| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Guest1706
( )
|
 Posted - 04/20/2009 : 14:23:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by OILINONTARIO
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
(Oh, and feel free to comment!)
Well, I don’t like Philly. I don’t like Bobby Clarke, I don’t like it that they bought their team, I don’t like the way they played, and I hate their fans with a passion!
any fan of hockey wanted Washington to move on.
As a true Canuck, I can’t focus much more happy light on seven games that saw the pride of Alberta get ousted by some team from San Jose.
GM News: Brian Burke ain’t going anywhere. They like him over in Anaheim; granted, he didn’t have as big a mark as some would seem to suggest on the success of the Ducks last year. Toronto and Cliff Fletcher will have to sit and wait.
Meanwhile, the Vancouver Canucks organization is handling their situation like a bunch of turkeys. They had gold in Nonis, who made arguably the trade of the decade. You can not say that the Canucks failure to make the post-season this year should be left on his shoulders.
And then replace him with Mike Gillis? I wouldn’t know that guy from a hole in the wall! Vancouver is headed in ten different directions at once. Like some guy following a GPS system surrounded by magnets.
Happy readings,
Alex.
"You're playing worse every day and right now you're playing like the middle of next week."
-Herb Brooks
Okey Dokey. What does your dislike for Bobby Clarke have to do with the current Flyers' team? Paul Holmgren is the GM, and has done a masterful job to quickly rebuild a team under the new CBA. Any GM accused of buying a team in this new era should be congratulated for his ingenuity, as it is not possible to simply buy a team when the league enforces a salary cap. Your claim that, "any hockey fan wanted Washington to move on" is totally baseless. I, for one, was very happy to see Philly prevail, and I doubt that I was the only one.
On a very serious note, Alex, referring to the Calgary Flames as, "the pride of Alberta", will not serve you well in the future. I advise you to retract that comment.
Brian Burke will be the next GM of the Leafs. You may quote me later if I happen to be wrong.
Dave Nonis expected to ride out the Luongo trade as long as he could. What else did he do?
Cheers! Go SJ, Avs, and Philly!
The Oil WILL make the playoffs in 2009.
|
 |
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 04/20/2009 : 16:59:21
|
April 20 2009
Ovechkin just ripped a page right out of Avery's playbook. He went and sat in on a Rangers practice today, showing no signs of being worried you might expect from a guy down 2-0 as the higher seed in a series. When asked why, he said he wanted to piss of Torts. Personally, I think it was to study Henrik Lundqvist.
Whatever it is, the Capitals are up 2-0 in the first period of this game. Their best player is joking around, their coach is joking around, and they're winning a game finally. I just hope Avery comes up with something to out-do Ovechkin, because this is real entertainment.
Keep in mind that Ovechkin also made headlines for over the top celebrations, calling out Crosby and crazy gimmicks at the ASG. I think this guy has a little Avery inside of him and I love it.
For the record, I do want the Rangers to win, but I'm enjoying every minute of this right now. |
Edited by - Alex on 04/20/2009 16:59:50 |
|
|
|
Guest9790
( )
|
Posted - 04/22/2009 : 16:45:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
April 20 2009
Ovechkin just ripped a page right out of Avery's playbook. He went and sat in on a Rangers practice today, showing no signs of being worried you might expect from a guy down 2-0 as the higher seed in a series. When asked why, he said he wanted to piss of Torts. Personally, I think it was to study Henrik Lundqvist.
Whatever it is, the Capitals are up 2-0 in the first period of this game. Their best player is joking around, their coach is joking around, and they're winning a game finally. I just hope Avery comes up with something to out-do Ovechkin, because this is real entertainment.
Keep in mind that Ovechkin also made headlines for over the top celebrations, calling out Crosby and crazy gimmicks at the ASG. I think this guy has a little Avery inside of him and I love it.
For the record, I do want the Rangers to win, but I'm enjoying every minute of this right now.
ovechkin should stick to leading on the ice quietly if he wants to win. dont get me wrong i love him i don't think he's cocky and i happen to have a ton of respect for the guy as he is the best player in the game today; mind you, every team that has won the cup since time immemorial has been led by a quiet, non-flashy group of people. to win , teams need absolutely nothing distracting them from their goal. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2009 : 14:55:16
|
April 27 2009
I'm getting really annoyed. NHLers have a ton of skill, and for some reason, they can't seem to do one of the most important parts of the game right: hit the friggin net!
I don't know the stats but in some games it actually seems like there are more missed shots than shots on net. What gives? Like I get it that sometimes you try to pick a corner or a small gap, and anything other than a perfect shot will miss the net. But honestly, there are so many times in a game where players shoot it high or wide (not talking about tips.)
If you don't have an angle, why not just whip it along the ice or at least low, and hope for a lucky tip or maybe a hole in the goalie's five hole. It's better than this garbage of missing the net all the time. What ends up happening is the puck hits the boards, gets picked up by the defense/winger, and the play goes the other way. Stupid way to end a chance for your team, don't you think? |
Edited by - Alex on 04/27/2009 14:56:30 |
|
|
|
Sensfan101
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
500 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 04:47:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
April 27 2009
I'm getting really annoyed. NHLers have a ton of skill, and for some reason, they can't seem to do one of the most important parts of the game right: hit the friggin net!
