Canucks at Oilers, G75/07-08

Stan Weir is not hung like a horse, horses are hung like Stan Weir.

Stan Weir is a modern Buford Pusser, with a few minor differences. The famous Tennessee lawman was born in Finger, Tennessee. Stan Weir was born in Middle Finger, Alberta.

Ladies and gentlemen, Stan Weir.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.

143 Responses to "Canucks at Oilers, G75/07-08"

  1. Cory Klein says:

    It is a glorious time in life when Lowetide brings out the power of Stan Weir. Go Oil!

  2. doritogrande says:

    I’m going to show my age quite prominently here, but…what’s a Stan Weir? And why does every member of the Oilogosphere have a raging hardon for him?

  3. dstaples says:

    Stan Weir hustled, he hustled, he hustled.

    When I think of hustling Oilers, I think of Weir, Todd Marchant, and a little WHA center called Bobby Russell.

    On the current team, I think of hustle and I think of Smid, Greene, Glencross.

    Some players hustle but they’re so smooth you don’t notice.

    You noticed with Stan Weir, legs churning, skates digging, elbows everywhere, the Oil’s own Eddie Shack.

    As much as Stan hustled, though, no one ever tried harder than Wayne Gretzky. I’ve never seen anyone else hustle like that, especially when he was in the offensive end, trying to win back the puck he or someone else had just turned over.

  4. Black Dog says:

    doritogrande – you just pegged yourself as a latecomer to the sphere, young man

    Stan was the driving force behind the Oilers’ run in ’06. LT would post before each playoff game. He started with various old Oilers – Weir was the first, Harrison was another iirc.

    It became clear that Stan had the magic – LT would post with titles like “Weir Not Going To Take It”

    Rode him all the way to Game 7.

  5. lonnieearl says:

    Why the hardon for Stan Weir? Because he’s the gawddamned Pied Piper:

  6. HBomb says:

    If the Oilers win tonight and Saturday, the bandwagon is going to be right fuckin’ full.

    That is all.

  7. HBomb says:

    And oh yeah, Matt Cooke asked for a trade to the east due to his fear of Stan Weir potentially returning to the Oilers lineup.

    Now you know the rest of the story.

  8. Cory Klein says:

    doritogrande – perhaps we are similar in age… I also had never heard of “a Stan Weir” before I stumbled upon this outpost of hockey heaven a couple years back.

    All I know is Stan Weir gave birth to Chuck Norris while in the penalty box for a fighting major.

  9. Alice says:

    dg, I made the same blunder Tues, mistook the Talisman for a mortal, in my ignorance I actually posted the Measure of the man too. Thankfully Dennis stepped up with a nice little gale to save the day, or my ass would have been on fire hereabouts.
    Btw, thanks for the text this time LT, well worth the wait.

    Hard to Quantify this, exactly, but I really Really hate the Canucks. Large. Worse than I did the Tim Hunter Flames. Maybe it’s the way they closed ranks around Bertuzzi and Crawford, I dunno. But I’d cheer for the ‘Canes, if it ever came to that. A win would take about 10% off the hate, a loss, on the other hand, it’ll grow by light-years. Squared.

  10. HBomb says:

    Mr. T pities himself because he is not Stan Weir.

    Fear the Weir!

  11. Alice says:

    Lonnie, thanks for the clip! You forget how hairy it was in those days, maybe That’s why they mandated the helmets, clean up the game. Lumley looks like nothing so much as Paul Stanley. Notice penalty was taken by #21, penalty shot by #21.

  12. Doogie says:

    In game-related news, $5 says there’s a fight in the first two minutes, and another $5 says it’s off the opening faceoff. (I should have checked the schedule before signing up for a raid tonight. I wonder if I can move a TV into my computer room?)

    Good luck trying to collect from me here in Calgary, mind you. ;)

  13. Bill Needle says:

    Stan Weir is almost a dead ringer for Levon Helm during The Band’s heyday.

  14. andy grabia says:

    Stan was the driving force behind the Oilers’ run in ’06.

    Excuse me, but Stan was A driving force behind the ’06 run. The Beard Mojo did it’s job, thank you very much. #%**@ Black Dog.

  15. Tweezer So Cold says:

    The mere mention of Stan Weir and Levon Helm in the SAME POST?

    It must be springtime.

  16. Tweezer So Cold says:

    Now I can’t get “Don’t Do It” out of my head.

    When did Stan Weir grow the facial hair, and earn one of the coolest nicknames ever?

    Tonight’s game. Will be. Fever Pitch.

    I hope Paul does the anthem.

  17. HBomb says:

    Stan Weir’s power source is the beard.

    He did not grow said facial hair. The beard grew Stan Weir.

  18. Oilman says:

    I heard Stan Weir had an affair with the Italian godess Venus – they named their lovechild Fernando

  19. Bruce says:

    Hard to Quantify this, exactly, but I really Really hate the Canucks. Large. Worse than I did the Tim Hunter Flames. Maybe it’s the way they closed ranks around Bertuzzi and Crawford, I dunno.

    I feel the same way, Alice, and I think for the same reason. That end-of-season game against the Oilers when the Canuck “fans” gave Bertuzzi a prolonged standing ovation for totally fucking up their team and its playoff chances remains one of the more inexplicable moments in sports. I was embarrassed to be a Canadian, let alone a hockey fan. That was revolting.

