| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest0902 |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 17:59:33
I'm not talking about the format of penalty shots in general, I'm referring to the rules around penalty shots.
1) The shoot out - I don't like how after the first 3 players you can repeat shooters. I like shootouts coming down to the stay at home defencemen if it comes to that. I don't want to see Crosby and Ovechkin get 3 cracks at the shoot regardless of how good they are.
2) In game penalty shots - Rick Nash gets awarded a penalty shot against germany and Canada can send whoever they want to take the shot. I think that blows.
Further to the Nash penalty, I thought that was a bad decision giving Crosby the shot. One, Nash earned that chance, two Canada is up 4-0 and aren't under pressure to put out there "best" player, and three it's not like Nash is a scoring slouch (but he does need to get the first goal monkey off his back). Hell if you're going to put in a shootout specialist instead of the guy who earned the penalty send in Toews. If it's 1-1 against Russia different story. But this time I say bad coaching decision by Babcock. |
| 14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 12:53:40
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9659
I believe that Nash has been playing better than Crosby, even though he has less goals than Crosby. The coach should consider putting crosby on the second line and keeping Nash on the first. I would put all my best guys on one line - Nash, Heater, and Staal.
San Jose Chemistry aside, I agree those 2 Nash and Heatley make magic and Staal can play with any line in any role. So why not reunite the dynamic duo of the world championship. But for the sake of don't fix what aint broken, leave the top two lines alone even the checking line is playing good hockey. These guys need time to develop an A game.
To me the line thats broken is the 3 line, Getzlaf and Perry especially. Dont know how to fix whats going on with those 2, but something has gotta improve or they gotta reduce these guys playing time and increase the remainder on the lines playing time. |
| Guest9659 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 12:04:04
I believe that Nash has been playing better than Crosby, even though he has less goals than Crosby. The coach should consider putting crosby on the second line and keeping Nash on the first. I would put all my best guys on one line - Nash, Heater, and Staal. |
| Guest2211 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 10:23:50
Any1 notice that canada played its worst 10 mins. of hockey during the game after NASHs / CROSBYs penality shot ?? bad team splitting decision by baddock...players, commentators, fans, etc...knew this was WRONG in this case. Major slap in the face to NASH...with a 4-0 lead this SUPERSTAR must have felt like S**T... |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 09:26:58
I really feel the only issue here are the facts that Nash was looking for his first goal and the game was lopsided. For me, it was those two things and those two things only that made me feel that Nash should have taken the shot. However, if the score was close, i doubt that anyone would be questioning Babcocks choice.
Here's something else to consider. If it were let's say, Boyle who got hauled down, does anyone then think that Babcock should turn to Nash to shoot to help him out of his slump or is it simply because Nash created the opportunity that we feel he should have shot?
Either way, i think it's clear that if we get another penalty shot, it'll be Crosby front and center! I'm okay with that. For anyone who follows soccer, they'll know that rarely is the guy who's hauled down for a pk the one to take the shot as they always have a designated kicker for the penalty kicks! No different than if the NHL had this rule. Can you imagine Rod Brind'Amour getting hauled down on a breakaway in a big game? Do you think the coach would let him shoot or would he turn to Jussi Jokinen? You take advantage of any rule that helps your team! |
| Alex |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 07:54:03
Here's the thing. Nash earns the penalty shot, he's the default shooter. You don't need to make a case for giving it to him. Giving it to Crosby, on the other hand - well, you need a pretty strong case for that. Don't know that it was there.
Yes, Crosby may have the best stats when it comes to penalty shots. So what? I mean, I guess you want to be playing your best at all times, and maybe that's got to come from the coach down. The coach should be making the same decisions in an open game than a close one. Granted, did that message go through with this play?
How'd it look when Crosby missed? Not great. How would it have looked if Nash missed? Ho-hum, back to business as usual. The only redeeming reasoning behind this move was the need to approach every game with a consistent, full effort, which is something Canada's been struggling with. If this move sent that message, success. I'm not sure it did. |
| Guest9836 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 07:05:10
Going back to the topic of penalty shots.
Even Babcock said he wished he had left Nash in there after Sid didn't score. And no one is saying Nash complained or minded Sid taking the shot. All egos have been checked (in theory), but that doesn't make it a poor decision.
As for shoot outs, it is wierd seeing a player get 1, 2 even 3 chances. I don't like it. |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 06:44:03
Canada wins 8-2 and people still find things to complain about.... ego's were supposed to be checked at the door. Babcock has made it clear that Sid is his go-to guy in shootout and penalty shots so he went with Sid. I thought Nash should have shot as well, but that was their gameplan. Nash is a pro, im sure he would have liked to shoot but I doubt it is bothering him very much.
Also, Scott Neidermayer is one of the smoothest skating, puck rushing D men of all time, joining the rush is a big part of his game.
I thought Getzlaf and Perry had their strongest game of the tourny, getz may have choked a little on that point blank opportunity but his line dominated on the cycle and the germans running around like headless chickens all night. Perry wasnt able to score either, but he fired much more rubber towards the net than he had in any of the other games, even if some pucks were deflected wide.
