indicator
Loading...

Blogs

swissman24's blog

hasek

Tuesday April 15, 2008 @ 02:24 PM EDT

omg, did a world class veteran goalie really let those last 2 goals in? i like him but i dont know if he has “it” anymore. the last 2 goals scored by the preds looked like routine stops for dom, even though the backchecking was a little lax. chelios changing as they were breaking out didnt really help but i hope to see ozzy start in game 4.he’s a little more stable to say the least.

Rating: 2.00 (1 Vote)
  • Currently 2.00/5 Stars.
Tags:
(none)

3 Comments - 1 Reply

  • Viewing 1-3 of 3
  • ‹ Prev Next ›
  • Page ‹‹ 1 ›› of 1
  • f1kshj_thumb
    TeamCarrier
    Apr 15 2008 23:23
    Hasek

    did not lose the game for us last night. Defensive break downs and not playing for 60 min. is why the Wings lost. Ozzy had a great year but I don’t think he is better than Hasek and I don’t think he could do any better than what Dom is doing right now.


    reply [view replies(1)]
  • xcdbv7_thumb
    RedM3
    Apr 15 2008 14:47
    Wouldn't mind ozzy

    but I sure don’t blame Arnott’s goal on Dom. That was a laser. Dom was way out to cut the angle and there wasn’t much to shoot at. The Wings didn’t have the jump late in the game needed to finish them off. The tying goal came off of a bad decision by Stuart. The Wings need to play like they did in game 2, midway 2nd to the end.


    reply [view replies(0)]
  • b841br_thumb
    SYXXD
    Apr 15 2008 14:33
    Hasek over it

    I do not feel happy with Hasek starting, I never really have. I thought Osgood did very well in the season and should have been playing in the post season. I know that this is probably Hasek’s last playoff which is why he is starting, but why wouldn’t they want to win and have a keeper who can make those easy saves look easy. I do not think the Wings can go the distance with Hasek honestly. This is all coming from a Wings fan as well. I think they should start Osgood next game to throw in something different and have the Preds guessing again.


    reply [view replies(0)]