Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
gocanes0506

In Season 2017-18 Talk

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Except when it is not--and the huge sample, which so impresses you, is exactly what, in this highly specialized situation, negates the case-specificity of any particular game, and excludes issues like momentum, desperation, sustained pressure prior to pulling the keeper, etc.

 

Stats aren't always the answer. Sometimes it's trusting your team.

 

Personally, I think Rem (and Lake) laid out a pretty good argument based on actual data that pulling the goalie earlier when down by 1 goal gives better odds at tying the game than waiting later to go 6v5.  I also don't think they are judging Peters decision, but rather presenting an alternative argument (based on more than speculation) on why the decision was actually made to pull Darling with 3 minutes left. 

 

I don't understand why this has to be a debate about who knows more about it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Coastal. Maybe I overreacted to top. Different opinions make the board. I think we can all agree that scoring one goal in the entire game is more reflective of the concern right now, and arguably put us in that position in the first place. Lets score more goals.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, coastal_caniac said:

I don't understand why this has to be a debate about who knows more about it.

Seems to me a discussion about when it was done and how it was executed. If feeling strongly and expressing it makes it a debate hey, guilty as charged. 

 

I think a major benefit of pulling the goalie is the opposition's uncertainty about when it will happen. IMO BP lost that element of surprise and it cost him. Not sure how "IMO" constitutes a debate about who knows more about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is safe to say that in this particular case we pulled the goalie early and it didn't work. The nice thing about hockey is that there is another game looming. The team has to put the Bolts game behind them and focus on the Leafs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, remkin said:

Thanks Coastal. Maybe I overreacted to top. Different opinions make the board. I think we can all agree that scoring one goal in the entire game is more reflective of the concern right now, and arguably put us in that position in the first place. Lets score more goals.

Or miss more posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Not sure how "IMO" constitutes a debate about who knows more about it.

 

Well, "IMO" did get a little snarky, so there is that.

 

I think this is something to keep an eye on going forward.  I'm sure the situation will arise again with so many games left.  It will be interesting to see if BP does the same thing in a similar situation.  If he does, it could be more reflective that he is playing the odds - which support that pulling the keeper earlier being one goal down is more successful.

Edited by coastal_caniac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Switching gears.  One of our co-captains who is on the blue line has truly been leading by example.  He is playing a sound 2-way defensive game as all blue liners should and is really lighting it up!  Giving this guy the C was a great idea.  What has been up with Justin?  He is just as bad as Hanifin.

Edited by bluedevil58
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It occurred to me this morning that the other night when the Canes got a "Too many Gentlemen on the ice" penalty that the referee could have been making a subtle jab at us on our physicality.

 

Then I looked and sure enough we are last in hits...

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggregate=0&gameType=2&report=realtime&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20172018&seasonTo=20172018&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=hits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the blaming Faulk or Hanifin thing, when 3 of the 4 losses were 2-1 games (face it, the TB loss was a 2-1 game), how exactly is it the defense's fault?  Teams need to score more than 1 goal in order to win.  This isn't soccer.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, super_dave_1 said:

On the blaming Faulk or Hanifin thing, when 3 of the 4 losses were 2-1 games (face it, the TB loss was a 2-1 game), how exactly is it the defense's fault?  Teams need to score more than 1 goal in order to win.  This isn't soccer.

However, this team isn't going to win if both of these guys are not scoring.  The team is built to have scoring come from the blue line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bluedevil58 said:

However, this team isn't going to win if both of these guys are not scoring.  The team is built to have scoring come from the blue line.

 

However, one of these guys is tied for 4th on the team in scoring.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, super_dave_1 said:

 

However, one of these guys is tied for 4th on the team in scoring.

 

 

 

For a team that is 28 in the NHL in scoring.  That's your counter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bluedevil58 said:

 

For a team that is 28 in the NHL in scoring.  That's your counter?

 

For a team that can't score, by all mean, blame one of the guys that has scored.

 

Why do I even bother sometimes?  Easier when I just ignore this completely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

The only reason to do it that early is when you're down by two, analytics be damned. It is also an extremely case-specific decision, one too nuanced to count on analytics, which do not take those nuances into account, for direction. This is why some of us are saying BP should have trusted his gut instead.

His team was surging--that is the key point. We'd owned them in their end for the prior five minutes, and the dam was about to break. But the minute the Bolts saw our open net, they knew they'd won the game. This is the NHL, where guys can hit that thing from anywhere on the ice--not the intermission, with guys in sneakers trying to win $100. Another minute of 5 v 5 would have still given the Canes two minutes of 6v5, if they failed to tie 5v5.

 

19 hours ago, LakeLivin said:

 

Ok . . . That pretty much begs the question and ends any further discussion, no? :D  And what makes you think BP wasn't going with his gut, the fact that yours said something different? Yeah, we were carrying the play, but we also weren't scoring.  Might it have been possible that Peters felt that we just weren't going to score at even strength within the next minute, which is why he went so early?  