    Nowadays the Canucks have dumped Bertuzzi and Crawford, they have got rid of Jerkko Ruutu and Matt Kook and even Brian Burke has thankfully taken his ample hot air supply stateside from whence it came, but my hatred for them has hardly diminished. I’m sure it’s because they got the same asshole fans. When Oilers play out there I never hear “Let’s Go Canucks!” or “Rah rah home team” of any description (other than in Jim Hughson’s play-by-play), it’s just “Oilers Suck!” It’s pathetic. They must be beaten down. Far, far down.

  20. sacamano says:

    All I know is that Stan Weir had the original playoff beard because his facial hair cut the blades off his razor.

  21. buddy says:

    Stan is back, and he’s bringing it!

  22. Black Dog says:

    Grabia, seeing as your failure to keep your beard was the original spit in the eye of the hockey gods and the reason for the final result of ’06, I would be careful what you say, my friend.

    Plus, if I remember correctly, Stan Weir discovered the New World. He was out for a swim one day and decided to stretch it out.

  23. andy grabia says:

    Grabia, seeing as your failure to keep your beard was the original spit in the eye of the hockey gods and the reason for the final result of ’06, I would be careful what you say, my friend.

    We’ve already established that it was Sacamano’s shaving that did the deed in the Finals. I’m only responsible for the first two games against the Sharks. You know this. You are just trying to antagonize me. Don’t make me sock you, McLean. I’ve already had to send you home in a cab because you couldn’t hold your liquor.

  24. Black Dog says:

    If by saying “we’ve already established” you mean “I have trumpeted this story in order to deflect any blame from myself” then you are correct, sir.

    True or false? Were you not the first to shave your playoff beard during the 2006 playoffs, thus spitting in the eye of the hockey gods?

    All we’re looking for is the truth here Andy.

    If that’s your real name …

  25. jon k says:

    That really is a glorious beard.

    If I wasn’t so cowed by the magnificence of Weir I would have Beard Envy.

  26. grease trap says:

    Hard to see how the boys pull this one off tonight (did that sound gay?).

    I’ve got a sinking feeling the Canucks win this one.

  27. HBomb says:

    Stan Weir always played the tough minutes and kicked ass at it. Even as a rookie.

  28. gary b says:

    i envision a chance meeting between Stan Weir and another tough hombre, Rudy Ray Moore, (aka Dolomite). substances/fine ladies are no doubt enjoyed, and tough guy statements are exchanged:

    Dolomite: “I’m gonna rain pain, and hail hurt.”

    Weir: “I’m gonna bury Burrows, bust up Bieksa, and make a messuh Kes-LUH.”

    Dolomite: “I handcuffed lightning, and threw thunder’s ass in jail.”

    Weir: “Anytime we get a visit from those unks from the coast /
    i like to enjoy my Sedin twins chopped up on toast.”

  29. Bruce says:

    In 1979-80 Stan Weir played with two rookies*, Dave Lumley and Dave Hunter, on the second line of a team good enough to scrape into the playoffs. 16th of 21, but still quite an accomplishment. Weir, who played centre and therefore never lined up with Wayne, finished the season an extremely impressive 33-33-66 in 79 GP, posting a more-than-creditable +2 on an expansion** team. Only 3 of his goals were scored on the powerplay, where he was usually second unit (last 15 seconds, in other words). A couple were shorthanded, where he was first unit. And 28 were scored at even strength, in what I retrospectively would agree were tough minutes.

    Stan’s shooting percentage of 25.6% speaks to “career year”, but believe it or not he had two seasons in Toronto with Sh% of 21.1% and a remarkable 30.8%. That latter is small number statistics, “just” 12 goals on 39 shots in 30 GP, as the Leafs rather shockingly shuttled Stan to Tulsa during that season. This after 5+ seasons as a full-time NHLer, three as a California Seal, then two and a half in Toronto where he had always been a plus player in a supporting role (behind Sittler for starters). But he sure as fuck didn’t belong in the minors, a glance at his career record shows that. Stan was a proud man, so he jumped at the chance to be the last Leaf to flip a middle finger at Harold Ballard & Co. and jump to the WHA Oilers.

    Here he once again acquired a supporting role, given Gretzky’s arrival a month after Stan’s. He fit the role beautifully, recording a very solid 30-31-61 in that last WHA season before really turning it on after the merger***. For us in Edmonton the NHL was new, but for Stan it was a comeback, and in 1979-80 he delivered IN SPADES.

    Stan Weir was (is) indeed a proud man, and he showed it on the ice, where he played with dignity, desire, drive and downright professionalism. A dandy.

  30. James L. says:

    TSN says that Roli is getting the start tonight.


  31. Bruce says:

    Win and you’re in. It’s worked so far …

  32. Scarlett says:

    Maybe Roli will come back with a killer game (he was not sharp against Phoenix). Good news: we have a helleva backup in Garon sitting on the bench if Roli falters.

  33. Alice says:

    Can’t afford to give them the Bettman point anyhow, so having our shootout ace is moot. Perhaps that’s MacT’s real message keeping Roli in there: get it done in regulation, you’re not playing with the safety net.

  34. Dennis says:

    Stan Weir, Levon Helm and ’06 memories?

    A drunkard’s dream if I ever did see one.

