It's a hopeful sign for the Senators that Teemu Selanne has been held to one assist so far. Jim McIsaac/Getty Images

Now that the Ducks have thoroughly shut down the Senators in Anaheim to take a 2-0 lead in the Stanley Cup Finals, is the series basically over? Is this a mismatch headed for a sweep after three years of seven-game finales? Or do the Sens have a realistic shot at coming back to at least go the distance? There are some good arguments for and against Ottawa:

THE PROS

1. The Ducks may have had the advantage in Anaheim, where hockey is the flavor of the week, but this game is all there is in Ottawa. Really. Ever been there? These fans are as hearty and boisterous as any in the league. It won't be as easy for Ducks coach Randy Carlyle to keep Travis Moen, Sami Pahlsson and Rob Niedermayer out against the Senators' top line when he doesn’t have the last change. That opening, however small, can give the Sens some breathing room, and life -- perhaps enough to send the series back to Anaheim tied 2-2.

2. Yes, the Sens' top line -- Dany Heatley, Jason Spezza and Daniel Alfredsson -- was dreadful in Game 2, overpassing, turning the puck over and generating little offense. Yet, the Sens lost by . . . one goal. That line has scored 23 in this year's playoffs. It hit a rut, and you can't keep talent like that down for long. Sometimes that first goal is enough to help a team re-build its confidence. Take Anaheim's checkers away and Alfredsson won't commit six turnovers. Coach Bryan Murray spotted Mike Fisher on the first line in Game 2. With the last change, Murray will have more flexibility to make Anaheim counter-punch if he decides to call another audible.

3. I don't see Teemu Selanne on the scoreboard in this series, except for one assist. He had six points in his last three games against Detroit. He's had a bunch of shots blocked by Chris Phillips and Anton Volchenkov, so it isn't as if Anaheim's big guns are firing on all cylinders. An ongoing lack of scoring from the usual sources could prove fatal if the Senators get untracked and begin to break through.

4. The Ducks almost tossed away their series with the Red Wings by being too aggressive. Chris Pronger got suspended for a game because of his hit to the head of Detroit's Tomas Holmstrom. Get the Ducks a little hot under the collar and they'll take more than one foolish penalty at the wrong time. If the Sens get a lead, the pugnacious Ducks will think of sending messages rather than mounting comebacks.

5. Ray Emery kept the Senators in the first two games with some fine play. He's growing into a big-game goaltender even if his fundamentals aren't great. Not a period went by against Buffalo when Emery didn’t overplay a puck, cough up an unnecessary rebound and have trouble with a long shot, but he won four of the five games. Score a few goals for him and he'll get you some wins. What has Jean-Sebastien Giguere had to do so far? He'll be much busier in Ottawa.

THE CONS

1. Sure, playing at Scotiabank Place, the Senators get a charge of venue, fan support, time zone, currency and ways to spell center/centre, not to mention the last line change. Think they'll flip the switch just because they're wearing red? Game 2 may have been the most lopsided 1-0 game in a long time. The Sens' offense looked emaciated, as if it was firing peashooters against Anaheim's stand-up defense and diligent backchecking forwards. The shot margin was 31-16, Ducks, but it seemed much greater. Anaheim also had a 32-20 shot advantage in Game 1. Was it rust in Ottawa's once finely-tuned gears after a nine-day layoff between the Buffalo Series and the Cup final? Or do the Ducks have their number? It's likely a combination of the two.

2. Just try to win the Stanley Cup with a one-line team. It’s brutally hard. Yes, Heatley, Spezza and Alfredsson are often one of the NHL's deadliest trios. They came into this series as the top three scorers in the playoffs. But the offensive talent gap to Ottawa's next line isn't so much a step as it is a fall off a cliff. OK, so Murray tried breaking them up part of the time. That could still work. But if the Ducks continue to shut these guys down, Anaheim may not need more than a goal per game the rest of the way in order to win the series.

3. Yes, the Sens’ defensemen are superb shotblockers, but, my goodness, Michelle Kwan had nothing on Joe Corvo during Pahlsson's game-winner in Game 2. Pahlsson’s outside-inside move probably still has Corvo spinning. Corvo has provided some offensive punch in the playoffs. So has Wade Redden. But the Ducks' defense is solid on all fronts. Everybody knows about the contributions of Pronger and Scott Niedermayer, but Francois Beauchemin and Sean O'Donnell have improved mightily during the season, and even if the last change keeps the Sens' top line away from the Ducks’ top checking line, Anaheim is guaranteed to have strong lines of defense there to clean up the mess.

4. Sure, the Ducks get carried away with pushing teams around once in a while, but each team drew four minors apiece in Game 2. Brad May was running around as if he wanted to stomp someone during his six minutes on the ice, yet he still skated with controlled aggression. A team that plays physically on the road can keep a home crowd very quiet.

5. Who would you rather have in your net, a Conn Smythe-winner like Giguere or an unproven commodity like Emery? Giguere came within a game of a championship in 2003. This is newer territory for Emery, who always seems to have a stretch of play where he looks vulnerable.

So how do you see it? Are the Senators as good as dead? Or does the comeback begin at home on Saturday night?