San Jose Sharks Show Dominance In OT Loss
Sometimes you just have to laugh one off. After dominating the last 50 minutes of play, another fluke goal sent the Sharks to the locker room with another playoff loss... a loss they can hold their heads high with.
Remember the old saying when we were kids, it's not whether you win or lose but it's how you play the game?
The Sharks played with the passion and heart that has been lacking in other playoff series. Even frosty Todd McClellan looked fiery and aggressive.
This was a much more impassioned effort and the fact that the Sharks lost the games can only add fuel to the fire.
The Sharks played mean and the game was fun to watch.
San Jose pounded Colorado up and down the ice finishing almost every check with spite and it's only get to get more intense from here on out.
Even with Heatley out of the lineup (day-to-day). Colorado couldn't get anything going except for the first 10 minutes of the game and this young and energetic group in Colorado looked tired from chasing San Jose around all night.
If the Sharks dominate play like they did last night then the Sharks are on their way to the Stanley Cup Finals.
San Jose dominated in all aspects of the game except for goaltending and lucky bounces.
So far, almost all the lucky bounces have gone in the net for Colorado. It's as if the Sharks are subconsciously programmed to lose and the hockey gods and granting them their wish.
Eventually though, the bounces end up evening out in a playoff series. When these bounces do even themselves out, and the Sharks keep dominating play, the San Jose Sharks will be moving onto the next round of the playoffs and beyond.
San Jose in 6. Colorado has had a great season and deserve to have their season ended to a hero's ovation in front of the home crowd after far exceeding expectations.
The Sharks deserve to move forward in the playoffs and are playing like it for the first time in years.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?