I'm considering shifts.  The way he did it Peters was sure he'd have the players he wanted out there on the 6-on-5 for a full, relatively fresh shift.  If he waits, sure, he might get the 6 out there together fairly quickly, or, if it takes the Canes awhile to gain possession in their end, maybe not.  I'm not saying it's an overriding consideration, but I do think it could be a factor.

 

16 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

You're basically shortening your bench at that point to your two PP units plus one forward. It ain't rocket science, and BP has done it around 2:00 in these situations in the past. So, no sale.

As for my other point ending discussion, yes. Yes it does.

 

2 hours ago, top-shelf-1 said:

Seems to me a discussion about when it was done and how it was executed. If feeling strongly and expressing it makes it a debate hey, guilty as charged. 

I think a major benefit of pulling the goalie is the opposition's uncertainty about when it will happen. IMO BP lost that element of surprise and it cost him. Not sure how "IMO" constitutes a debate about who knows more about it.

 

Top, I'm not going to pretend to know how you meant your arguments to come across.  But look back at your actual statements; surely you can see how others might not get any indication of an IMO on your part, given how you worded your posts?  Not trying to pile on here, just pointing out that it's possible that you may be coming across differently in print than the way you intend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, super_dave_1 said:

 

For a team that can't score, by all mean, blame one of the guys that has scored.

 

Why do I even bother sometimes?  Easier when I just ignore this completely.

 

Ok Hanifin aside, Justin Faulk has yet to have a goal.  Ignore me all you want but it's concerning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

 

 

 

 

Top, I'm not going to pretend to know how you meant your arguments to come across.  But look back at your actual statements; surely you can see how others might not get any indication of an IMO on your part, given how you worded your posts?  Not trying to pile on here, just pointing out that it's possible that you may be coming across differently in print than the way you intend.

Lake, I would offer that discussions on these boards are inherently PASSIONATE, and as such, often can get misconstrued just as much by the listener as the author of those words. In this particular matter, BP's gambit failed, thus he is "justifiably", or not, criticized. Had if succeeded, he likely would have been celebrated as "genius". We, no matter how we view this, can never know precisely how he made this decision, can we? I personally celebrate his boldness for at least trying to break through the scoring impasse that currently seems to be affecting 90+ percent of the team, and look forward to the next time he is in this situation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

          Shot %            

#1    Bolts        13.6%

#2    Leafs       13.0%

.

#29  Canes        7.3%

#30  Oil             5.0%.

#31 Yotes         4.9%

 

I think this pretty much sums it up.

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LakeLivin said:

          Shot %            

#1     Bolts        13.6%

.

#29  Canes        7.3%

#30  Oil             5.0%.

#31 Yotes         4.9%

 

I think this pretty much sums it up.

 

Yeah it's what we all feared but deep down knew.  Lack of high end skill in the top 6.  I will give it 20 games before I make a final verdict but it's not looking good right now.  Rask has been non existent and Ryan belongs in the AHL IMO.  Not sure Wallmark is ready.  May have to trade for a 3 C or give one of LIndy, Aho, TT a shot at it and hope it sticks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hag65 said:

It occurred to me this morning that the other night when the Canes got a "Too many Gentlemen on the ice" penalty that the referee could have been making a subtle jab at us on our physicality.

 

Then I looked and sure enough we are last in hits...

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggregate=0&gameType=2&report=realtime&reportType=season&seasonFrom=20172018&seasonTo=20172018&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=hits

 

 

If i remember correctly the 'too many gentlemen' call went against Edmonton (am i getting my games mixed up?  the opposition, in any case...) and not against the Canes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, bluedevil58 said:

 

Yeah it's what we all feared but deep down knew.  Lack of high end skill in the top 6.  I will give it 20 games before I make a final verdict but it's not looking good right now.  Rask has been non existent and Ryan belongs in the AHL IMO.  Not sure Wallmark is ready.  May have to trade for a 3 C or give one of LIndy, Aho, TT a shot at it and hope it sticks.

 

 

If you ask me, we already have a half-dozen 3Cs so unless you're shuffling one of those out for another, i see no benefit to another one.  You're not sold on Ryan which i respect even though i disagree, but even so if we bring in another 3C in his place yet leave the 1C untouched, we're not accomplishing much of anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for the team to respond to the fans.  Right here on this board, we've had a bunch of new people contribute, and some have come back from the dead.  Meanwhile, our regulars are having little brotherly love tiffs.  The fans are ready.  Is the damn team ready to make a move?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, realmdrakkar said:

 

 

If i remember correctly the 'too many gentlemen' call went against Edmonton (am i getting my games mixed up?  the opposition, in any case...) and not against the Canes.

 

Crap.  I hate it when facts ruin a good joke.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...