LALALALALALAFONTAINE Posted May 14, 2006 Report Posted May 14, 2006 Buffalo ES: 4/2/2/1/1-10 PP: 1/0/1/0/1-3 SH: 2/0/0/0/1-3 Ottawa ES: 4/1/0/1/1-7 2PP: 0/0/1*/0/1-2 PP: 2/0/1/1/0-4 SH: 0/0/0/0/0-0 Let's look more closely at the PP goals Ottawa scored. In game one, one of Ottawa's PP goals came at the end of a two man advantage - McKee just came back on the ice. In game three, the sole PP goal (game tying goal) was due to Emery leaving the ice, giving the Sens a two man advantage. So really, the Sens scored 4 goals with a 2 man advantage and only 2 goals with a 1 man advantage. The Sabres outscored the Sens at ES, 10 to 7. The Sabres outscored the Sens when they had a one man advantage, 3 to 2. The Sabres outscored the Sens when we were on the PP, 3 to 0. The only place Ottawa outscored us was when they had a 2 man advantage, and they scored 4 times because of that. Ottawa had 5 two man advantages, and 1 time with Emery out, for a total of six. It contributed to four goals. The Sabres had no such opportunities. Ottawa had 27 one man advantages, and Buffalo had 24 PP chances. During the regular season, Ottawa drew 490 PPs, and we drew 473. Ottawa was SH 476 times, while Buffalo was penalized 436 times. Ottawa had 14 more PP than SH opportunities. Buffalo had 40. In the regular season, Buffalo was much more likely than Ottawa to have a man advantage than be a man down. The fact that this not only gets reversed but dramatically so is an absolute joke and reeks worse than all the cheese in Denmark. We dominated the Sens in every facet of the game, save when the refs handed the Sens 2 man advantages. Go Canes. No reason for the refs to favor them in any way.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.