I don't know the stats but in some games it actually seems like there are more missed shots than shots on net. What gives? Like I get it that sometimes you try to pick a corner or a small gap, and anything other than a perfect shot will miss the net. But honestly, there are so many times in a game where players shoot it high or wide (not talking about tips.)
If you don't have an angle, why not just whip it along the ice or at least low, and hope for a lucky tip or maybe a hole in the goalie's five hole. It's better than this garbage of missing the net all the time. What ends up happening is the puck hits the boards, gets picked up by the defense/winger, and the play goes the other way. Stupid way to end a chance for your team, don't you think?
I think one of the main reasons is how good players are at getting into the shooting lanes and forcing people to shoot wide
You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky |
|
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2009 : 10:56:09
|
agreed, the shooting lanes are almost always clogged (especially in the playoffs). Missing the net on purpose is actually a play the coachw ill draw up now, fire wide and have a winger stationed off the side of the net hoping for a rebound off the end boards.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 05/01/2009 : 10:55:16
|
May 1, 2009
Ovechkin, Crosby, Ovechkin, Crosby, blah blah blah, wah wah wah. Two things that tick me off in this debate more than anything are the ridiculous statements from the pro-Ovechkin camp that:
1: Crosby is a whiner
No he's not. He is a captain, and therefore has the right, in fact responsibility, under NHL rules, to go the referee on behalf of his team to discuss calls. Crosby plays to win, and so he will do whatever it takes, including damaging his rep (which by the way, he seems far less concerned about than Ovechkin.) But the main reason Sid the Kid seems to be a crybaby is because, frankly, he just doesn't smile as often as Ovechkin. There are people in this world that just don't. Crosby is, I'm sure, a fun and funny guy. Maybe in front of the camera he's a little less personal and a little more professional. Less fun to watch, but nothing to bash.
2. Crosby has less passion than Ovechkin
Why? Because Ovechkin slams the boards when he scores? Listen, Crosby loves the game of hockey. Every Canadian kid does. I don't recall AO playing with a broken foot for the last month of the season. Not that he had to, but would he have? Most superstars wouldn't. Sid loves the game just as much, simply expressing it in a different way.
So can we please stop making these two ridiculous statements? Thanks.
''Yes we can!'' -Obama |
|
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 05/01/2009 : 12:44:10
|
Agreed, Crosby is a warrior. He doesn't get enough respect. He excells in all aspects of the game. I love when they get a close up of crosby on the ice, you can see the fire in his eyes.
When Crosby got the empty netter to knock off Philly, you could just see how much satisfaction het got out of that. He shut up that crowd real good, yet he was still a pro when he was interviewed on the ice. The guy is all class, and all heart. Crosby will be a hero come the olympics.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
Gusteroni
Rookie
Canada
225 Posts |
Posted - 05/01/2009 : 12:48:13
|
I dare anyone to tell Don Cherry that Crosby is a cry baby and Ovechkin is a better hockey player. I'm sure you would get put in your place real quick!!
"There are only two seasons. Hockey season and not hockey season." |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2009 : 16:51:21
|
May 5 2009
CONTEST TIME! With 8 teams left in the race to the cup, I was thinking what the best possible outcome could be. If you could script it, how would it go? Here's my take.
Boston-Carolina
Carolina beats Boston, upsetting the number one seed in the east. Cam Ward stands on his head, and each game is decided by one goal. Another come from behind in dying seconds of game 7 for the Canes.
Pittsburgh-Washington
Crosby and Ovechkin keep matching each other goal for goal. Malkin is nowhere to be seen. Simeon Varlamov plays incredible, with the exception of against Sid. Pitt wins the next 3. In game 6 in Pitt, with the game tied, Ovechkin absolutely LAYS OUT Crosby, and the crowd goes nuts. Ovechkin takes a penalty, Crosby fights through the pain and scores the game winner on the power play. Talk about irony.
Detroit-Anaheim
The Ducks injure Datsyuk and Zetterberg, ending their series. The Mule takes over, and is on the verge of breaking Gretz's postseason goal record. Meanwhile, Osgoode stands on his head and (finally) shakes the monkey off his back. Jonas Hiller plays well too.
Vancouver-Chicago
The twins explode, and Luongo regains form, shutting out two of the next six games. Vancouver wins in seven.
Pittsburgh-Carolina
Staal vs. Staal. Cam Ward still standing on his head. Carolina surprises everyone by going up 2-0 and both Sid and Malkin are held off the scoresheet. But the Pens rally and win it in 7.
Vancouver-Detroit
Detroit wins, and Sundin's post-season and career are over. The team he could have gone to eliminate's him.
Detroit-Pittsburgh
REMATCH! When's the last time that happened? Pens win, Crosby gets Conn Smythe, Hossa loses two times in two years. He joined the Wings after losing with the Pens and lost again. Signs with the KHL in the offseason.
|
Edited by - Alex on 05/05/2009 16:51:56 |
|
|
|
pensfan17
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
330 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2009 : 08:15:42
|
Boston - Carolina
The game goes to seven games and with Carolina up by one with about a minute to go,Boston makes a huge late game comeback to win the game.