  35. Cam says:

    Roloson better be possessed by the spirit of Stan Weir…

    The only thing Roli has going for him is that he’s proven himself to be a big game goalie numerous times in the past.

  36. Julian says:

    I said right on the blog back when EDM lost G4 of the finals that if they came back to win, I’d have WEIR 21 put on the back of my currently blank Oil sweater.

    I’m bringing that offer back to the hockey gods. If Weir gets them to the playoffs, I’ll have his name emblazoned on the back of my jersey.
    (Whenever I get back to Canada).

  37. heed says:

    i say roloson got the call (unless this is some sort of mind game) because he plays the puck a little better. maybe trying to avoid the creepy twins cycle all together? maybe mact just wants to see him shake his mask off to remind him of truly great times?

  38. Dennis says:

    It’s like the Oilers are punishing Garon for breaking down from a workload that’s pretty damn destructive in the first place.

    I was talking to Ty the other night and he said he doesn’t think MacT has a clue about goalies and he could be right. Salo rotted the head off the ’04 Oilers before he was dealt and now we’ve got a situation where the Oilers were asking for way too much work from Garon.

    Now, honestly, I’ve been calling for a rest for Garon for a long time now. Fuck, I didn’t think he looked great as far back as say seven or eight games ago and I was all for Roli getting a start or two. But, overall this season, Garon’s certainly been better and now he’s gotten just about a week off and he’s had success vs the Canucks before but MacT’s still rolling with Roli.

  39. dstaples says:

    Bruce, I remember that improbably run to the playoffs by those first year Oilers. This year reminds me of that somewhat.

    Was it not Lowetide the First who was the goalie for those Oilers, who really came through for us?

    It would be huge, huge, huge for this team to make it.

    P.S. I’m with Dennis on the goalie issue. Garon is rested, burning to return, to prove himself, and his rebound control will be needed when the Sedins are buzzing.

  40. Lord Bob says:

    The robot that is Dwayne Roloson seems to have only two settings: “eat your heart out 1999-vintage Dominik Hasek” and “someone get Ty Conklin”. If we get the first tonight, there’s no way we’re losing. If we get the second…

    Oh, why does this orange juice not have vodka in it?

  41. namflashback says:

    Oilers site says this:

    LINEUP UPDATE (12:21 PM): Both Dwayne Roloson and Mathieu Garon left the ice at the exact same time this morning, meaning we don’t know who will be starting in goal likely until the pre-game warm-up. For what it’s worth, Roloson came off first but he had Garon right behind him.

    Doesn’t sound like the Oilers web guys know.

  42. HBomb says:

    Roloson better be on a damn short leash tonight.

    As in if they’re down 2-0 early (even after the entire first period), you switch it off and go back to Garon.

    Either that or call Stan Weir in to play goal. He only doesn’t because it would be highly unentertaining if no one ever scored on him. He’s that good.

  43. Mr DeBakey says:

    Garon was run over by some goof in an ugly uniform
    just before he started sitting – minor injury?

  44. HBomb says:

    Doesn’t sound like the Oilers web guys know.

    Gamesmanship – fuck yeah. Guess we won’t know for sure until faceoff, but honestly, I’d still be shocked if they didn’t go back to Garon, given his success rate against the Canucks this season.

  45. pboy says:

    It was on TSN, saying that MacT was going with Roli tonight. I think it’s the wrong decision and that Garon needs to be back in tonight but I would love for Roli to prove me wrong.

    Dennis, I agree totally with what you said about Garon noticably needing a rest about 7 games ago. Now that he has had it, he should be back in the pipes tonight. Roloson was pretty weak against Phoenix and we only won cause the boys were channeling the ’83 Oilers. What are the odds of that happening twice in a row?

  46. grease trap says:

    The Optimist in me says:

    About the same odds as winning a shoot-out?

    The Realist says:

    We’re boned. Cheese it!

  47. Scarlett says:

    Roli will be on a short leash tonight, he has to be. This is the season baby!!!

  48. PDO says:

    All year we’ve talked about not having enough NHL players…

    …. have we seen Gagner, Cogliano, Nilsson, Grebeshkov, Gilbert, Brodziak and Stortini turn into NHL players over the past couple weeks?

    Just saying…

  49. kinger says:

    I put up a SopCast instructional post over on my blog for those that don’t have access to the game tonight.

  50. Bendelson says:


    I think I still have my ’06 beard.
    Never bail out.

    I heard after Stan retired, his beard continued to play in the minors for a few more seasons…

  51. Showerhead says:

    kinger, thank you! I will be able to catch tonight’s game on SNW but have always wanted the info in a convenient place.

  52. Shawn says:

    I’m coming to Edmonton on Saturday afternoon for my first ever hockey game in Edmonton and my first trip to the home of the Oilers.

    Please win and make that game worth something. That’d be great, thanks.

    (if any of you folks are gonna be there we should say hello)

  53. speeds says:

    It’s nice to have a game with big implications this late in the year – I wasn’t expecting that to be the case earlier in the year, and especially once Horcoff went down for the year.

    While I’m without question pulling for a big Oilers win in regulation tonight, I’m enjoying the anticipation for the game as well.

    It’ll be interesting to see who starts, myself I’d go with Garon but Roloson hasn’t been terrible the last 3 games by any stretch. I’m also wondering if, this close to the playoffs, MacT will put development completely to the back shelf. If he hasn’t already, I missed the SJ game and haven’t looked at shift charts etc either.

