties with the Sens the rest of the way.

it's illogical to fight when your team had all the energy to being with. Period. Crombeen did his job and sucked Konopka into a fight.

Riprock wrote:

wprager wrote:

Riprock wrote:
Anyways, yeah I know I am being a smart Donkey

Glad we can all agree

Sorry, but I am just annoyed (with certain people) that just can't accept other people's views, and make them feel insignificant when they offer a realistic view of what they see. It's frustrating that when I say things like the Sens aren't a good team, they need a lot of improvements, won't make playoffs, etc that it is somehow concluded that I know nothing about hockey.

But it's not just certain people not accepting other people's views! You know my history with Rooney is not all truffles and strawberries, but his point was the Sens were 6th or 5th after half a season, and now they've lost 6. You are *completely* discounting what they had done in 40+ games and then pointing at the last 6 (or even the last 10) and saying, essentially, "See, see? That's what I expected them to do, and they are doing it, so I must be right." When they were 1 point out of 1st in the Division I certainly don't recall you coming here and saying "That's not what they are, they will lose."

Riprock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

Riprock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:Konopka is also a useless POS. Every fight he has, the other team scores right after. Exaggerating but it seems to happen a lot.

We get that you simply just don't like some players, but how can you possibly think that Konopka doing his job, trying to energize HIS team and HIS home crowd has ANYTHING to do with the Blues scoring? That's ridiculous dude.

Well it NEVER works, so you tell me. You don't need to start a fight to energize your team when they already had a lot of energy. The energy sank after his fight, actually.

This team doesn't need a fighter like that IMO.

First of all, the game was only a few minutes old. Fights usually set the tone of the game, early. There's nothing wrong with what he did. You just don't like him (and Carkner). So of course you would find faults with anything they do. PRetty sure the Sens are cool with it though, which is what matters. Energy probably sank after the deflating goal(s).

Yeah, it's not like that goal was scored because the Blues were generating a lot of pressure against a demoralized or indifferent team. They scored a lucky goal against a team that in a very fragile state of mind right now.

Big Ev wrote:it's illogical to fight when your team had all the energy to being with. Period. Crombeen did his job and sucked Konopka into a fight.

So phrase it differently. Konopka shouldn't be fighting because the Sens were getting good chances and the fight would break up the flow. Not that every time he fights the other team scores.

O, Captain! My Captain!

wprager wrote:

Riprock wrote:

wprager wrote:

Riprock wrote:
Anyways, yeah I know I am being a smart Donkey

Glad we can all agree

Sorry, but I am just annoyed (with certain people) that just can't accept other people's views, and make them feel insignificant when they offer a realistic view of what they see. It's frustrating that when I say things like the Sens aren't a good team, they need a lot of improvements, won't make playoffs, etc that it is somehow concluded that I know nothing about hockey.

But it's not just certain people not accepting other people's views! You know my history with Rooney is not all truffles and strawberries, but his point was the Sens were 6th or 5th after half a season, and now they've lost 6. You are *completely* discounting what they had done in 40+ games and then pointing at the last 6 (or even the last 10) and saying, essentially, "See, see? That's what I expected them to do, and they are doing it, so I must be right." When they were 1 point out of 1st in the Division I certainly don't recall you coming here and saying "That's not what they are, they will lose."

Hey, it's no different than when people say the Leafs suck and will miss the playoffs. Then the Leafs go on a tear to start the season, or they, similarly to the Sens, find themselves in playoff position, then they end up missing it. But people still say, regardless and in spite of how they played until then, that they will still miss, just wait and see.

There's two halves to a season, and a team can do well one half and poorly the other. Many teams find themselves in or out of a playoff spot one half and then it changes the 2nd half.

It's no secret I didn't believe the Sens would be a playoff team. Don't think the Sens did either. I realize they outperformed and proved many people wrong, but to say that it's a guarantee that they keep it up is in no way any different that me saying they won't.

Their recent play is more of what I expected. So yeah, when I see that after one half, that they are reverting to what I expected, then of course I am inclined to believe that the first half was the exception.

3-1.

bah 3-1 now, btw whats on the ice behind the nets?

But, Dash, that's the point: you *didn't* say "Just wait, they will lose and miss" when they were doing well. Also, anti-Leaf bias among Sens fans can have a heck of a lot to do with some one saying "Leafs suck" and singing the Blue Team Elimination anthem.

