Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes

caniac52

Full Member
  • Content Count

    107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About caniac52

  • Rank
    Rookie
  1. We were hoping to get one, too, but missed the game they were distributed. In prior years, extra copies were available at subsequent games, but not this year. Good luck getting one from a household that received more than one at the November 1 giveaway game.
  2. I'm as perplexed as anyone about why JR chose Mo, and hope he can do well for the Canes on his second time around. I went to the game last night, and then saw the FS Carolinas replay this afternoon. Yes, I'm a glutton, but I wanted to hear how Forslund and Tripp discussed the change. One interesting thing struck me when Tripp mentioned that JR had to get approval from Toronto to speak to MO, and that Brian Burke approved it. Burke's recent arrival in the Toronto front office may have everything to do with the timing of MO's availablity to come here. I have no way of knowing this but enjoy speculating that JR has wanted to get MO back on board months ago but probably got stonewalled by Toronto's former GM and couldn't get the green light until Burke arrived to give it.
  3. Help me understand this line of reasoning. Why are so many posters on this thread treating the Brindy contract extension as though it were a major Rutherford mistake? Wasn't it clear in 2006 that JR was rewarding Brindy with a contract that said "You've done some great things for our club and there's always a place for you in this organization!"? I don't recall any expectation that Brindy would continue to be a top producer "on the ice" for the then next five years in Carolina, only that he would have a place for certain to call home in the Carolina Hurricanes. I just assumed then that they would find a solid role for him in the organziation, something like a guaranteed retirement plan: "Brindy, you're taken care of." So why, now, does everyone think it's a terrible mistake that we have Brindy for two more years? He shouldn't be playing twenty minutes each game, and I think Lavy had to because so many other centers were IR or MIA. Cullen's back and Sutter's improving with each passing week, so Brindy can now contribute in a more limited way. That's not necessarily a demotion, if it works for the team. And it's not a mistake for JR to keep him around. Does Brindy's contract allow for a redesignation of his salary as management instead of player. Does that take him out of the player cap limits down the road? If so, I'm more sure than ever that JR knew exactly what he was doing and applaud him for it. Am I the only one who saw it this way?
  4. Everyone who says +/- is meaningless for forwards, or misleading at best, must look at one more factor. How many of the even strength goals against has he been on the ice for. Factor in his 4 even strength goals scored and you have him on ice for 24 opponent goals valued for +/-. This team has given up 80 goals; 51 of those have been even strength (per nhl.com stats). Brind'Amour was on the ice for almost half of the even strength goals, with 400 minutes of even strength time on ice in 26 games played (approx. 1/3 the total even ice time). By contrast, Josef Melichar has a much more benign looking -1, but he has been just as harmful to the Canes defensively. Melichar has played in only 15 games, been on the ice for 118 even strength minutes (approx. 1/10 of the Canes total), and has still been on ice for 8 of the 51 even strength goals against Carolina all season, approximately 15%. The two are on the ice for almost the same ratio (percentage of even strength goals divided by percentage of even strength ice time), but Brind'Amour's -20 looks much more devastating than Melichar's -1.
  5. Really? What would we get in exchange? Another team's detritus? I hear there' a new opening in the front office now that Francis is working behind the bench. Isn't it time to move Brindy gracefully upstairs?
  6. Why are we so anguished? Was Lavi so bad? I've pointed out how close he came to being Coach of a dominant team this year. Change a Staal whiff here, and bad pinch there, and this team could easily be sitting with 15 or 16 wins, well out in front of the SE Div. Was Lavi the reason we are not there? Well now we get see how Mo handles the team. We are anguished because Mo's best full season with the Hurricanes was 38 wins in 2000-'01, with 88 points (note, he had more points 91 in 2001-'02, on fewer wins, 35). Lavi's worst full season with the Hurricanes was 40 wins in 2006-'07, for 88 points. We're disappointed because Lavi got us to the top and couldn't keep us there, so we replace him with a coach who has "the winningest record" but has yet to win as many games as Lavi did in a full season. The press releases tout Mo's "winningest" record as Hurricanes coach, but don't tell us his 268 Hurricanes wins came with 406 more games he did not win, so he has a 39.7% winning percentage. Lavi won only 167 for the Hurricanes, but did so at a 51.7% winning pace. Just to match Lavi's winning pace, Mo must win, get this, 167 games in a row, exactly the number of wins Lavi earned in his 3 full and 2 partial seasons behind the Canes bench. That would bring Mo's record from 268 wins in 674 games up to 435 wins in 841 games, to match lavi's 51.7% percentage. That's why were are anguished. edited to reflect Mo's 91 point season. When I first wrote this I was focusing on wins. My bad.
