Home
Publications
spader wrote:rooneypoo wrote:wprager wrote:tim1_2 wrote:spader wrote:wprager wrote:spader wrote:tim1_2 wrote:spader wrote:wprager wrote:Mrazek has not been good down the stretch. Blowing lots of leads.
I agree, but I'd use stronger language. He was garbage the last 10 or 15 games. I'm confident his SV% was sub 900 for the last chunk of the season. Howard was the right call.
Yeah, they said this on the broadcast...I didn't know, so I guess Howard was the right call. I might not have picked Detroit to win the series knowing this!
I picked Detroit based on the decimated Tampa roster.
Decimated? Drouin is playing to prove his haters wrong (and to impress his next GM). Stamkos wasn't having a dominant kind of season anyway, so for a few games Drouin replacing him is not that much of a drop.
Did you see the hits Drouin laid on a few of the Wings? Larkin at least once, Abdelkader (but I think the entire Lighting team was standing in line to hit Abdelkader), Datsyuk, etc. He received a few elbows in the back of the head that really should have been called (Zetterberg, Larkin, more). I'm changing my opinion of Drouin. He's come to play.
Stamkos is probably the second best goal scorer in the league. Down year or not, he's not easily replaced. Losing Stralman is a big hit as well.
Yeah, I'm not sure what Walter is smoking, but TB is without their best player in Stamkos, and they're also without a top pairing defenceman. That said, Bishop had a Vezina-caliber season, so he might prove to be the great equalizer.
Not smoking anything [Sentence Fragment]. I picked TB to beat Detroit, [comma splice] you chose otherwise. I didn't expect Drouin to play as well as he has[,] [two independent clauses] but it's just one game in. While they [pronoun agreement error: earlier sentences use "TB", for Tampa Bay, a singular noun] won't get to the Finals without Stamkos, I figured they could get past a weak Detroit team. Mrazek was their #1 for most of the season (meaning Howard wasn't as good) but fell apart at the end. Clear advantage to TB [Sentence fragment]. Stamkos may be a better player by far, but he hasn't been great this season[,] [again, two independent clauses] and I figured the difference between what Stamkos was (this season) and what Drouin could do over a short period of time wasn't a huge gap [grammatically fine, but just an insane statement]. Larkin was one of Detroit's best players[,] [yet again, two independent clauses] but he's got no playoffs experience. Datsyuk said he's going back to Russia (or thinking very much about it) and that's got to be a distraction, especially for the younger players. And both he and Zetterberg are not close to the level they used to be.
We'll see how this plays out. You picked the Wings in 7 and they have to lose 3 games to do that. So you're 1/3 of the way there. I picked TB to win in 7 and now they [pronoun agreement error, again] are 1/4 of the way there. I guess you're a little further ahead than I am, right?
I *just* couldn't *resist* the temptation.
The only problem is that you can combine two independent clauses if you use a comma and a coordinating conjunction, which he did a couple of times.
Correct. This is a comma splice.I picked TB to beat Detroit, [comma splice] you chose otherwise.
There's nothing wrong with this one. Coordinating conjunctions + a comma can resolve a run-on sentence.I didn't expect Drouin to play as well as he has[,] [two independent clauses] but it's just one game in.
For proper grammar, that sentence construction requires the comma + the coordinating conjunction to separate out the two independent clauses. In the originals, there were no commas.
The clear solution is that you stop correcting people's grammar. That's how we get back to hockey. You need to stop throwing stones from your glass house. 
Yeah, that penalty was weak at the end but Wings have to kill those off if they want to move on. Back to Tampa with a 3-1 lead. Are they done or will there be a game 6?