Pittsburgh - Washington
Another seven game series(obviously)with Ovechkin and Crosby lighting it up until game seven when Art Ross Trophy winner Evgeni Malkin decideds to do something and nets a hatty. Pens win the game 3-2.
Detroit - Anaheim
As much as I would like to see Detroit lose, it doesn't fit the script. In game seven with Detroit up 2-1, Anaheim pulls the goalie and think they have a goal... but wait, the ref blew the whistle.
Vancouver - Chicago
Khabbibulan plays terrible in Game four so the Hawks switch him for Huet. Huet then goes on to shut down the Canucks and Chicago wins three straight.
Boston - Pittsburgh
Bruins take it in seven. At the end of the last game with Boston up by three, Crosby and Savard actually fight.
Detroit - Chicago
Veteran Wings vs inexpeienced Hawks. Awesome Original Six matchup with Chicago prevailing in seven.
Boston - Chicago
Another Original Six matchup between two teams who combined have not hoisted the Stanley Cup in 85 years. Gave seven goes to triple overtime. Kris Versteeg who was trade from Boston along with a conditional pick for Brandon Bochenski pots one by a flopping Tim Thomas. Chicago's 48 year drought is over (now the Leafs have the worst one ). |
Edited by - pensfan17 on 05/06/2009 08:17:36 |
|
|
|
Guest6717
( )
|
Posted - 05/06/2009 : 08:16:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by pensfan17
Boston - Carolina
The game goes to seven games and with Carolina up by one with about a minute to go,Boston makes a huge late game comeback to win the game.
Pittsburgh - Washington
Another seven game series(obviously)with Ovechkin and Crosby lighting it up until game seven when Art Ross Trophy winner Evgeni Malkin decideds to do something and nets a hatty. Pens win the game 3-2.
Detroit - Anaheim
As much as I would like to see Detroit lose, it doesn't fit the script. In game seven with Detroit up 2-1, Anaheim pulls the goalie and think they have a goal... but wait, the ref blew the whistle.
Vancouver - Chicago
Khabbibulan plays terrible in Game four so the Hawks switch him for Huet. Huet then goes on to shut down the Canucks and Chicago wins three straight.
Boston - Pittsburgh
Bruins take it in seven. At the end of the last game with Boston up by three, Crosby and Savard actually fight.
Detroit - Chicago
Veteran Wings vs inexpeienced Hawks. Awesome Original Six matchup with Chicago prevailing in seven.
Boston - Chicago
Another Original Six matchup between two teams who combined have not hoisted the Stanley Cup in 85 years. Gave seven goes to triple overtime. Kris Versteeg who was trade from Boston along with a conditional pick for Brandon Bochenski pots one by a flopping Tim Thomas. Chicago's 48 year drought is over (now the Leafs have the worst one).
|
|
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2009 : 08:42:32
|
I would laugh my ass off if Detroit loses to Pitt in the final. Hossa would look like such a fool. Would he sign with Pitt in the summer? lol
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
DangleFest89
Rookie
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2009 : 17:35:37
|
| Best possible ending in Caps Pens series Pits comes back from a 3-0 defecit forces game 7 has the 3-2 lead with 5 minutes left and crosby takes 2 diving pentalies in a row to have Ovechkin net every goal while he is whining in the box |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 05/07/2009 : 05:56:09
|
LMFAO, Danglefest . . . that is some serious Crosby hate you got going on there.
Well, almost all the series are going very well in terms of excitement, all we can ask for is a Game 7 for all 4 match-ups . . . it could happen. The Boston series was the only one I thought was going to be quick, but suddenly the Bruins are in trouble now against a red-hot Carolina team!
I'd like to see Washington/Boston, a real hard-hitting hard skating series. And I'll take Anaheim/Vancouver in the west, with a real goalie/defence battle. Vancouver/Washington final, goes to game 7 (again!) and Luongo robs Ovechkin and Semin on point blank chances in o/t, and Sundin gets the winner (wrist-shot, top-right) on an inspired rush right afterward to give Vancouver their first ever Stanley Cup, returning it to Canada.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2009 : 04:51:28
|
May 17, 2009
New Jersey Devils - 7 games.
Vancouver Canucks - 10 games.
Detroit Red Wings - 11 games.
Pittsburgh Penguins - 13 games.
That's how many games each team has played this post season. For those keeping score, the first two are out of the playoffs. The latter two are looking to go to the final for a second straight year. My point? Building your team around a goalie doesn't work. Martin Brodeur and Roberto Luongo are both out, and in waltz Osgood and Fleury to take over where they couldn't. How did this happen?
Well, Roberto Luongo makes 7.5 million. Martin Brodeur makes 5.2. Fleury makes 3.5 and Osgood makes 1.7. It's obvious what the effects of that are. The Canucks top two forwards are Sedin and Sedin. The Penguins top two forwards are Crosby and Malkin, while the Wings have Datsyuk and Zetterberg.