I think Babcock made a nice move putting Staal with Sid and Jerome and moving Nash over to Getz and Perrys line, that line is so dominating physically.
anyways, I think canada is primed to face the russians now. While Canada has been far from perfect so far, the same goes for the ruskies. Russia only has 2 PP goals so far and has a loss to Slovakia. Nabokov is also in a similar position to Luongo, he has a rep of never winning the big game and hopefully Canada can get to him early and maybe hurt his confidence a little. Having Thornton, Marleau and Heatley on the team should really help expose some of Nabokovs weaknesses.
pronger played better and doughty seems to be getting better each game, i think the russians are in for the fight of their life.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| Guest9836 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 06:27:19
9494... while I appreciate the satire on some of your reasons, I'm thinking you're serious on a couple of them.
I'll bite on one... I'm not buying the first one about headlines. Tthere would be nobody talking about Nash missing a penalty shot he earned in a 8-2 game, but there is talk now about Babcock's coaching decisions. |
| ryan93 |
Posted - 02/24/2010 : 05:08:52
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9494
Reasons why Babcock could have pick Crosby
- He felt Nash would injured himself on the shot example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWgb8zt2d80
I love that, you imagine if he would of fell on that shootout  |
| Guest9494 |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 20:49:56
Reasons why Babcock could have pick Crosby
- He knows if he didn't there be a headline wondering why he didn't pick Crosby
- He scored on his 2nd try against the Swiss giving him experience in the tourny
- He trying to ignite Crosby after his poor performance against USA
- He felt Nash would injured himself on the shot example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWgb8zt2d80
- He knew Crosby wouldn't score so it would keep the game close
- Crosby was whining on the bench saying he wasn't getting enough playing time
- Jonathon Toews felt bad for the Germans and refused to shoot
and the number 1 reason
- Crosby was the best choice :P
|
| Guest0854 |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 20:09:41
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0902
I know... it also looks like I took word for word the commentary after the game was over, but I started writing this as soon as I saw Crosby lining up.
Can't believe I agreed with Mcguire, haha.
Still not happy with the performance of the game. Yeah we won. But I'm not happy until we play a perfect game. Guess that makes me one to the 35M+ coaches on the team.
Still not happy with Seabrook and Pronger. Nieds is playing like a forward - who does he think he is Paul Coffey? Luckily he is pinching against the Germans and not the Russians. Our defensive strength hasn't shown itself. This I find most surprising.
Still not happy with Getzlaf. Can't believe he blew that one on one against the goalie. He is still not performing like I expected. Perry looks lost. Umm Corey, the bench where you belong is over there. Getzlaf and Perry should be buried in the 4th line and get only 2 minutes of playing time. This pairing is playing well below my expectations (maybe I had too high of an expectation from them). Iggy if only you can score against quality opponents. Hopefully this means you are feeling better from that check in the Norway game. Why is Bergeron on this team if you are only going to give him 13 seconds of playing time in the 1st? That defensive coverage, by all players on the ice, on the first goal was complete and utter garbage. Yes that means the altar boy, Crosby.
What I was happy with in this game.
Those who question why Morrow is on the team, he is the one of the most consistent forward on the team. His game doesn't show up well in the stats sheet, but I'm so glad he is on the team. Eric Staal has played well the last two games. Toews is a much better player than I expected. McGuire coming to his senses and agreeing with pickuphockey posters.
The defence needs to pick it up a notch, Getzlaf and Perry benched and Iggy scoring for Canada (hey we have a 100% winning percentage when he scores) if we are going to go for gold. |
| Guest0902 |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 19:32:56
I know... it also looks like I took word for word the commentary after the game was over, but I started writing this as soon as I saw Crosby lining up.
Can't believe I agreed with Mcguire, haha. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 19:25:54
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0902
I'm not talking about the format of penalty shots in general, I'm referring to the rules around penalty shots.
1) The shoot out - I don't like how after the first 3 players you can repeat shooters. I like shootouts coming down to the stay at home defencemen if it comes to that. I don't want to see Crosby and Ovechkin get 3 cracks at the shoot regardless of how good they are.
2) In game penalty shots - Rick Nash gets awarded a penalty shot against germany and Canada can send whoever they want to take the shot. I think that blows.
Further to the Nash penalty, I thought that was a bad decision giving Crosby the shot. One, Nash earned that chance, two Canada is up 4-0 and aren't under pressure to put out there "best" player, and three it's not like Nash is a scoring slouch (but he does need to get the first goal monkey off his back). Hell if you're going to put in a shootout specialist instead of the guy who earned the penalty send in Toews. If it's 1-1 against Russia different story. But this time I say bad coaching decision by Babcock.
I'm going to say this. I completely agree with what you've said here. I will also say this to qualify my opinion and avoid being labelled a parrot: I heard Pierre Maguire say pretty much the same thing. While i agree with his opinion, i do so only after thinking it over clearly to myself. I feel bad that we share the same opinion and truly thought that Nash should have taken the shot before Maguire said it on air!
Either way, glad to see that Nash ended up getting one later in the game and hopefully that kick starts his scoring touch to the tune of a few more tomorrow night! |
| ryan93 |
Posted - 02/23/2010 : 19:17:15
If it was a close game then yes by all means go with Crosby or whoever Babcock feels gives his team the best chance to score.
But with a 4-0 lead over a weak German team, i thought he should of let Nash take the penalty shot. |
|
|