  7. The shame of all this to me is that with Williams on the verge of returning, the whole team should be more effective. That should be true whether Lavi or Mo is behind the bench. I had hoped that having Williams back would get Lavi over the hump or out of the rut (choose your own metaphor). Lavi doesn't get that opportunity now and its a shame. If Williams reenergizes the team now, MO will get all the credit and everyone will say it was a good thing to dump Lavi. Life is so unfair.
  8. Is that where the team has been maillng it in? The Holly Springs list. It is all so clear now.
  9. I agree completely. Mo didn't have to lift a finger to get his check. Coming back to Carloina clearly shows he prefers coaching hockey at the NHL level to playing amateur golf. By coming back here, he is risking his entire future Hockey career. Failure now with the talent this team offers him would cast him into the NHL dustbin. He has to succeed, and we will all love him for it if he does. To me, this echoes JR's decision to pick up Samsonov off of waivers last year. That washed up, has been came into Caniac nation and set us all on fire. I sure hope Mo can do the same.
  10. Well here we are just barely into day two of Mo 2.0 and we haven't seen a win yet. I think it's time to give the Canes a fresh moniker for JR's idea of a fresh start. Here's one I trotted out earlier today on another board, paying homage to the Detroit bailouts and the Karmanos connection: Mo-Town and the Retreads. It seems just perfrect for the second time around club. Then I got to thinking the captain could take the new lead, so it could be "MoTown and the Hot Rod" I'll be there to see how the Canes handle this change against the Pens. Thanks to the Rangers for taking them into overtime. Could that wear them down enough to give us a strong third period?
  11. With that humility, I wouldn't want you up there, either, cause up there, everyone is in front of you. Try walking out on the ice from the press box. It isn't easy.
  12. That example is ideal, but it stands out because it is so rare. How many other times has firing the coach made no difference, or even made the team perform worse? Think Tampa Bay (twice), Atlanta, and how about the New Jersey Devils just before the playoffs. See how far that got them. Fire the coach is the right answer only when you have a better answer and no one can tell for sure until review3ing it in hindsight. At the time of the change, who knew Boudreau would work out so well? Who knew the other changes would not match up?
  13. Look at last year. Everyone knows Staal stepped up his game after Brindy's knee went out on Feb. 14. In the 23 games beginning that night and running to the end of the year, Staal had 12 games with two or more points. Carolina lost only 6 (i.e, 1/4) of those 23 games. In the previous 42 games (game 18 through game 59) he had 4 games with two or more points. The Canes lost 23 (i.e. more than half) of those 42 games. When Staal was not contributing two points a game (goals or assists), the Canes lost with almost twice the frequency as when he was contributing. How does that compare to this season? Before his injury became apparent, he had two multi-point games in Carolin's first five played: result Carolina 3 wins, 1 loss. 1 SO loss. Since then, he has had two multi-point games in the next 20 games, and Carolina won both. Overall record in those twenty games: Carolina 9 wins, 10 losses, 1 SO loss. Strikingly, again this year the team loses more than half the games played in stretches when Staal consistently fails to contribute two points a night.
  14. He sure has been giving up the puck at the blue line or center ice way too often. Late in 06-07, Brindy made what was practically a handoff to Atlanta on a misplayed pass in a 1-1 tie game at the time. Atlanta scored on the ensuing rush to take the lead, and Carolina couldn't get the equalizer. Feb 20, 2007. But Brindy also opened the scoring that night, giving Carolina the 1-0 lead they failed to hold. I remember being so angry at his blueline miscue. This year, I noted on another board his weak game against Los Angeles: One shot on goal, 4 giveaways, 0 takeaways. I don't know where to find giveaways and takeaways cumulated on NHL.com, but that could be a more interesting statistic for forwards than +/-, kind of like turnover margin in NCAA football. It's my impression that this year he seems to be less effective on takeaways, and more generous on giveaways, than was his norm. He definitely seems to be a stride slow and caught out of position more frequently than before.
  15. You're right about that. It has been a long thread at 17 pages now. I know readers can't keep up with all the variations of serious thought, sarcasm, and simple frustration that continue to appear. My "Fire the Coach" rant is more clearly sarcastic in posts #163 and #235 back at pages 9 and 12.
×
×
  • Create New...