  54. doritogrande says:

    I think Alex Kovalev has channeled Stan Weir tonight. His spin-o-rama was pure Savard.

  55. Bruce says:

    I was talking to Ty the other night and he said he doesn’t think MacT has a clue about goalies and he could be right.

    Well, this is the dumbest call by MacT since last Sunday, when he started his geezer goaler back-to-back on the shortest turnaround of the season. Just 18 hours after Roli had faced the last of 40 shots in Phoenix, and one wonky plane/bus ride later, MacT came right back with the 38-year-old who had been rusting, er resting on the bench for six weeks since his previous start. Now he was going back to back?

    I thought it was a strange move, I figured a game for each goalie on the weekend no matter what, but guess what, I was wrong, MacT was right, and Roli was hotter’n a pistol. Ask me to name the goaltending thefts of the season for the Oilers and Roli’s 48-save performance in San Jose is right there with Garon’s save-for-save showdown with Luongo, in which the great BobbiLu was the one to finally falter in the third round of the shootout.

    So what do you do? My sense is MacT wants to ride a winning goalie, and right now that’s Roli. He has done it before, and that’s what they’re paying him for. I do agree it will be a pretty short leash, esp. given Garon’s success against Vancouver this season (see above).

    This is why they pay the coach the big bucks. He’s only right if we win.

  56. Tyler says:

    He’s only right if we win.

    Do you really believe this Bruce? You made a comment the other day about Lowe having a plan that I found a bit surprising too. I tend to think that MacT can be right and lose, wrong and win and that the Oilers can go on a run without Lowe necessarily having a plan.

  57. Lowetide says:

    I don’t know, guys. Roloson was huge against SJS and has won a few in a row plus he’s the guy they spent the money on in summer 2006.

    Garon has played well, no doubt. But you dance with the one that brung ya, and the last time the Oilers played in the dance it was with Roloson.

    I’m probably going to get killed by reality in the next hour but it’s a reasonable choice to my eye.

  58. doritogrande says:

    You know, we’re one slip away from Curtis Sanford down the stretch…I’m not saying, I’m just sayin’

  59. Kristopher Milligan says:

    Roli better be in the bernie parent zone tonight, or it might be nasty.

  60. doritogrande says:

    Oh, so it’s going to be one of those nights for Pitkanen. Great.

  61. Bruce says:

    It’s almost time for Oilers to engage mentally into this game. Icing on the powerplay? Frick.

  62. Dennis says:

    Oilers playing really tight and are flat-out panicky with their passes in the O zone. It’s weird but they’re making some damn fine passes out of their own zone — I’m thinking of first 78 and then 37 later on during the PK — but then it gets worst as the distance closes from them to Luongo.

  63. Bruce says:

    He’s only right if we win.

    Do you really believe this Bruce?

    No of course not. But it’s safe to say there’ll be a hell of a lot of second-guessing about the decision if we don’t win.

    MC: More on Lowe’s “plan” later. I’m, uh, watching the game. :)

  64. doritogrande says:

    Beauty hit by Smid turns into a penalty for the Canucks. I like it.

  65. Dennis says:

    Oilers playing really tight and are flat-out panicky with their passes in the O zone. It’s weird but they’re making some damn fine passes out of their own zone — I’m thinking of first 78 and then 37 later on during the PK — but then it gets worst as the distance closes from them to Luongo.

  66. doritogrande says:


    Uh, we heard you the first time. haha.

    I agree, both teams are feinting and dodging. We need some jabs and uppercuts soon.

  67. Dennis says:

    Oilers certainly recovered post first TV timeout and we’re carrying the period by frame’s end.

    78 has an extra hop in his step and nearly snuck one high on Luongo along with two more attempted shots. He’s looking to shoot every time now and of course he also nailed Bieksa as well. C’mon, MacT, kid’s been ready since he took down Hossa.

    Like 46 or not, he does a great job at shielding the puck.

    12 with a couple of beauty passes and a pretty quiet frame from 13. 25 dumbed his way into his penalty and then nearly made up for it by changing his angle on the PP and making sure his point shot got through for the waiting Penner and perhaps screened Luongo.

  68. Dennis says:

    Forgot to mention that 34 was in the mix all stanza long as well. And, obviously, 78 would’ve never seen the A this year if he played like he has the last couple of games.

  69. danny says:

    Nashville killed off a 2 minute 5on3 DET PPlay and scored immediately after. 3-2 DET, 3rd 17:00 left

  70. Bruce says:

    Watching Dustin Penner win faceoffs on the PP and then head for the front of the net reminds me of Tim Kerr.

    Anxious moments behind our blueline as usual, but Oil were carrying the play after awhile. Nice to see the Crosstiniaks draw two powerplays, too bad Penner couldn’t bury that rebound to make one of them count. Luongo looks sharp tonight.

  71. danny says:

    Well, as much as 77 has been doing his best Spaz imitation lately, he just 1 upped 44 there.

  72. danny says:

    NSH with the PPG. 3-3 3rd.

    Rain, meet pour.

  73. danny says:

    A bit premature, but nothing new there…

    4-3 DET 3rd.

  74. doritogrande says:

    Thanks Markus.

    Nice effort by Rowbear.

  75. doritogrande says:

    No way does Grebeshkov attempt that play even 20 games ago.