For the record, I think it was 2-3 years ago I thought the Leafs would make the playoffs. They disappointed me that year (well, not really) and ever since then I've been reluctant to give them props early on. Still, when they got off to their hot start, let's just say that NEELY was *not* alone in saying they will cool off. Which they did.

Riprock wrote:

wprager wrote:

Riprock wrote:

wprager wrote:

Riprock wrote:
Anyways, yeah I know I am being a smart Donkey

Glad we can all agree

Sorry, but I am just annoyed (with certain people) that just can't accept other people's views, and make them feel insignificant when they offer a realistic view of what they see. It's frustrating that when I say things like the Sens aren't a good team, they need a lot of improvements, won't make playoffs, etc that it is somehow concluded that I know nothing about hockey.

But it's not just certain people not accepting other people's views! You know my history with Rooney is not all truffles and strawberries, but his point was the Sens were 6th or 5th after half a season, and now they've lost 6. You are *completely* discounting what they had done in 40+ games and then pointing at the last 6 (or even the last 10) and saying, essentially, "See, see? That's what I expected them to do, and they are doing it, so I must be right." When they were 1 point out of 1st in the Division I certainly don't recall you coming here and saying "That's not what they are, they will lose."

Hey, it's no different than when people say the Leafs suck and will miss the playoffs. Then the Leafs go on a tear to start the season, or they, similarly to the Sens, find themselves in playoff position, then they end up missing it. But people still say, regardless and in spite of how they played until then, that they will still miss, just wait and see.

There's two halves to a season, and a team can do well one half and poorly the other. Many teams find themselves in or out of a playoff spot one half and then it changes the 2nd half.

It's no secret I didn't believe the Sens would be a playoff team. Don't think the Sens did either. I realize they outperformed and proved many people wrong, but to say that it's a guarantee that they keep it up is in no way any different that me saying they won't.

Their recent play is more of what I expected. So yeah, when I see that after one half, that they are reverting to what I expected, then of course I am inclined to believe that the first half was the exception.

Except for the fact that the first half was over 13 games ago....

I never said hey would make the playoffs either, so I don't see the point.

I actually said that I didn't expect the Senators to make the playoffs when it was admitted they were "rebuilding" or whatever they called it. I said fans shouldn't be disappointed if the team doesn't make the playoffs when the team itself says "we are rebuilding (or whatever)". You said you would be (disappointed) and I shouldn't tell you to not be.

So when they played well, I admitted that I was pleasantly surprised. But I never said "playoffs, here we come".

It's also not an excuse to say that a bias for or against a team makes it acceptable to use the same argument for both teams but one is accepted and the other isn't.

If it's the argument you have a problem with, ok, but it can't be okay for one person to say that the Leafs will miss the playoffs despite being in a playoff spot after the first half, or vice versa.

Also, I think you have to look at consistency. Have the Sens lost this many games in a row this season?

Whatever, I am done with this argument.

Blues are 21 - 1 - 1 when leading in the 3rd.

Riprock wrote:I never said hey would make the playoffs either, so I don't see the point.

I actually said that I didn't expect the Senators to make the playoffs when it was admitted they were "rebuilding" or whatever they called it. I said fans shouldn't be disappointed if the team doesn't make the playoffs when the team itself says "we are rebuilding (or whatever)". You said you would be (disappointed) and I shouldn't tell you to not be.

So when they played well, I admitted that I was pleasantly surprised. But I never said "playoffs, here we come".

It's also not an excuse to say that a bias for or against a team makes it acceptable to use the same argument for both teams but one is accepted and the other isn't.

If it's the argument you have a problem with, ok, but it can't be okay for one person to say that the Leafs will miss the playoffs despite being in a playoff spot after the first half, or vice versa.

Also, I think you have to look at consistency. Have the Sens lost this many games in a row this season?

But you didn't come here, while they were doing well, and say "This is not the team they are, they are just overachieving; they will eventually come down and will miss the playoffs just like I expected."

It's a little hard to take what you're saying now, after a 6 game losing streak, when you kind didn't say much after 40+ games.

Riprock wrote:Whatever, I am done with this argument.

Wanna bet?

Caps up 4-0 on the Panthers with under a minute to go.

Flyers-Isles tied 0-0 in OT.

Flyers/Isles now in the shootout. Pens have come back to tie the Habs. Leafs tied 1-1 with Jets on Kessel's 30th.