Atypical Levity: Go Wings!

By -
It took longer and was harder fought than I expected. And, like many others, I was sure that the series was over with 35 seconds left to play on Monday. What happened at 34.7 seconds changed that, of course. Still, game 5 was about the most exciting hockey game I've ever seen. The end of game 6 was no picnic either, and was far too close to a repeat of game 5 for comfort - the play for overtime came from the same side of Ossie and again got by his stick, but slid clear. But, none of that matters much now that the eleventh Wings squad is being etched into the Cup...

For those of you who weren't blessed to live in the greater Detroit area during the 2002 cup series (and the Wings' win, of course), you may have missed this gem - "Without Stanley."

Comments

Dave Belcher said…
As it stands, I think my own Nashville Predators ended up playing the Wings better than any other team in the Cup...Pittsburgh had some great teams, and I was depserately hoping for a game 7 (more hockey is always a good thing), but alas...props must be given to what I consider to be perhaps the greates Red Wings team in many years (maybe ever) -- which of course means that this Red Wings team needs to be looked at as one of the greatest teams in hockey history...I know that might seem a bit much (especially for a Preds fan!), but they're freakin' good!
June 04, 2008 11:11 PM
W. Travis McMaken said…
Dave,

I think you would be right about the Preds vs. the Pens IF one doesn't factor in goalies. Fleury, as much as he frustrated we Wings fans with those 55 or so saves on Monday, is simply excellent. That said, your Ellis is no slouch either.

As for wishes for a 7th game, I don't think my nerves could have handled it after Monday and after the last 5 minutes of game 6 which very nearly sent things into overtime again.
June 05, 2008 6:28 AM
Dave Belcher said…
Yes, but remember that Ellis had, what was it?...54 saves against the Wings in game 5 of that series, and that was without any overtimes! As a backup, young goalie, Ellis proved that he can play with the best of them -- he was outstanding for my money.

That said, the Pens would have been demolished without Fleury; he was indeed quite excllent.

In my first comment by the way, it should read "Pittsburgh had some great lines" (or concomitantly, "players")
June 05, 2008 7:41 AM
W. Travis McMaken said…
I had forgotten that Ellis had that many saves that game. He is certainly a great young goalie. Still, that the Wings consistently put so many shots on goal is a testament to the level of their play.

The Pens did have a couple good lines, but they weren't as deep as the Wings and the star Pens players were just so young (although this will have matured them quite a bit - watch out next year!). I keep thinking of how Crosby is treated as a young phenom - Zetterberg is only 5 or so years older, and proved to be the better player as testified by the fact that Therrien was doing everything he could to keep Crosby away from Zetterberg.

In any case, it was a great Cup series. Here's to another Wings cup next year!
June 05, 2008 8:23 AM
Post a Comment

Popular Posts

So You Want to Read….Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

By -
Image
"I fear that Christians who stand with only one leg upon earth also stand with only one leg in heaven." "The exclusion of the weak and insignificant, the seemingly useless people, from everyday Christian life in community…may actually mean the exclusion of Christ; for in the poor sister or brother, Christ is knocking at the door." "Since ethical thinking in terms of realms is overcome by faith in the revelation of the ultimate reality in Jesus Christ . . . there is no real Christian existence outside the reality of the world." "People who reject their bodies reject their existence before God the Creator." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer Prelude Andreas Steinhoff [Attribution], via Wikimedia Commons I envisioned having a lot of time for blogging this summer, but that simply has not been the case - the last month has been a crazy one, to say the least. For two weeks, I was working at a theology summer camp of sorts, the Duke Youth Academy, and s...
Keep reading

So, You Want To Read Karl Barth?

By -
Image
Every now and then I am asked for advice about studying Karl Barth. So, I thought that I would share some of my standard advice here. But, before I do that, let me just say that I am by no means a Barth expert as compared to the people whose books I will mention below. I would be thrilled to find myself in their league one day, but as of yet that remains a distant dream. Still, I have been reading Barth for long enough, and under the supervision of a number of the scholars that I will mention below, that I think I can provide a decent orientation. I have never read Karl Barth before. Which of his books should I read first? Barth’s most famous work is the monumental 13-volume Church Dogmatics . Reading the CD with understanding is not an easy thing, so you definitely do NOT want to start here. Luckily, there are two smaller works by Barth that serve as helpful introductions to his work. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction - Based on the lectures that Barth delivered duri...
Keep reading

Karl Barth on Hell, the Devil, Demons, and Universalism – A Florilegium

By -
Image
You know, all the most interesting topics. Although Barth often confessed that he didn’t find these questions particularly interesting. At best they might draw sideways glances, as it were, as one travels the theological road. But I found a number of places in the records of Barth’s later conversations that I thought folks might find interesting, so I’ve collected them here. And if you aren’t familiar with the term “florilegium,” here you go ! All these texts are from the first volume of Barth in Conversation , with pages numbers given in parentheses along the way. As usual, italics are in the text and bold is mine. Hell “Now we come to hell. You shouldn’t laugh! There is nothing to laugh at! What does hell mean? I think hell means to be in the place where you are once fore all damned and lost without ceasing to exist, without losing the image of God, being what you are but being damned and lost, separated from God, whose creature you are, separated also from your neighbor, from...
Keep reading

George Hunsinger’s gloss of the Christ Hymn in Philippians 2

By -
Image
I’ve been reading George Hunsinger’s (my doktorvater , for anyone who might be new around here) entry in the Brazos Theoloical Commentary on the Bible series on Philippians. Anyone who has studied with George will find this book to be a compendium and application of many of his most characteristic and beloved analytical tools and patterns, and I’ve been enjoying it immensely. But one of the things that really stood out to me was how he glossed the so-called “Christ hymn” of Philippians 2. George Hunsinger, Philippians , Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids: BrazosPress, 2020). The gloss that Hunsinger provides is not a historical-critical interpretation. Rather, it is an ecclesial, ecumenical, and theological interpretation that attempts to fill in the blanks for how to understand this proto-liturgical formulation in light of the later formulations of the ecumenical creeds. In order to achieve this gloss, Hunsinger engages in “ecclesial hermeneutics” and makes “...
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 3, Day 1

By -
On the Monstrosity of Christ : Karl Barth in Conversation with Slavoj Žižek & John Milbank By Paul Dafydd Jones For a while, I hoped to frame this conversation in terms of a dramatic interchange – something along the lines of “A Slovenian philosopher, a British theologian, and a Swiss dogmatician walk into a bar…” Alongside an eye-wateringly hip assemblage of cinematic references, literary allusions, and comedic scenes – my early favorites being when Barth imagines a young adult novel, entitled Are you there God? It’s me, Žižek , and when Milbank waxes poetic about the Twilight movies – I wanted to engage some topics that would likely receive attention, were the authors to meet for drinks. Primarily, I envisioned an intense discussion of the logos asarkos and the logos ensarkos , with Milbank talking up the former category, Barth emphasizing the latter, and Žižek asking whether recent debates are but symptoms of secret puzzle, embedded in the Church Dogmatics – a puzzle that...
Keep reading