  76. HBomb says:

    I’m watching the alternate feed on SN Pacific because it’s in HD, and I am seriously considering driving down to the arena after the game and beating the living fuck out of Hughson and Garrett with a baseball bat. They’re already anticipating a GD shutout for Luongo, and we’re what, halfway through the 2nd?

    Add the injured guys in for both teams, and I like the Oilers team from the goalie out a LOT better than the Canucks. Now and for the forseeable future.

  77. danny says:

    This is the game where you should be able to measure Ales Hemsky.

    Will he continue to skate into dead ice and turn it over or will he change it up a bit, enough to make his freak abilities a bit less predictable.

    Either way, this is where he needs to make some plays. The Oilers may not win, be he damn well better be their best player.

  78. doritogrande says:

    Matt Greene has more shots in this sequence than I think he has all year long… “The Shooting Machine wearing #2″ as Ferraro calls it.

  79. doritogrande says:

    What the Fuck! Let Smid kill him!

  80. danny says:

    5-3 DET, 3 mins left, DET PP.

    Booker Danno.

  81. HBomb says:

    Fuckin’ Staios.

  82. danny says:

    Edmontons coverage against a cycle has been a lot better the past 20 games than anytime in almost 2 years, but if it lasts for anything longer than their comfort level they collapse to the front pretty quickly. Not a terrible thing but they need to maintain their aggression a bit more than they are.

    Luongo will be heaped with praise, but the Oilers aren’t making plays. They are taking what VAN are happy to give for the most part.

    Boy it would be nice to see someone other than 89/12 (*cough* 83) to start moving the puck and making plays.

  83. Bruce says:

    I’m watching the alternate feed on SN Pacific because it’s in HD,

    Where do you find that? Just on satellite?

    Mind you, I’ll take LD and Ferraro over the best picture in the world and those two fuckheads.

    Luongo is playing good, there’s no doubt. Dennis, you were wondering where Souray belongs, I’d say third pairing, playing where Greene is playing tonight. Those Crosstiniaks sure know how to cycle the puck, and throw the other guys off their defensive zone coverage while they’re at it. Too bad they haven’t got the big bomber on the blueline after all those feeds and with all that traffic.

    Two textbook shifts, then somehow we give up a 2-on-1 off an offensive zone faceoff afer all that pressure. Goddammit anyway.

    Dustin Penner was outstanding that period, saved a goal and was a bull on the puck.

  84. Dennis says:

    Well, Nsh already lost, Col Should lose and it’s the Avs we’re chasing anyway and we still have two HTH against them.

    Not sure how much difference Pettinger’s goal’s gonna make because you get the feeling we’re gonna be shutout no matter what.

    Hard to quibble with the way the Oilers have played in the last 35 min, though. And 24 got stuck in a hard spot; you either fish for the puck or you just say fuck it and take the interference call.

    And, yes, that was a great move by 37. He also made a couple of bad passes that harkened back to the early season but that’s a trade that looks like it’s gonna pay off for Lowe.

    Gonna have to get a PP goal to get back into this and given the way Luongo’s playing, it might have to come 5-on-3.

  85. HBomb says:

    Bruce: I’ve got NHL Centre ice, and the Vancouver feed is available on one of the HD channels tonight.

    I’m in Edmonton and have it on 298 Shaw. I somehow think you’re not local, however…

    And yes, Hughson and Garrett are fucktards, but in 1080i with a 120 Hz refresh rate, it’s slightly more tolerable.

  86. Bruce says:

    Thanks, Hbomb, I am local and on Shaw. I didn’t know about Channel 298 though. Too bad it wasn’t synched with the radio, I could listen to Rod.

    Hughson and (grrr…)Garrett have been fellating Luongo from the moment I changed … not sure how much of it I can take.

  87. Bruce says:

    Did anyone else notice Pisani get Weaver back last period for the hit from behind in the first? Not like Fernando, but that was no accident. He got the right guy, for sure.

  88. doritogrande says:


    What a move by Shannon.

  89. HBomb says:

    Charge that one to Matt Greene. WAY out of position.

    This game is over….time to goon it up.

  90. Bruce says:

    Tough night for the kids. That one’s on Sam, he had Pyatt and stopped to watch Shannon. OOOOPS. -3 for 13 and 89 now.

  91. Cam says:

    Goon it up time!

  92. danny says:

    i hate vancouver


  93. Bruce says:

    Charge that one to Matt Greene. WAY out of position.

    Hbomb, I’m not so sure. Greene did pinch, but at 0-2 the D has to take some chances. (Yeah, I know, it’s Matt Greene.) It’s not like Greene’s man stepped around him and made the play. The forwards have to pick up the point there, and that was Gagner who had Pyatt for a while, then fell asleep..

    One guy I don’t blame on that play, is Smid. That was a major league move.

  94. doritogrande says:

    Looks like Pitkanen knows it’s over and wants to play forward for the rest of the night. If he had Coffey’s finish then yeah, he’s worth the 4.5, but Paul Coffey he ain’t.

    Where oh where is Stan Weir?

  95. HBomb says:

    Canuck fans are still morons. No amount of wins can change that fact.

  96. HBomb says:

    What’s that, 3 goals on 20 shots on Roloson? Can’t really blame him on the first goal, but the second and third goals COULD have been had…..

