Hobbled Flyers drop another to Sabres 4-2

by Travis Hughes on Nov 27, 2009 4:27 PM EST in 09-10 Game Recaps

[TSN Recap] - [Boxscore] - [Buffalo Reaction]

Final - 11.27.2009	1	2	3	Total
Buffalo Sabres	1	1	2	4
Philadelphia Flyers	2	0	0	2

Complete Coverage >

It's become tradition to have a home game on Black Friday each season. But looking for relief from the crowds at the mall, fans have frequently found disappointment inside the halls of Wachovia Center, as the Flyers have lost on the day after Thanksgiving each year since 2006. Nothing changed today as the injury-riddled Flyers fell to the Buffalo Sabres 4-2. It's the second time in just under two weeks that the Sabres have come into Philadelphia and wrestled a win away from the home team.

After taking an early lead on a Drew Stafford first period goal, the orange and black fought back late in the period. Mike Richards tied the score at one late on a beautiful pass by James van Riemsdyk, and then with about 30 seconds left, a point shot from Braydon Coburn deflected off a Buffalo player and past goaltender Ryan Miller. The momentum was completely changed in the Flyers favor.

So, naturally, as the second period opened, Buffalo captain Craig Rivet decided to try to change that. He took on Dan Carcillo in a pretty evenly matched bout, but the Flyer tough guy was pretty heated afterward. It takes a lot to keep Carcillo down, so it was no surprise that the next time he and Rivet were united on the ice, a fight broke out. Carcillo beat him down this time, but a late strike by Rivet after the linesman had already jumped in ticked him off even more. He went off on the official for allowing it, a move that quickly earned him a 10 minute misconduct. He was asked to head to the dressing room for the remainder of the second period after jawing at Rivet from the penalty box.

Paul Gaustad tied the game in the second period, and it was the Tim Connolly show in the third as he added two goals to give the Sabres the victory.

Some more thoughts on this one...

Ian Laperriere is an absolute warrior. He took a Jason Pominville shot to the face in the second period and left the game to reportedly receive around 50 stitches in his upper lip. I've been hit with a puck in the lip and I needed eight stitches, and let me tell you -- that hurt. To return to the game after 50 stitches and a cut that looked like it completely severed his upper lip in two is unfathomable. But Lappy did it, taking three shifts in the third period with a cage on his helmet.
Jared Ross was slammed into the boards by Patrick Kaleta in the first period. He had already passed the puck away when Kaleta leaped and drilled his head into the boards. He didn't return, but neither did Kaleta. He was handed a boarding major and a game misconduct, and you can fully expect the NHL to come down on him for this one. The good news: Ross will travel with the team to Atlanta.
With Ross and Laperriere out and the Flyers bench slim at the forward position, Carcillo's 10 minute misconduct didn't help things. He was right in his argument to the official that led to the penalty, though, so it's hard to be too mad with him. I have a feeling Carcillo won't have a short memory about this one.
The power play laid an egg today, going 0 for 5 in 9:14 with the man advantage. Not allowed.
Mike Richards was an animal in the final few minutes. He had about six shots on goal with Ray Emery pulled from the Flyers net as the orange and black tried to tie the game. It was a futile effort, however, since Ryan Miller had an answer for everything the Flyers threw his way in the third.
Despite the loss, Philadelphia's fourth in five games, the same problems that plagued the Flyers during their West Coast road trip did not lead to the loss today. Instead, today was a lot more similar to the Flyers last loss to the Sabres in that they didn't get much luck and that they just couldn't finish their chances. Miller didn't help the equation, either.

After the jump, questions with answers and the comment of the day.

Questions With Answers

How much ice time does Riley Cote get today? Despite the Flyers short bench, Cote didn't see much ice, only played 5:38.
The Flyers are better than the Sabres at even-strength play, on the penalty kill, and the power play. Can they show that's true today? I thought the teams matched up pretty evenly at even strength, but the Flyers couldn't get anything going on the PP.
Do the Flyers show up today, or are they stuck between lazy off day and travel day? They certainly showed up. It just wasn't enough today. It happens.
Does Ray Emery rebound from a bad road trip with a strong game today? He allowed four goals on 25 shots, but he didn't have a terrible game. Then again, he needed to outduel Ryan Miller to win this one, and that didn't happen.