It just does not make sense to put all your eggs in one basket! Teams that can ice a great team and a solid goalie to better than teams that can ice a solid team and a great goalie. When you have one way of winning a game, namely, goaltending, don't you think a good team will be able to overcome that in a seven game series? But on any given night for the Wings, they can win an offensive game, a defensive game, and know that they've got solid goaltending backing them up.
Which is why Roberto Luongo and Martin Brodeur are part of a dying breed. Sorry guys.
Floor's yours. |
Edited by - Alex on 05/17/2009 04:52:40 |
|
|
|
leigh
Moderator
Canada
1755 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2009 : 11:59:40
|
Alex, your subject title is gratuitous and essentially has nothing to do with the post itself. You should edit it to something relevant to your post, or edit the post itself so that it matched the subject line. Besides, I hardly think that a guy who just turned 30 is past his prime in the NHL. He has at least 5 stellar years left, probably more.
But to your point (I think it's your point anyway), the Canucks built and nurtured a reasonably well-rounded team this year, considering they were barely expected to make the playoffs. In the end they nabbed first in their division right at the buzzer, and then went on to the second round of the playoffs (after not making it to the dance at all last year) This translates to finishing around 6th to 8th spot in the league, not too shabby - whatever their strategy was!) The playoffs are a different bird and beyond having a good team you need a hell of a lot of good luck (just ask anyone who bet on the "sure thing" Bruins) The Canucks need tweaking, not re-architecting.
You say that Pittsburg has Malkin, Crosby and Fleury (If you include Gonchar I am assuming that you are saying they have about 4 baskets) Well combined these 4 make $19.5 million. Do you know why they only make this little? Because Malkin makes less than $1 million! Next year that will change my friend...then what? They better hope for another miracle...or invest in a great goalie.
The Canucks are not exactly the Red Wings but they are on the right path. If they don't implode financially due to their egos they should be able to keep their core intact. I agree that all your eggs in one basket is a poor way to build a team. But I hardly think that putting the goalie first is a bad decision. I don't think many would dispute the fact that Luongo is in the top 3 goaltenders in the league, and frankly I'm pretty sure that most would argue between Brodeur and him for the number 1 spot. $7.5 million for Luongo is a steal! He is equal in value to a Crosby, a Malkin, or an Ovechkin (all of whom do, or shortly will make over $9,000,000/year)
In summary....
1) No do not put all your eggs in one basket (and the Canucks have not done so)
2) $7.5 million is not much for Luongo
3) Luongo is at least 5 years away from being "past his prime" |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2009 : 15:43:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
Alex, your subject title is gratuitous and essentially has nothing to do with the post itself. You should edit it to something relevant to your post, or edit the post itself so that it matched the subject line. Besides, I hardly think that a guy who just turned 30 is past his prime in the NHL. He has at least 5 stellar years left, probably more.
But to your point (I think it's your point anyway), the Canucks built and nurtured a reasonably well-rounded team this year, considering they were barely expected to make the playoffs. In the end they nabbed first in their division right at the buzzer, and then went on to the second round of the playoffs (after not making it to the dance at all last year) This translates to finishing around 6th to 8th spot in the league, not too shabby - whatever their strategy was!) The playoffs are a different bird and beyond having a good team you need a hell of a lot of good luck (just ask anyone who bet on the "sure thing" Bruins) The Canucks need tweaking, not re-architecting.
You say that Pittsburg has Malkin, Crosby and Fleury (If you include Gonchar I am assuming that you are saying they have about 4 baskets) Well combined these 4 make $19.5 million. Do you know why they only make this little? Because Malkin makes less than $1 million! Next year that will change my friend...then what? They better hope for another miracle...or invest in a great goalie.
The Canucks are not exactly the Red Wings but they are on the right path. If they don't implode financially due to their egos they should be able to keep their core intact. I agree that all your eggs in one basket is a poor way to build a team. But I hardly think that putting the goalie first is a bad decision. I don't think many would dispute the fact that Luongo is in the top 3 goaltenders in the league, and frankly I'm pretty sure that most would argue between Brodeur and him for the number 1 spot. $7.5 million for Luongo is a steal! He is equal in value to a Crosby, a Malkin, or an Ovechkin (all of whom do, or shortly will make over $9,000,000/year)
In summary....
1) No do not put all your eggs in one basket (and the Canucks have not done so)
2) $7.5 million is not much for Luongo
3) Luongo is at least 5 years away from being "past his prime"
Purposely put that title even though it is very loosely tied into my point. Actually, I think as a player Luongo is nowhere near past his prime. But in terms of how much money he's going to get (or should get), I am suggesting he is, by virtue of the fact that the goalie-centered teams do not work. That's why the title fits.
And after all, a title is meant to draw in readers, right  ?
As to your points, can't say I completely agree. Vancouver was trying to win a championship this year. Luongo believed that. I would think Sundin believed that and I would think that was the thinking of the organization when they got Demitra early last off-season. Nope, getting past one round of playoff hockey is a underachievement when compared to the goals these guys had.