    And with that, some fourth line forechecking leads to an Oiler goal. 9 minutes left, still some life in this corpse.

  97. Bruce says:

    See Weaver bail when Zack was bearing in on him? Here, have the puck. 3-1, and at the very least, it isn’t a fucking goddamned shutout.

  98. doritogrande says:

    In the words of Drowning Pool; Let the bodies hit the floor.

    Seems to work pretty well.

  99. Bruce says:

    Gilbert opens the scoring for both teams in the same game. Is that an NHL record?

  100. Quain says:

    Good lord, I love our fourth line.

  101. Bruce says:

    Wow, the Crosstiniaks are all over them. GlenX is a force of nature. Luongo was a lot more lucky than good on that nice backhand by Brodziak.

  102. doritogrande says:

    Shut le fuck up sil vous plait moiseur Burrows.

    Does the french help you understand that if you keep your yap-ass mouth going, someone’ll shut it for you once we score on the powerplay you caused?

  103. doritogrande says:

    fuck off.

  104. HBomb says:

    Garrett says Hemsky dived.

    Garrett is a retard.

    Total fucking bullshit, should have been a 5-on-3.

    Run Luongo and finish him.

  105. Lowetide says:

    Well that’s on Hemsky.

  106. danny says:

    Atta boy Ales… Atta boy…

    I knew youd do it…

  107. Bruce says:

    In the immortal words of Joe Schultz: Shit. Fuck. Shitfuck. Fuckshit.

  108. HBomb says:

    If it wasn’t a trip, it WAS a slash.

    And Roloson tonight was the wrong call. The last three have iffy at best.

  109. honkey says:

    Hemsky with the difference maker but not in a postive way.

  110. doritogrande says:

    Garon would have had that one.

  111. Bruce says:

    John Fucking Garrett: “You have to know when to take a dive. Vancouver has taken five penalties in a row.”

    I thought the days of the refs calling the game by the penalty count were over. Guess I was wrong. But man, do I ever fucking hate John Garrett. He is THE WORST. Thank the hockey gods SN assigned Ray Ferraro to Edmonton.

  112. Black Dog says:

    joe schultz

    very nice bruce

  113. danny says:

    LT: hes been serving that junk all night long. Part of me knows hes trying to play without legit linemates, but part of me questions if it even matters. That was as innevitable as a Canucks win.

  114. Bruce says:

    I had to change channels. Hughson and Garrett are sucking Luongo’s balls again. They’re terrible.

  115. Quain says:

    Even if the goals weren’t iffy it’s like Vancouver decided to score its goals in the way to best embarrass the goalie decision by scoring three of them on breakaway-ish plays. Garon probably stops all three and skates off thinking we just won a shootout.

  116. Black Dog says:

    staples – just was reading the earlier comments – I actually did a post on Bobby Russell last spring – he was a big star on my hometown junior team when I was a kid

  117. doritogrande says:

    Lets take some small victories from this game. I think Stoll just broke Ryan Kesler. Shoot for Luongo’s head next time please.

  118. Bruce says:

    The Crosstiniaks just drew their FOURTH powerplay of the game. They’re also +1.

    This has gone beyond just being a small little thing. These guys have been dominating for weeks.

    Only one problem, every time they force another powerplay MacT pulls those guys off and puts Hemsky and Stoll out there.

  119. Lowetide says:

    I’m a big time Hemsky fan but he’s been a problem at EVs for awhile now. Horcoff should solve that in the fall.

    As for this edition of the Oilers tonight’s gone but they still have a shot.

    It’s a game of giveaway right now.

  120. Cam says:

    I know this is going to seem hypocritical because I didn’t mention my dislike for the Roloson choice in the GDT, but the choice of Roli over Garon was a bad one.

    What I have mentioned is how well Garon has played against Vancouver and how Roli hasn’t been able to come up with a “big save” (with the exception of the SJ game) all year. The thing is that Garon has been able to bail out this young team on numerous occasions this year, and Roli hasn’t.

  121. danny says:

    Would CHI take Hemsky for Toews?

  122. Lowetide says:

    I don’t think there’s any real need to call out Hemsky, Danny. He’s playing injured and unable to get going at EVs with Stoll and Penner.

  123. HBomb says:

    Would CHI take Hemsky for Toews?

    Dumping on Hemsky and wanting to trade him right now doesn’t make sense.

    He’s trying to do too much himself because he’s stuck playing with guys like Stoll and Reasoner.

    On the bright side though….VERY nice game from Dustin Penner tonight, all things considered.

  124. danny says:

    Hemsky has been a barrel of monkeys, and by monkeys i mean blueline turnovers. I know its because hes trying to do too much, and that doesn;t work against an NHL defense…

    Does he have a bluecollar gear though? Because games like this is where 83 needs to make short passes and drive to the net, eventually you get one instead of turning the puck over and giving up more than you get.

    And the answer is no, CHI wouldnt dream of swapping 83 for Toews.

    I know I’m frustrated now, but just once you would love to see EDMs best play be exactly that in a must win game.

  125. Dennis says:

    So what if Hemsky did dive? We know he did but he was also helped by a Canuck’s stick. Put the two of them in the box and we still have a PP. I don’t understand why it wasn’t called like that.