Comment Of The Day

My Goodness, HE IS MY F’ING HERO!

>> flyrsfrk05, on Lappy's return

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Yuck.

by Ben Feldman on Nov 27, 2009 4:38 PM EST reply actions

Yet another loss while Paul Holmgren fails to address this team’s problems.

Buffalo won 58% of faceoffs. Carter was at 35%. Richards won 48%.

Emery is out of position on the first goal. There’s not a good replay on NHL.com, but his right leg is behind the goal line next to the net. By contrast, look at the plays Miller made in the last couple minutes to block and cover those cross-crease passes. If Emery stays out in front of the net, there’s no room for that cross-crease pass to get behind him.

Emery now has the 29th best save percentage in the league. He’s played the 10th most minutes but allowed the 6th most GA. Now can we put to rest the ridiculous “Emery on the Olympic team discussions?”

by MarioD on Nov 27, 2009 5:26 PM EST reply actions

The first goal, Pronger stands there as his guy goes right around him, he makes the pass to the center of the ice, where it goes off Carle’s stick and in. Ray Emery’s fault!

None of those goals were his fault, period. And of course, today’s loss had nothing to do with faceoffs. But sure, it’s Homer’s fault.

Your boy Cote is absolutely worthless. The team was without Lappy, Carcillo, and Ross for over 15 minutes, and Cote still only got 5:38. Where’s your Syvret hating logic on this one? Stevens can’t trust him to be on the ice, why is he in the NHL?? Right, the reason they lost 4-2 is because of faceoffs and Ray Emery being out of position on ONE goal, not the fact that the team skated with only 9 forwards for nearly an entire period – 10 for half of the game and 11 for nearly the entire game.

I never disagree with what you say – Emery has been bad lately and they did not do a good job in the faceoff circle today – but every loss, you just go back to the same tired arguments. Today’s loss was not on Ray Emery. Today’s loss was not because of faceoffs. And today’s loss was not because of Paul Holmgren.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Nov 27, 2009 6:39 PM EST up reply actions

The first goal, Pronger stands there as his guy goes right around him

Thats not correct. Pronger had Connolly, who brought the puck into the zone. Stafford was Pyorala’s responsibility streaking past Pronger and Connolly.

Pronger had the correct coverage there. Pyorala forced Stafford deep into the zone, blocked the cross-slot pass passing lane, and forced Stafford into such a bad position that he didn’t even attempt a shot. Stafford threw the puck through the crease and if Emery hadn’t been guarding the side of the net, he would’ve blocked that pass just like Miller does.

Your boy Cote is absolutely worthless.

I have no idea why he’s my boy. He’s a serviceable fill in who makes the league minimum and doesn’t turn the puck over. He had a couple smart plays today, and I think he even had a couple scoring chance against the Islanders. It’s Cote or Laliberte, and Laliberte’s last four games played he logged:

6:48
7:02
5:30
8:51

So I’m not real sure what the difference is between the two. And I really don’t know what you’re even arguing. Cote is the 14th forward on the nhl depth chart and is even further down the organizational depth chart.

Where’s your Syvret hating logic on this one?

I blamed Holmgren for Syvret, not Stevens. (I think Stevens has done a good job with a poorly constructed team this year.)

But you argue Holmgren isn’t at fault, then type an entire paragraph about how Riley Cote shouldn’t be on the roster. Which, of course, is Paul Holmgren’s decision. So I don’t know what your point is.

by MarioD on Nov 27, 2009 7:56 PM EST up reply actions

Please.

(I think Stevens has done a good job with a poorly constructed team this year.)

Let’s look at the healthy version of this poorly constructed team.

Goalies: Emery, Boucher
Defensemen: Pronger, Carle, Timonen, Coburn, Parent, Bartulis, Tollefsen
Forwards: Richards, Carter, Hartnell, Briere, Gagne, Giroux, Van Riemsdyk, Powe, Pyorala, Asham, Betts, Laperriere, Carcillo, Cote

There’s nothing wrong with that team. Right now they’re poorly constructed due to the injuries and suspension to Briere.