And as to the Penguins situation: they have 46 million committed to salary next season. For that money, they've got:
Kunitz-Crosby-?
Dupuis-Malkin-Talbot
Cooke-Staal-Kenedy
?-?-Godard
Orpik-Gonchar
Eaton-Letang
?-?
Marc-Andre Fleury
So, with about 14 million to play with they need to find a top six forward, a top six defenseman, and a backup 'tender. I think prospects can fill in the fourth line positions. Not bad at all. One things for sure - no way they're a worse team than Vancouver next season! |
Edited by - Alex on 05/17/2009 15:44:51 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 08:21:24
|
Leigh - spot on.
Alex . . . where to start? Let's begin with goalies.
Marc-Andre Fleury was chosen #1 in the 2003 entry draft, only the third goalie in NHL history to be picked first. He came in with very, very high expectations (as an 18 year old!) to be the franchise goalie, and after a few years, he began to deliver, leading the Pens to the finals, including an impressive 55 save triple O/T win to stave off elimination, going 12-2 with 3 shutouts for the playoffs.
Before there was Crosby and Malkin, there was Fleury, and make no mistake - the Penguins started their rebuild from the goalie out.
As most successful teams do.
My second point is - read back to what the expectations were at the beginning of the season for the Vancouver Canucks, seriously. The goal was to make the playoffs in a very tight division where every team was a possibility to make it in. As the season wore on, that remained the goal - stay close enough to the top eight until Luongo got healthy again, and make the playoffs. With about 10 games left, after a good run, the possibility to catch a faltering Calgary emerged, and they did it, on the last day. Expectations swelled for a team that looked like a very dangerous opponent now, and for many, it now looked like they had a very good chance to go all the way.
Just because they got knocked out in the second round, doesn't mean they didn't have a successful season based on expectations at the beginning of the year. We all see now that they didn't have the depth in defence, and they had an ace goalie that underperformed in the second round. It happens to the best of them.
And, you missed Leigh's point: Malkin and Crosby are not going to stay together forever like the Sedin twins. Malkin is probably gone after next season (my prediction) because it's just too much money for two huge offensive pieces . . .
Bottom line: if every good GM knows one thing, it is this - if you are building a championship team, you start from the goal out.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 08:43:47
|
Tell that to the Red Wings... they have won 4 stanley cups with 3 different goalies in the past 11 years. As long as they have a competent netminder who understands the detroit system they are good to go.
I know they had Hasek for the cup in '02 but its not like they built the franchise around him... it was about the core players: Yzerman, Fedorov and Lidstrom.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 08:47:53
|
If Malkin leaves, it will be through a trade. Crosby is signed through 12/13 making $9, $9, $9, and $7.5 (million. Malkin is signed trhoguh 13/14 making $9, $9, $9, $9, $7.5 (million).he have virtually the exact same contract, only Sid signed his one year yearly. Fleury is signed through 14/15 at $5.25 million per season.Throw Staal into the mix through 12/13 at $3.5, $3.5, $4.5, $4.5 (million) and the core of that team is locked up for at least the next 4 season. However, that is $26.75-$27.75 million a season on 4 players. I would say that core will stay in for at least 2 more season. Then, you might see one or two traded for huge value to "rebuild" on the fly and remain competative for a long, long time. And I agree completely with Slozo, most of the successful teams in history had a clutch goalie.
The only exceptions I can think of are Detroit with Osgood and maybe the Oilers with Fuhr. However, both goalies were clutch when it counted and specifically Fuhr was know to make that huge, game saving stop late in the game. But, looking at those two teams (Detroit and Edmonton) they had a mix of players that come along once in a lifetime.
However, talking specifically about Luongo, he has not shown be to be that clutch guy. Not the Roy or even Brodeur in the playoffs. When his team needs him the most, he might be there or he might not. He's not clutch. Brilliant regular season goalie. Does his job in the playoffs, but not clutch. Not like others who, when their team is not playing great, they take over and do not let in a goal. Cam Ward reminds be of Roy in the playoffs. He just refuses to let in that goal when it counts. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 09:09:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Roberts85
Tell that to the Red Wings... they have won 4 stanley cups with 3 different goalies in the past 11 years. As long as they have a competent netminder who understands the detroit system they are good to go.
I know they had Hasek for the cup in '02 but its not like they built the franchise around him... it was about the core players: Yzerman, Fedorov and Lidstrom.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E".
I totally disagree with you about the Red Wings. They always win with experienced playoff goalies. 2 time cup winner Mike Vernon-Osgood in 1997 Osgood in repeat year 1998, Hasek-Cujo-Osgood in 2002 and Osgood-Legace in 2007-2008. I think Ossy may be the real deal here whne it comes to playoff victories.