    As for the rest, another good game by 78 and he’s doing just about everything right now. Not sure if anyone else caught this but just before his second shot, he was on the left side of the ice and threw a leading pass the width of the ice before motoring over there and taking the return pass to sift a shot on Luongo.

    Finally, I didn’t like the 3rd goal all that much but the fourth one sucked and isn’t it interesting how Linden kills us even though he’s 89? Same fucking reason why I hated Yzerman.

    I’m not being a flip-flopper here because I called it at the start but the Oilers outchanced the Dys in this one and you play this game over again and the worst we wind up is going to OT. MacT made the wrong call here and now I guess he’s even for having the foresight to play Roli on Sun night in SJ. Tues was pretty much a wash as both MacT and Roli got lucky that night.

  126. Bruce says:

    I know this is going to seem hypocritical because I didn’t mention my dislike for the Roloson choice in the GDT, but the choice of Roli over Garon was a bad one.

    Like I said, this is why they pay MacT the big bucks.

    Those last two from righthand shots to the blocker side might have been different for Garon. Pettinger’s shot would’ve beat pretty much anybody I think.

    Way too many odd-man rushes. Speaking of which …

    Pitkanen vs. Vancouver this year:

    4 GP, 0-0-0, -7

  127. Hemsky is a gangsta says:

    the oil have kept stealing points from games where they got outchanced, you knew this was coming

    avs lose tonight

  128. Dennis says:

    Bruce: Outside of taking that penalty in the first, there wasn’t much wrong with 25′s game tonight.

  129. Quain says:

    Hemsky is in a bad spot. He doesn’t really have the skill guys to make things happen and he’s not a Malkin who can turn a Reasoner and Stoll into a 100 point season.

    But he also isn’t a guy who is particularly capable or inclined to grind and create a bunch of no-event time, which is what we need as long as we can’t field linemates that make him a useful offensive weapon.

    Somewhere, in a room, Shawn Horcoff is shedding a single tear.

  130. Bruce says:

    Oilers out-Corsi Vancouver 67-44. Too bad three of the Canucks shots are on wide-open 2-on-1s.

    Canucks played a good road game, won it on the counter attack. And won it fair and square.

  131. Matt says:

    Charlie Simmer and John Garrett alternate as the colour guy on Sportsnet Flames broadcasts, Simmer is also the Flames PPV guy. Know how bad Simmer is? When the Sportsnet intro comes on and it’s *Garrett* sitting next to Roger Millions, a giant “Thank God!” wave of relief washes over me.

    Anyway, there’s better than Garrett, and he’s definitely pro-Canuck, but there are a LOT worse.

  132. Bruce says:

    Outside of taking that penalty in the first, there wasn’t much wrong with 25′s game tonight.

    Oh yeah,I forgot, -3 AND a bad penalty. 0 hits, 0 blocks, 0 takeaways. And pretty much 0 defence.

    As for offence, 0-0-0 kinda sums it up. We need guys who can raise their game for Vancouver, not just dissapear into the fog.

    Listen, I’m not saying Joni sucked tonight, but if he wants to be paid like a difference maker, he needs to make a difference. A positive difference.

  133. Dennis says:

    Well, Bruce, what is it you want from him?

    Look, I’m a 25 guy but not as much as I used to be. Though, I must admit, that has as much to do with his penchant for being hurt as it does with his on-ice impact.

    AFAIC, tonight was about the PP letting us down for the first in in a very long time, no luck at the offensive end in general and MacT making the wrong call in net. For anyone that remembers the goal 24 scored vs the BJ’s a few weeks back, you knew the luck would turn on us sooner or later. So, you play a game like tonight where 51 hits a post, 89 juuust about gets to the 13 rebound but not exactly, Pisani has about 34 chance to score but can’t find a handle and 37 sends Naslund closer to the SEL with a juke at the blueline and sends a low shot that would beat just about every other goalie save for one that was 7 feet tall.

    Tonight was about why the Canucks ever win a fucking game in the first place.

    On this particular evening, we needed a PP goal going in off someone’s ass or the goalie dragging us to at least OT. I’m not saying 25 doesn’t have some warts but I don’t think tonight’s the jumping off point for any big discussion on what kind of a difference he is or isn’t making.

    But, hey, maybe that’s just me.

  134. Bruce says:

    I’m a big time Hemsky fan but he’s been a problem at EVs for awhile now.

    LT: Hemsky is now -15 since the All-Star Break. Penner is -17 in the same period (22 games). Stoll, -9. And Horcoff’s value just keeps soaring through the roof.

    Tonight I though Ales battled hard through the usual slashes and traffic along the boards, but he didn’t create jack. Penner had one of his better games in awhile, but not that you can tell from the results. He did go 7-1 in the circle, while his linemate Stoll went 10-3.

    I’m pretty sure Stoll has 0 ESP since the break, he’s been stuck on 8 since forever. And he’s been with 27 and 83 for 15 or so games now. MacT just has to change it up somehow, just cuz that threesome clicks on the PP doesn’t mean they’re going to work at evens. Quite clearly, they don’t.

    I’m loathe to break up the kids, but if it were up to me I’d be tempted to give Cogliano a look with 27 and 83, try Pouliot with 12 and 89 and put Stoll down on the pluggers line with 19 and 34. That line wouldn’t score any less than 16-27-83 at evens, and might have more success at preventing the GA.

