Ducks Gameday: Keeping the seat warm for Sleek
by jamestobrien on Mar 6, 2009 12:43 PM PST
Email
PrintAnaheim Ducks (31-28-6 for 68 points with 17 games left; 10 games at home with 7 games remaining on the road; 5-4-1 in last 10)
vs.
Dallas Stars (30-26-8 for 68 points with 18 games left; 8 games at home and 10 on the road; 3-6-1 in last 10)
7:00 PM PT
The other Stars guys at SBN: Defending Big D
Rarely does a team choke away a game the way the Dallas Stars did last night. It was a slightly bizarre game throughout, but you could genuinely feel the game slip away when Marty Turco comically hacked away at the Handzus that rocks the cradle.
The Stars were fighting through a 4 on 3 at that time and adding another penalty put quite the burden on the Stars' 4-2 lead over the Kings. Three goals later and the Stars were one point poorer.
At this point in the season, it is plainly obvious that nothing (except maybe penalty minutes) will come easy for the Ducks or the Stars. After the jump, we take an in-depth look at this gigantic Pacific division game.
The ("Probable") Goaltenders
You know it's a bad game when Mike Heika writes the "Get rid of Turco?" post on Dallas Stars blog.
Is there any other way to look at this game other than a joust for one of those playoff spots? It's pretty hard to imagine both of these teams sticking around the right end of the bubble.
The Ducks start a five-game homestand against the Stars in which every game is against a Western Conference playoff contender. Anaheim has to hope that their homestand is more successful than the Stars 0-fer homestand.
First game after the deadline
The Duckies will have to manage without quite a few role players tonight. Kent "Husky" Huskins, Steve Montador, Brendan Morrison and ... what's his name are no longer wearing the bland Anaheim duds.
Oddly enough, Travis Moen was shipped out of Anaheim so the eye gouge heard round the Pacific will not be avenged. Perhaps the Stars' listless loss to the Pittsburgh Penguins during Otter's one-game suspension will be enough?
Revenge?
It's easy to underplay the Ducks' revenge angle since the teams play about 20,000 times per season, but it is quite plausible that people will look back to this game as a pivotal point in both team's seasons. So, it begs the question: will the Ducks avenge their first-round defeat last season by c-blocking the Stars from making the playoffs?
Righting a wrong vs. Fatigue
The table's set for the Ducks. The Stars, as we mentioned, just came off a heart breaking loss to the Kings and will be playing a back-to-back.
Of course, the most recent "flop" resulted in the Stars power-slamming the Toronto Maple Leafs with a jaw dropping 10-goal output.
Which team will show up today? I guess that's a question both Stars and Ducks fans find themselves asking more than they would hope this season.
Prediction: Ducks 4, Stars 3. Hat-trick by Morrison, GWG by the ghost of Sammy Pahlsson and Turco decapitates Corey Perry.
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
A gameday post for a ducks game… not by Sleek?
C’mon, RK, give us a good, old-fashioned Surprise, Cockfags! post. Complete with Corey Perry etch-a-sketch magic.
Fuck you, Denis Gauthier. You deserved that 5-game suspension.
James
What’s with all of the Frat Boy references of late? Are you attempting to make peace with your inner-Bromosexual side, or just really craving a 80oz. beerbong-a-palooza, brah?
Just leave Heidi Androl alone!
Dodger
Good question, DBB.
For some reason, my friends have just been dropping a lot of “brah” and “broseph” into conversation as a derisive term for “you.” And typically/tragically, real-life conversations often have their way of slipping into my blogging.
(Because I’m a hack)
Just bustin’ your balls a bit, JTB. Keep up the good writing here, and I hope you enjoy watching the game tonight.
Just leave Heidi Androl alone!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Mar 6, 2009 5:43 PM PST up reply actions
Damn that picture’s funny. Nothing like the reminder of my soccer-playing days… no, that never happened to me.
Wouldn’t it have been better if Zinedine Zidane did that the Materazzi (sp?), instead of head-butting him?
Fuck you, Denis Gauthier. You deserved that 5-game suspension.
It’s amazing what a google search for "Bustin Balls: will turn up, KY.
Just leave Heidi Androl alone!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Mar 6, 2009 8:20 PM PST up reply actions
Awful, awful
62% in the faceoff circle, more than double their shots on goal, but somehow we looked extremely inefficient, at least in comparison to their scoring on 1/5 of their shots.
the new “Wiz Kid” notches a goal, Cotton Gin an assist. Bobby Ryan keeps turning heads. And yet we still find ways to lose.
That 3rd Dallas goal was atrocious – from the faceoff win turnover to the goal, just complete unpreparedness on the Ducks part.
I blame passing – in the last part of the 3rd period, the passing game looked terrible.
Fuck.
People who save up for a rainy day are like milk. And milk goes good with cookies, so you should have those people over for cookies.
Fuck.
So more of the same, despite the new blood? Well, at least we’re not dragging Pahlsson down any more.
http://www.battleofcali.com/
I wrote a big long post explaining the 3rd Dallas goal and how much it sucked, but my browser crashed so here’s the video recap if you haven’t seen it already.
Right after the Wisniewski (?) goal at around 2:30 in the clip, is the faceoff I’m talking about. Just brutal.
People who save up for a rainy day are like milk. And milk goes good with cookies, so you should have those people over for cookies.
Hey y’all, I found out the whole Bobby Ryan jersey switch thing. Apparently, the Ducks have this thing with their good young prospects. When they first come into the league, the Ducks give those players a high number. Then, when they get their feet wet (no pun on an actual duck getting into the water) and they feel they’re able to hold their own in the league, the Ducks give them a low number.
Getzlaf: 51→15
Perry: 61→10
Penner: 76→17
Carter: 52→20
Ryan: 54→9
SK, you were right about the whole “rookies don’t get low numbers” thing from a couple days ago, which I’ve noticed with the Kings. Doughty (if memory serves right) wore #88 in camp, although Matt Ellis wore that number before being picked up by BUF on waivers. Simmonds wore #57, even though we had already traded Visnovsky and #17 was vacant. Not to mention the fact that in baseball spring training, you have guys up in the 70s, 80s, and 90s, just because all the other numbers are already taken.
But now I know the actual reason behind it, at least in the Ducks’ case.
And now, I’ve got an interesting thought… if all of y’all had the choice, which number would you select for yourself if you selected to play for your favorite sports team (exclude NFL, since the numbers you’re allowed to wear are determined by your position… RBs are always in the 20s, WRs are usually in the 80s, and such and such)?
Fuck you, Denis Gauthier. You deserved that 5-game suspension.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
* Thanks, Kevin Lowe!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Pacific Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
San Jose
|
54 | 31 | 17 | 6 | 68 |
|
Los Angeles
|
57 | 27 | 19 | 11 | 65 |
|
Phoenix
|
57 | 27 | 21 | 9 | 63 |
|
Dallas
|
56 | 28 | 25 | 3 | 59 |
|
Anaheim
|
56 | 23 | 24 | 9 | 55 |
(updated 2.15.2012 at 5:59 AM PST)
5 years old and counting!
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Puck Previews: Ducks’ road trip continues; Sens, Panthers in battle of most surprising teams
- Watch the weirdest goal of the year, courtesy of ECHL ref’s rulebook gaffe (VIDEO)
- Jeremy Roenick’s OK with Blackhawks trading Patrick Kane for goalie upgrade
- Puck Headlines: Rick Nash chatter; Jagr turns 40; Ovechkin too much of a rock star?
- NHL Trade Deadline Dream Scenarios: Whom do you want to go where?
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