Some goalies are refered to as clutch goalies who play at there best under great pressure(Fuhr, Belfour, Roy, Cujo and Irbe). I would like to see his playoff stats measured against the greats in regards to playoff only. I bet he does well. |
|
|
|
Rambo2305
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
546 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 10:04:28
|
How did we get to talking about Osgood on a forum about ROBERTO LUONGO!?!? lol
Back on topic, Luongo is still amazing, did he let in some weak ones? Yes, but you also have to remember that the Canucks D was MIA in the series! lol
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
|
|
|
Matt_Roberts85
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
936 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 12:38:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Roberts85
Tell that to the Red Wings... they have won 4 stanley cups with 3 different goalies in the past 11 years. As long as they have a competent netminder who understands the detroit system they are good to go.
I know they had Hasek for the cup in '02 but its not like they built the franchise around him... it was about the core players: Yzerman, Fedorov and Lidstrom.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E".
I totally disagree with you about the Red Wings. They always win with experienced playoff goalies. 2 time cup winner Mike Vernon-Osgood in 1997 Osgood in repeat year 1998, Hasek-Cujo-Osgood in 2002 and Osgood-Legace in 2007-2008. I think Ossy may be the real deal here whne it comes to playoff victories.
Some goalies are refered to as clutch goalies who play at there best under great pressure(Fuhr, Belfour, Roy, Cujo and Irbe). I would like to see his playoff stats measured against the greats in regards to playoff only. I bet he does well.
Im not saying they didnt have good goalies when they won, i just dont think that the team was built from the goal out. They just found guys they were comfortable with and went with them.
Remember, heading into 97 vernon wasnt a 2 time winner, just once with the flames. Heading into 98, osgood had never been a starter before, big time question mark. In 02, hasek was hurting, had never won it all before and really, that team infront of him was an all star team so it was gravy. Cujo was still in Toronto in 02.
Ozzie is the real deal come playoff time, It still doesnt mean that detroit builds from the net out. Id say they build blueline out.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2009 : 14:42:32
|
| Agreed, but come playoff time Detroit always seem to have a goalie in the crease with playoff experience. Not like Columbus, Washington, this year. I hope these team are not wondering why they didn't make it one more round. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2009 : 05:18:51
|
I think it takes some time for most human goalies (not Patrick Roy) to become as good as in the playoffs as they are in the regular season . . . and Luongo is starting to get to the point where he doesn't have any more mulligans.
I'll leave it at this: if Luongo puts up the same kind of numbers and performance next year (see: disappointing), then I will firmly put him in the playoff non-performer category. I give him one more year.
As an aside: Osgood is starting to make me a believer this year. As much as I argued against him heading to the HOF on this site last year, if he takes Detroit to the promised land again . . . I'll have to tip my hat to him. He has played very, very well this year in the playoffs.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 06/23/2009 : 05:41:33
|
June 23 2009
Hey guys so I know it's been a long time but now that exams are done there'll be a lot more time hopefully.
Today's more blog is more of an open ended question than anything. It's something I've actually been wondering for a while. My question is, what do NHL teams do during practice? Like, in my league we're always getting better at skating, shooting, passing, crossovers, etc during practices. I would think you're done with that by the NHL level. Other than staying sharp or doing suicides after a sluggish performance, can't imagine there's a lot of pure skating / shooting / hitting drills.
My guess would have to be that they work on team stuff, i.e. systems, breakouts, the trap, fore checks, 3-on-2s, power plays, etc. After all, the best teams in the league are filled with players that know what to do in any situation based on what the other team is doing and where their teammates are (see: Detroit Red Wings.)
Any thoughts? If anyone knows for sure what they do in practices or can get their hands on a practice schedule I'd be interested. |
Edited by - Alex on 06/23/2009 05:42:20 |
|
|
|
Guest6362
( )
|
Posted - 06/23/2009 : 10:37:00
|
| I have been to a Leafs practice and from what i remember they were doing exactly what you said, practicing different situations. But there was also alot of time when the players just did whatever they wanted (try some new fancy moves or just shoot on the goalie). I remember seeing Domi and thinking Wow he some amazing hands, why can't he be this good in a game. I also got to hang out with Mr. Dryden for the day, that was pretty awesome and he signed his rookie card for me that i had. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2009 : 12:54:15
|
June 25, 2009
As most of you know, Steve Yzerman and the management group for the Canadian Men's Olympic ice hockey team in 2010 announced their decision regarding coaching staff, and I thought it fitting to give in my two cents worth.
Number one, I like the decision to bring in Mike Babcock. He is a guy that obviously knows how to win, I think he gets a lot out of his guys and he's a calm headed person. I also think he knows how to utilize four lines quite nicely (mind you that might just be a by-product of working under such a great general manager...) The assistant coaches are Lemaire, Ruff and Hitchcock. Must say, I'm a little surprised that Ruff got in over Quinn, but we'll have to see how that pays off.
Anyways, my main point for today is this. In the NHL, all these coaches are the main guys. I don't understand, (A) what each person is bringing to the team and (B) how smart it is to have four leaders at the helm of a team. I think there's a little too much knowledge and opinion there to let Babcock do his thing. I'm going to assume that Hitchcock and Lemaire would work on the defensive aspects while Ruff and Babcock focus on the offense, I guess.