    I’m not saying 25 doesn’t have some warts but I don’t think tonight’s the jumping off point for any big discussion on what kind of a difference he is or isn’t making.

    Dennis: Agreed. He wasn’t the biggest of our problems tonight.
    But that kind of statistical line — zeroes and a big fat -7 — doesn’t cut it against anybody, and when it’s Vancouver, a huge divisional rival who we need to beat, it kinda stands out. I’m getting a little impatient for Joni to have a big game in a Big Game, is all.

  135. P says:

    dennis, this is a couple points back but 25 also put snet-w’s game breaker over Roloson’s left shoulder, so don’t look too closely at Joni’s non-negative gameplay. He did contribute. Only for the other team

  136. uni says:

    Well with the build up as it was, there was a good chance the game would be disappointing, glad I started drinking early tonight =(.

    That Linden shortie was a heartbreaker.

  137. Pat H says:

    I’ve been thinking, with the difficulty the 1st line is having (i.e. finding linemates for Hemsky), isn’t this precisely the kind of scenario where it would make sense to give Schremp a taste?

    I know, he’s not ready, his game isn’t well-rounded enough, he’s too slow, he doesn’t have a future on this team, we may or may not even be able to even call him up (injury call-ups only?), God/MacT has declared him anathema, etc. Nonetheless, while I’m a fan of both Reasoner and Stoll, it pains me to see either of those two guys on a line with Hemsky 5 on 5.

  138. dstaples says:

    Bruce, I love your suggestion about moving up Pouliot between Nilsson and Gagner and giving Cogs a shot on the top line, while moving Stoll down.

    Stoll played his best when he was in a checking role earlier this year.

    And Pouliot has played well enough to deserve a real shot on a top line. Very impressed with the kid the past few games.

  139. Bruce says:

    Pouliot has played well enough to deserve a real shot on a top line. Very impressed with the kid the past few games.

    David: No less an authority than Louise pegs Pouliot as having a high hockey IQ. Why not move him up a level? I agree 78 has been impressive in recent games. I’d like to see what he could do with higher-skilled linemates, and 12 and 89 are nothing if not highly-skilled.

    Whatever, that Black Hole Line needs some different chemistry, they’re getting killed at both ends of the ice. The idea of Reasoner with Hemsky leaves me just as cold as Stoll, whereas Cogs brings speed and creativity, as Horcoff once did. He could hardly make the unit any less cohesive than they are currently.

  140. Showerhead says:

    Dennis: I may be a very drunk Good Thursday student right now but I wasn’t when I saw the game. Your take is precisely the one I agree with, though I’m not sure why Pitkanen is even part of the conversation. If one were to argue loosely one way or another for a player who might have cost Edmonton anything it would much more likely be 35 than 25. Even then, you could come up with excuses for the guy if you really wante dto.

  141. Rod says:

    lowetide said:
    >>you dance with the one that brung ya< <

    Yeah, and with the season on the line, how about you put the guy in net that’s been their MVP *this* season. Or the guy with the most wins on the year. Or the guy that’s over .500…

    Earlier this season MacT was quoted saying he doesn’t put much stock into the idea a goalie does well against a particular team. Well, that’s nice, but here’s some numbers:
    Roli vs Vancouver
    last year: 1-4
    this year: 0-2
    this year: 3-2

    So, in a year Roli played well (last season), he was 1-4. Those digits will keep popping up…

    Roli’s first start vs. Van this season:
    4-1 L, .818 Save%

    4-1 L, .810 Save%

    Eerily similar no?

    I’m not saying the Oil would have won the game with Garon in net. They had several key breakdowns…

    However, you don’t leave your current MVP on the bench as your season circles the drain. This game was the season.

    I can’t help but agree with earlier comments that MacT doesn’t seem to know how to handle goalies.

    4 starts for Roli in 6 nights?
    5 games for Roli in 8 nights? What was MacT thinking?

  142. Dennis says:

    LT: I honestly feel that Garon would not have let in the third goal and I’d bet a fuckuva lot that he wouldn’t have left in that goal from Linden. Also, I think we manage to take that game to OT if Garon’s in goal.

    On one hand we can say MacT’s even because he made the right — and
    out-of-the-blue — call to go back with Roli in SJ and then he fucked up last night. But, coaches shouldn’t get credit for coming out even and I was against Roli vs the Canucks from minute one.

    SH: I knew I liked you for some reason;) Seriously, though, that’s exactly the way I saw the game and thinking back on it, I wouldn’t change any of those opinions. Oilers held the edge in PP opps and won chances for/against but Luongo was outstanding and the Oilers tending wasn’t and sometimes
    that’s how she goes.

    To those who recommend line changes, I’m all for it but I wouldn’t expect to see it all the time. It’s a total waste to have Hemsky where he is now so
    something has to change. As for who moves off the kid line and up top, I think I’d go with the old 27-89-83 line and just pop 78 in with 12-13.

    Finally, I think 25 gets slagged because to whom more is given, more is expected. Sure, he showed up that year with 43 points in 58 games but thinking on SH’s post, Pitkanen’s like that guy in university who’s grabbing
    70′s when everyone knows he can do much better. When he picked up 43 points in 58 games, he stopped drinking on Wed and Thurs nights and he decided to screw just the one goal for that term.

    But now he’s back off the wagon and he’s plowing everyone but he’s still getting decent grades and he’s certainly not a problem:)

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright -