Ginger is another one that shouldn’t be used. VERY upsetting to some.

Also, dude, can you really not tell I was joking? Look at the accompanying post. I specifically crowbarred all of their words in that they were fighting about
- Hesh_

Point taken. I was thinking of Ginger from Gilligans Island though

Ginger is another one that shouldn’t be used. VERY upsetting to some.

Also, dude, can you really not tell I was joking? Look at the accompanying post. I specifically crowbarred all of their words in that they were fighting about
- Hesh_

so are you a daywalker?

Usually. Certainly most days. However, I took a little time off, so I haven’t been around. When I go away for a bit, I try to do that from my phone, as well.

I still keep in touch with people, but I do my best to cut down on time with my nose in the screen.
- Hesh_

Ok, well, I was gonna post about some of my fave Philly food secrets sometime soon.

You participated the last time we chatted about food, so I was wondering if you were gonna be around to read it.

Moscow on the Potomac. Yep, I can't wait.
- Gogol

better than China on the Potomac which is what the Dems give

I know exactly what you were having too much of!




- PT21[img][/img]

Nope, wrong as usual. Rum

So we are all done with the hockey talk then today?

So we are all done with the hockey talk then today?
- Peter Richards

jvr and ghost for johnny hockey?

So we are all done with the hockey talk then today?
- Peter Richards

No, no, no. I am outta here.*

*With the usual warning to the 8e+@8ds that I will be back.

So we are all done with the hockey talk then today?
- Peter Richards

Scot Laughton to minny.....

The speculation part is correct, and there is little doubt Giroux is/was a very good player, but I suggest there is at least one alternative explanation to playoff woes than what you mention.

Giroux's most dramatic years in the playoffs (with a couple of explanations mentioned below) were when he played behind Richards and Briere. Since Richards/Carter left, he had that series against Pens in 2012, where virtually every game was a shootout and the Pens allowed our physical play to get to them. I consider that series to be a completely meaningless aberration.

After that, here are Giroux stats

2012 NJD: 4 games 3 points (1 G)

2014 Rangers: 7 games 6 points (2 G). However, 3 of those points came in game 2, when Simmer put on a tremendous performance (and I remember a special bank pass Giroux made where he hit Simmer in stride just in time to prevent an offsides). Other than that, he was not really a factor.

2016 Caps: 6 games, 1 point (0 goals)

2018: 6 games, 3 points (1G)

2020: 16 games, 8 points (1 G)

Even counting that game against the Rangers, he has 39 games, 5 goals, 21 points since the Pens series in 11-12.

I suggest this: Giroux is a very good player. But he is not a game breaker/dominant-player in playoff type situations, and we have expected him to be so because of falsely raised expectations.

Like other also very good forwards we have drafted this century (Wiiliams, Carter, Richards) he would do very well where he plays a second fiddle/supplementary role. Currently Couturier (4 goals in 37 games leaving out 2 hat-tricks against Pens) is not that player either - we don't have that kinda guy.

As such, I am sure that Giroux will have a fine regular season, but his playoff woes, in my opinion, are terminal, especially given the cast we have now, and their projected development, I do not think you will see the early Giroux in orange and black in the playoffs ever again. He will be at best respectable.
- PT21

At least you had that one shift where he was the best player in the world.

On a serious note, age is a female dog. He’s now a very good but not great player.

So we are all done with the hockey talk then today?
- Peter Richards

Ghost for McDavid

Retarded is still okay when referring to certain mechanical/electrical things, such as the timing of an engine

Buuutttt, Yknow. Not the same n such.

What’s crawled up the asses of you guys? Constantly at each other’s throat. Just let it got, for Christ’s sake
- Hesh_

The issue with PT21 is that he is a beaten man. It has been proven that he is not the superior elite that he claims to be and so badly wants to be. Now that he has been exposed, he has regressed back to acting like he's in the 6th grade and making poor taste comments about people's Mom's.

Ok, well, I was gonna post about some of my fave Philly food secrets sometime soon.

You participated the last time we chatted about food, so I was wondering if you were gonna be around to read it.
- PT21

We're on the edge of our seats with anticipation. Perfect for a hockey blog.

No, no, no. I am outta here.*

*With the usual warning to the 8e+@8ds that I will be back.
- PT21

Your hastily planned departure from Hockeybuzz is imminent.

jvr and ghost for johnny hockey?
- 2Real

Is interesting. But idk. Feel we are making out a little better so don’t know if Calgary would be.

I would do it though just for the cap space.

Is interesting. But idk. Feel we are making out a little better so don’t know if Calgary would be.

I would do it though just for the cap space.
- Peter Richards

Calgary will not make that trade. Now something like Farabee and Gostisbehere or Lindblom instead of Farabee. They might think about it.

what did i do?
- 2Real

what did i do?
- 2Real

Lol! Calm down, Puddin’. For once you’re an innocent bystander.

better than China on the Potomac which is what the Dems give
- 2Real

China is a nation, not a capital city of a nation, so it's an incorrect comparison. You should be better than this.

Lol! Calm down, Puddin’. For once you’re an innocent bystander.
- Hesh_

Is he, though?

I mean, he may be a bystander. But the innocent part should be up for vigorous debate.

You two imbeciles need to stop acting like idiots.

You’re better than this, you morons.
- Hesh_

Guaranteed ban for this

[quote=SMS4016]
I guess not. I call Bruce an idgot and More on and I get 3 day ban. This site blows

General hockey rule question that has bothered me and maybe I missed an update or change on it, or am just making things up. But I think I recall, correctly seemingly, that one of the rule changes after the 04-05 lockout was that any icing eligible play that was an intended pass between two teammates would not be called icing. IE...if it was deemed that it was in fact an intended pass even if the puck was not touched by the player for who the pass was intended icing would not be called. Hope people can understand the question. Cheers!

General hockey rule question that has bothered me and maybe I missed an update or change on it, or am just making things up. But I think I recall, correctly seemingly, that one of the rule changes after the 04-05 lockout was that any icing eligible play that was an intended pass between two teammates would not be called icing. IE...if it was deemed that it was in fact an intended pass even if the puck was not touched by the player for who the pass was intended icing would not be called. Hope people can understand the question. Cheers!
- Cootehill

That’s always been the rule. Pass is intended for teammate it’s not icing. Always has bothered me the way icing is called

Okay ladies to finish the week I’m gonna go some basketball for lock of the night. Take the under 212 in lakers/nuggets game. For those who need insight from the swami it’s game 1 and both teams will be feeling out each other and Denver playing relatively good d lately. Looking for a game around 97-93 or so which should leave plenty of room for the under without having to sweat it out. You’re welcome. 3-2-1 this week. #lovethebackdoorbetting102
- SMS4016

Well color me even for the week. 3-3-1 admittedly I don’t follow bb as much anymore maybe I was way off base on this pick.