No one is going to confuse our lineup with that of the late-1970s Canadiens, but on talent alone the Flyers should be able to compete every night and win on most nights.

It is Holmgren’s job to put the team together. It is then Stevens’ job to make sure that the team has a system it believes in and plays for 60 minutes every night. (As much as I hate listening to Andy Reid after Eagles’ losses, he at least understands that it is the coach’s job to have his players sharp and ready to go.) Obviously it is the players’ responsibility to follow through on their preparation for any given game.

Could the team have some better talent on it? Sure. Is it a horrible team (or as you put it in another post, “An abortion of a roster?”) No. In other words, the struggles of late are not Holmgren’s fault.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Nov 27, 2009 8:17 PM EST up reply actions

1) They don’t have a single player on this team who can win more faceoffs than he loses. Their self-described “faceoff specialist” suffers from a recurring injury to his right shoulder.

2) What team in the NHL doesn’t suffer injuries? Yay! Holmgren assembled 21 good players. How about the next six players that every NHL team needs? They don’t exist.

3) Right now, this is a roster clinging to a playoff spot. They’re 7th in the conference in points per game and they still haven’t played teams in their own division, which is probably the toughest in hockey. If Tampa holds on tonight (currently up 2-0 after the first period) they’ll be tied with the Flyers for the 7th seed.

by MarioD on Nov 27, 2009 8:27 PM EST up reply actions

1) This is an argument we’ve had seventeen times. Plenty of teams win plenty of games with poor faceoff numbers. Plenty of good teams don’t have good faceoff numbers. Right now, 5 of the top 8 teams in the NHL have FO% under 49%. What’s your point? (And oh, Richards is currently at 52% on the year.)

2) Besides Buffalo? The next six players every NHL team needs? Pittsburgh’s been racked by injuries this year, and they’ve had 26 skaters play so far. Eliminating 2 goalies, that leaves 25 skaters you say every NHL team needs. Let’s look at who these players are for the Stanley Cup champions: Mark Letestu, Nathan Guenin, Chris Conner, Ben Lovejoy, and Deryk Engelland. These are the five with the fewest games played besides Max Talbot. I’m assuming another of their callups was Chris Bourque, since he averages less than 10 minutes a game. Eric Godard is their Riley Cote, averaging less than five minutes. For those 6 players (the five plus Bourque), they’ve gotten 10 points in 45 games with a minus-4 ranking. Yeah, I can’t believe Homer doesn’t have people who can play like that! Nodl, Ross, Laliberte, Syvret, Tollefsen, and presumably Kalinski – but why not Kolanos? Matsumoto? Legein? Ward? Maroon? – clearly aren’t as good as Letestu, Guenin, Conner, Lovejoy, Engelland, and Bourque. “They don’t exist”, Holmgren is a failure.

3) Right now, this team is 4th in G/G, 11th in GA/G, 3rd in even-strength goal ratio, 2nd in PP%, 15th in PK%, and 11th in SA/G. Who cares about playoff spots in November? This team clearly is scoring, is great at 5-on-5 and on the power play, and slightly above average defensively. They have to shore up their defense.

But here you are sounding alarms, blaming the same people you’ve been blaming since August while blindly closing your eye to any evidence that doesn’t support your preconceived biases.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Nov 27, 2009 11:55 PM EST up reply actions

Plenty of teams win plenty of games with poor faceoff numbers. Plenty of good teams don’t have good faceoff numbers. blah blah blah

Everytime we discuss this, you ignore the point. Whether you think it’s important or not, this was the goal Paul Holmgren laid out for himself:

Holmgren said the club needed a veteran defensive faceoff specialist. Someone like Jim Dowd, who the club did not re-sign after last season.
"The game is all about puck possession and when you’re starting more than 50 percent of the faceoffs without the puck, that’s a problem," he said. "We need to address that. Whether it’s a [Glen] Metropolit or a Dowd or preferably a bigger guy."

That’s the the standard I’m holding him to, his self-imposed standard. Agree, disagree, whatever. The fact is, he said he needed to do something and then he fucking didn’t do it.

2) I think the Penguins are terribly constructed, so don’t hold them up as the gold standard. If you want to blame these losses on injuries, then Holmgren failed to build a team that could last for an entire season. Creating a team that can’t withstand injuries to 2 good players (Gagne and Betts, I won’t even count Powe and his forwards worst RPM) without going into a tailspin (they’ve now lost 4 of their last 5) is unacceptable.

3) Who cares about standings in november? People who are interested in seeing how the Flyers are performing.

this team is 4th in G/G, 11th in GA/G, 3rd in even-strength goal ratio, 2nd in PP%, 15th in PK%, and 11th in SA/G

And yet 12th in the league in points per game. Because they piled up some numbers on shitty teams like Carolina.

I’m looking at standings and performance. And this team is barely a playoff team right now.

by MarioD on Nov 28, 2009 1:09 AM EST up reply actions

Well, besides the fact that Connolly didn’t bring the puck into the zone, and Pyorala was backchecking, sure, Stafford was Pyorala’s responsibility. Except the forward gets the trailing man, not the guy carrying the puck into the zone. So no, Pronger did not have the correct coverage there. In your “what if” world, where only Emery is to blame, where are these possibilities: If Laperriere didn’t try to go behind the net in the offensive zone, the Sabres aren’t coming the other way; If Pyorala dove rather than half-ass laying his stick down, the puck doesn’t even get to Emery, let alone past him; If Carle doesn’t have his stick on the ice (what is he, a forward?) the puck doesn’t go in. But yeah, TOTALLY Ray Emery’s fault.

On Cote: I didn’t know all you had to do in order to be worthy of the NHL in your book is be “serviceable” and not turn the puck over. Unless your Darroll Powe, in which case you still hate him. On Laliberte, you don’t know the difference between the two? Ice times for the last four games are nice and all, but they are in fact very different from Cote’s. Seeing as how Cote’s season high was 5:38 and Laliberte’s season low was 5:30, I’d say there’s a large difference. In a game where they were short 3 forwards for nearly an entire period, I’d think having someone who can play more than 5:38 would help the team. Hell, even Nodl got over 10 minutes today.

I know you blamed Holmgren for Syvret. I don’t understand how you don’t see this logic: In a game where the Flyers desperately needed people to eat minutes, Stevens couldn’t trust Cote to log those minutes – just like you blamed Holmgren for Stevens not playing Syvret in a blowout. Why have a guy on the bench your coach can’t trust? That’s your argument. How is it okay to have Cote (who Stevens doesn’t trust) but not Syvret (who Stevens doesn’t trust)?

Lastly,

But you argue Holmgren isn’t at fault, then type an entire paragraph about how Riley Cote shouldn’t be on the roster. Which, of course, is Paul Holmgren’s decision. So I don’t know what your point is.

Are you dyslexic? The LAST thing I said was “And today’s loss was not because of Paul Holmgren.” That came AFTER my paragraph on Cote. I didn’t know I said anywhere that today’s loss was because of Riley Cote, and through him, Paul Holmgren. Nowhere did I say that. But good try twisting my words.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Nov 27, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions

I'll admit this:

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Nov 28, 2009 12:03 AM EST up reply actions

oops.

Sorry.

I’ll admit this:

Hell, even Nodl got over 10 minutes today.

I like what Nodl has brought to the table since he’s been called up. By no means should he be a regular here any time soon, but he’s done all they’ve asked him to do.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Nov 28, 2009 12:04 AM EST up reply actions

I’m twisting words?

You wrote a whole paragraph on how Cote shouldn’t be on the team, then absolved Paul Holmgren of responsibility. Make up your fucking mind.

These are your words totally in context:

How is it okay to have Cote (who Stevens doesn’t trust) but not Syvret (who Stevens doesn’t trust)?

Lastly,

Are you dyslexic? The LAST thing I said was "And today’s loss was not because of Paul Holmgren."

The last thing you said was you didn’t blame Holmgren, yet you wrote a hundred words on why Paul Holmgren shouldn’t have put Cote on the roster. So decide which one it is.

And then open your fucking eyes. Tim Connolly got the primary assist on the play. Because he carried the puck to the blue line playing the pivot on a give and go play. And Pronger had him covered. That’s his job. He forced Connolly to the wall and slowed down the rush. He basically stopped Connolly at the blue line instead of fucking sagging into the zone so he could cover Stafford like you want, and just giving Buffalo the offensive zone. And when he slowed Connolly down, Stafford and Pyorala skated past them. This isn’t complicated.

You can make all the excuses you want, (you never want to leave your feet, so Pyorala made the right play, and you always want your stick on the ice, so Carle made the right play) but it doesn’t change the fact that Emery once again got his ass beat because he overcommitted and dropped into a butterfly on every one of the goals.

How is it okay to have Cote (who Stevens doesn’t trust) but not Syvret (who Stevens doesn’t trust)?

Because Cote isn’t a regular in the lineup. He’s the 2nd backup forward. He’s not meant to even dress. And because they play two different positions. Many teams don’t play their 12th forward, and Stevens routinely doesn’t play his 12th forward. Riley Cote’s role has to be filled by a guy on a min salary and not by a kid who needs to be getting experience and improving.

by MarioD on Nov 28, 2009 1:29 AM EST up reply actions

I though the team played a decent game but I am absolutely stunned by Laperriere. Anthony San Filippo is reporting in addition to the 50+ stitches, he also lost 7 teeth. This is one of the best under the radar signings the team has made in a really long time. Now if Emery stops his habit of letting in 2 softies a game we’ll be just fine.

by krice1989 on Nov 27, 2009 5:30 PM EST reply actions

Maybe I was at a different game.

I didn’t like the effort today. I was there. (Not that this lends any credence to what I’m saying, but I’m just offering my view from Section 214.)

The power play was the biggest problem. It’s not so much that they went 0-5; it’s that they went 0-5 without ever mounting a serious attack. When you are tied with/losing to a good team at home, you need to get your ass in gear, set up, and get pucks to the net. You also have to win battles along the boards for loose pucks when you have an extra guy on the ice. That drives me crazy every time.

Emery was not great today but he did not lose the game for us. Buffalo’s goals were essentially an own goal by Carle (who’s hit a wall recently), a nasty deflection that most goalies would be hard-pressed to stop, a laser blast which he might have been able to get a piece of (but was a great shot natheless), and a Datsyukian pop-up which landed in the right place. Still, he had more uncomfortable moments than I’d care to see from him. He’ll be back sooner than later, but sooner would be nice.

I’ll agree with Mario that faceoffs were definitely an issue today. But I will also agree with Geoff that another argument is necessary from our esteemed counsel. Manny Malhotra is not playing here any time soon. Get used to it. Just because Holmgren didn’t mold the team to your liking doesn’t mean that they’ve been losing because of him. To the contrary – Laperriere’s return in the 3rd period and Carcillo’s combativeness are prime examples of why Homer made some of the moves he did. Those attitudes need to be infectious throughout the Flyers locker room.

Richards tries too hard to make “statement” plays sometimes, and today was no exception. He had a wide open chance to blast a slapshot at the net in the second period, and he held onto the puck too long. He passed behind the net, and whoever was back there fed a centering pass to Buffalo. There are times when you just need to shoot the puck. (Like on the power play, maybe.)

Pyorala had a rough afternoon. It wasn’t for lack of effort, but he just had a pretty bad game I thought.

And while Miller saved the game at the end for Buffalo, I think it might have been a different outcome had the Flyers sustained more pressure on him throughout the game. Buffalo did a decent job of keeping us to the outside, but it seemed to me that we could have broken through had we wanted the win a little bit more.

I am reminded of a snippet from Never Say Die: The Story of the 1988-89 Philadelphia Flyers, which is a glorification of a .500 Flyers team who made the conference finals. Early in the video, they interviewed Mark Howe about up-and-coming defenseman Jeff Chychrun. Howe related a conversation he had with Chychrun some years prior, when he said “I don’t like you, Chych; I don’t want you on my hockey team… I don’t like you because you have all the tools but you don’t ‘want it’ yet. And when you ‘want it,’ then you’re good enough to be on this hockey team.”