All I'm saying is, it seems like there are one or two too many coaches on this team. Obviously there's a purpose, would someone care to offer some insight? |
Edited by - Alex on 06/25/2009 13:02:00 |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2009 : 13:06:15
|
| Does seem like one too many coaches for the Olympics. My guess is one for special teams PP/PK/4on4(Hitchcock), Defensive pairing and checking lines (Lemaire) Run and gun scoring lines PP/shootout(Ruff) and Babcock overseeing the development and chemistry of the lines maybe taking control of one aspect or another. Based on the coaching selection I expect this to be a well balanced Defensive lineup. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2009 : 15:37:26
|
Do some homework Lads. Hitchcock has been an asssit. coach at various competions, including the last two Olympics. Ruff has also coached International teams. Babcock is (IMO) not only the best Canadian Coach, he's the best coach in the NHL period. Lemaire is the best defensive coach in the league. Not too many coaches. They all have their roles and will do them well.
And as far as Quinn goes, I'm not surprised he's not there. Although he recently won with the Juniors, he's been out of the NHL for a few years. Absolutely solid choices top to bottom. |
|
|
|
Alex
PickupHockey All-Star
Canada
2816 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2009 : 17:21:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Do some homework Lads. Hitchcock has been an asssit. coach at various competions, including the last two Olympics. Ruff has also coached International teams. Babcock is (IMO) not only the best Canadian Coach, he's the best coach in the NHL period. Lemaire is the best defensive coach in the league. Not too many coaches. They all have their roles and will do them well.
And as far as Quinn goes, I'm not surprised he's not there. Although he recently won with the Juniors, he's been out of the NHL for a few years. Absolutely solid choices top to bottom.
Can't say I agree with you, Beans. I fail to see any purpose for four different guys. In the NHL you've usually got a head coach, a defensive coach and an offensive coach. There's also the goalie coach and the video coach, but that is irrelevant as none of these guys are taking that position.
So, who's who here?
Head coach - Babcock
Offensive coach - Ruff (?)
Defensive coach - Lemaire (?)
Random fourth wheeler - Hitchcock (?)
While we're at it, I'm interested in knowing what Lindy Ruff has done to make himself team Canada worthy, especially over the likes of Pat Quinn who won Canada's last Olympic gold and just came off a win at the World Juniors.
A better coaching staff, in my humble opinion would be:
Head coach - Quinn
Offensive - Babcock
Defensive - Lemaire / Hitchcock (one or the other)
EDIT:
I just watched a TSN.ca video that explain what everyone will be doing.
Babcock - Head coach
Ruff - Defense
Lemaire - Special teams
Hitchcock - ''eye in the sky'' (whatever that means)
So even though both Lemaire and Hitchcock are great defensive coaches, it will be Ruff, who admitted he was surprised to get the call, taking on the defense. Lemaire will have special teams, and Hitchcock basically has a job that's been made up in honour of him.
Look, I hope everything goes well and I respect each of these men for their individual accolades, but I don't think that you can just mix and match talent and create a hodgepodge of a coaching situation behind a bench to have success. If Babcock is your guy then he's your guy. Taking in four coaches because they're all good and it's a hard decision isn't responsibly, in my humble opinion. What happens if they need in game adjustments, for whatever reason? What if Babcock wants to split up a line, or wants to play a particualar line more, or switch something around? Does he have to now answer to four other people?
I don't like it, I think it's too complicated, and I don't see how it could possibly work when the going gets tough. |
Edited by - Alex on 06/25/2009 17:37:13 |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2009 : 17:37:03
|
| Alex, you had me until you said Quinn for head coach. Beans is right he has taken a few years off of the big game. He might deserve a job on the staff, but who has been picked so far I have no problem with. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 06/25/2009 : 20:20:15
|
Would someone like to tell me what it is exactly that makes Babcock the best coach in the league? I just don't see it. I'm sure someone will chime in with "he wins". He has the most talented team to work with and has had for several years now thanks to the great Red Wing brain trust. He inherited a golden goose. Bowman did all the work with that team instilling the necessary qualities to win with the core group of players. After he retired he was still a very big part of what went on with that team until his departure to Chicago recently. Personally I thought some of his decisions in the playoffs this year were questionable.
"Society, have mercy on me. Hope you're not angry if I disagree." - Jerry Hannan |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2009 : 05:34:30
|
I'm with you on that one, Willus. I really don't think Babcock is all that.
Don't get me wrong - he is clearly a solid coach, and you can't take anything away from his cup win . . . but he has the best team on paper. That means, he should win if he is competent.
I consider Hitchcock a better coach than Babcock, and I am not too keen on Ruff being on that team . . . what's the point? You already have three very good coaches in Lemaire, Hitch and Babcock.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Rambo2305
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
546 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2009 : 05:44:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Would someone like to tell me what it is exactly that makes Babcock the best coach in the league? I just don't see it. I'm sure someone will chime in with "he wins". He has the most talented team to work with and has had for several years now thanks to the great Red Wing brain trust. He inherited a golden goose. Bowman did all the work with that team instilling the necessary qualities to win with the core group of players. After he retired he was still a very big part of what went on with that team until his departure to Chicago recently. Personally I thought some of his decisions in the playoffs this year were questionable.