I am tired of feeling like the Flyers team is analogous to Young Jeff Chychrun, where they lose games because they don’t ‘want it’ enough. I don’t know what it’s going to take for them to understand that you cannot half-ass it during key moments of the game (like power plays) and expect to come away with two points. It can’t be done by any team on any night. So something’s gotta give here.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Nov 27, 2009 8:02 PM EST reply actions

I will second your Richards criticism. It seems like every game, either he or Carter is missing. Today, Richards kept throwing the puck at Sabres’ sticks. I just wish we could see both those guys clicking in the same game more than once a week.

On Emery, I agree as well. The third goal was frustrating because it was clear he didn’t see the puck and just dropped into a butterfly (pulling a “Varlamov”). Great shot, great utilization of Kimmo as a screen, but one that I didn’t like seeing him give up anyway.

Faceoffs today were a problem, but Richards has clearly stepped it up and has improved in that area.

Great snippet. I agree whole-heartedly.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Nov 28, 2009 12:04 AM EST up reply actions

I will second your Richards criticism. It seems like every game, either he or Carter is missing.

I would accuse Carter of “missing” more than Richards. When Richards screws up, it seems like he tries to do too much or make the perfect play. So he tries hard, but it’s usually to the point that he does stupid stuff, like today.

Carter, on the other hand, just doesn’t show up every now and again. That’s frustrating.

One reason the Clarke-MacLeish dynamic worked so well in the 1970s was that Clarke got on MacLeish for dogging it. If Richards, as captain, does not do the same to Carter, than someone else (Pronger?) needs to do it.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Nov 28, 2009 12:08 AM EST up reply actions

That’s true. I agree with what you said more than what I said. Richards is always there, but one day he’s screwing up left and right, making bad decisions. Carter is either there or not, which is worse.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Nov 28, 2009 12:09 AM EST up reply actions

It seems to me like Richards just tries to do too much sometimes. His struggles are never for lack of effort, but instead too much effort. He tries to put the team on his shoulders and that just simply isn’t going to work.

Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Travis Hughes on Nov 28, 2009 5:55 PM EST up reply actions

…and I just realized that Mike said the same thing, basically. Move along..

Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Travis Hughes on Nov 28, 2009 5:56 PM EST up reply actions

sweet

It might be pointless, but I am I the picture at the top, so something good same out of the game.

by JpH89 on Nov 27, 2009 8:24 PM EST via mobile reply actions

In a lot of these losses it is our team that doesn’t press. Like the playoffs last year. Sometimes in the D- Zone we act like we are a man down sometimes. Guys get tired fast of stevens makes a change and when we get it back we dump it in. We are stong on fast attacks if we can get healthy and figure out how to do what is being done to us to others more consistent then we are contenders.

I wasn't even a year old but I stayed up to be outside the Vet with my Dad and Mom when the Phillies won the World Series 1980.

by Christopher A on Nov 27, 2009 9:20 PM EST reply actions

Guys, I was at the game, and all of my previous negative thoughts about Carcillo are now gone. He absolutely fired the entire crowd up and it looked to me like the team was fired up. After Kaleta (who is their main fighter) killed Jared Ross, someone had to answer the call to fight. It didn’t matter the score or situation becasue it was early enough, but someone had to answer. Thats why Rivet did, because he’s their captain. Thats hockey. Its what your supposed to do. Rivet hit him late in fight one, and before fight two slashed a Flyer on the ice before a draw, with Carcillo on the ice, and they almost fought BEFORE the puck dropped. Don’t give me this last year playoff game 6 stuff that Danny shouldn’t fight with the lead. Early season, confrence opponent who we played three times in a month, sometimes there are more important things than 2 points early in the year. Standing up for a teammate that got taken a run at and was injured is one of those things.

A few other things I noticed:
- Nodl had a very solid game.
- Lappy is a warrior. And his show of toughness couldn’t have gone unnoticed in the locker room.
- Carcillo and Lappy and the rest of the crew can handle the fighting on this team. Hartnell and Pronger can deal with the rest of the intimidation, there really is no place for Cote. I love him, but if he’s not fighting, he needs to do something else.
- Ryan Miller is a stud. I don’t want to play this team in the playoffs.

by orangeandblack20 on Nov 28, 2009 9:17 AM EST reply actions