"Society, have mercy on me. Hope you're not angry if I disagree." - Jerry Hannan
Babcock has the respect of every player in the Wings dressing room. He doesn't try to individually single out a player, but tells the team. Also, he doesn't play a single-minded game, he has the Wings working as a team. In today's era, that's huge. Also, with all respect to the Wings' players, but you have to admit, Babcock has taken a team of 3rd liner's, and turned them into solid, 2-way players (with the exception of Lidstrom, Rafalski, Zetterberg, Hossa and Datsyuk). Also, he made Hossa into a "team" player this year! Before this year, Hossa was an offensive minded, single tooled player. This year, Hossa learned from Babcock, if he didn't expand his style, he wouldn't play.
As for the whole, "Bowman did the work", you forget, Babcock never took over for Scottie. Babcock took over for Dave Lewis after Lewis took over the Bowman Era team and found average regular season success and no playoff success. So when Babcock came in, he had to work with a couple rookies in Zetterberg and Datsyuk, and re-develop the dominating style of Red Wings hockey. So to say he inherited a "golden goose", it was more like a goose with the runs...
Also, no matter how many "skilled" players you may have on your team, 3 straight 50+ win seasons, have to show your respect here. About the "questionable decisions in the playoffs", um, getting to Game 7 of the final, and lose 2-1, only thing you can say is, sh't happens. Did people forget he won the cup last year too?
To sum it up, if you want a team Canada from 2006, by all means, apply for the job yourself. However, if you want to see Canada get back to the top, and not run away with our tails between are legs, Babcock is the coach. He'll be hard on the team, key word, TEAM. He'll won't just let the superstars do as they please (like alot of other coaches), he'll make sire this team plays together, finds a chemistry and will battle for a full 60 minutes, no matter what the score is.
There are other coaches that can probably do the job, but at the end of it all, you have to go with the hot hand (in coaching), and post-lockout, no coach has had more success then Babcock in the new style of play...
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2009 : 09:30:04
|
Here's my take on Babcock.
1) He was the coach of a reasonable average team in Anahiem that went to the Cup Final.
2) The Red Wings made the needed adjustments after bouncing out to the Oilers in the first round to go to the Conference final the next season, win the Cup the year after, and go back to the finals the year after that.
3) Sure, you can argue the fact that he has TONS of talent on that team, but there is an obvious system in Detroit. It works. He put that system in.
4) And most important, Babcock has possible the most talented team in the league(or definately the top 3-5 if you don't agree with #1) and is successful. Other teams (San Jose, Boston) also have talented teams but do not succeed. Why not have a coach that has proven he can win with talent.
I think Babcock is the best choice today for the Head Coach. The next best in my opinion would have been Brent Sutter. I like Hitchock, Ruff (who has coached internationally before and won) and Lemaire. Quinn, for anyone who says won the last Gold for Canada, was also the coach of a team(who many said was more talented than the 02 team) who didn't medal in Turino. Plus, he's been out of the pro game for 3ish years???
I might even agree that Babcock might not be the head coach, but I can't understand leaving him out completely. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2009 : 11:22:26
|
That Anaheim team that Babcock coached to the final? That was the team that had a red-hot JS Giguere playing like Patrick Roy. It was a decent team with a phenomally hot goaltender that eventually snagged MVP honours.
Sorry, I don't give Babcock a whole lot of credit for that . . . again, I feel he was competent, but nothing exceptional.
To your second point - he won the cup 2 out of the three years he had the best team on paper. Again, I rate that as "competent", nothing amazing there.
Myself, I would have picked Hitchcock, with Babcock as assistant.
And please . . . no jokes about their name endings
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Rambo2305
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
546 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2009 : 11:36:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
That Anaheim team that Babcock coached to the final? That was the team that had a red-hot JS Giguere playing like Patrick Roy. It was a decent team with a phenomally hot goaltender that eventually snagged MVP honours.
Sorry, I don't give Babcock a whole lot of credit for that . . . again, I feel he was competent, but nothing exceptional.
To your second point - he won the cup 2 out of the three years he had the best team on paper. Again, I rate that as "competent", nothing amazing there.
Myself, I would have picked Hitchcock, with Babcock as assistant.
And please . . . no jokes about their name endings
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Ken Hitchcock? He's had his days in the past...but he hasn't been able to change his style to adjust to the "new NHL" or style of play, which mimics international play. As well as the players that play for Canada, all due respect Slozo, if Hitch was coaching Canada, we'd have a repeat of Torino...
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 06/26/2009 : 14:38:55
|
But Slozo, would you not want a coach with the experience of coaching the "best" team in the league when the Olympic team will be full of super-duper stars???
No disrespect to Hitch. His teams, good or bad, always compete and follow his direction to a tee. Uber Competative as well.
Ultimately, with the 4 guys they picked, they could have had any one of them as the Head Coach and it would be a solid pick. We are arguing minor details.
And ultimately, like every other decision that Yzerman gets to make, he's either a hero or a goat. They win, every decision he made was perfect. They lose, every decision will be under a microscope. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Canada - Russia rap 
