HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Edmonton Oilers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   Why that line-up last night? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=13218)

IceDragoon 09-21-2003 09:03 PM

Why that line-up Saturday?
 
I have been really busy the last few days and have had little time to read, let alone post anything more than a few words. I just finished reading all the posts since yesterday, and you guys are great. There is such a good diversity of perspectives. It is going to be fun chatting with you all season.

Some of you did an excellent job of telling us what you saw last night.
Some of you noted that for the most part we iced an AHL team.
Most anticipated "Saturday night at the fights".
Most of you didn't expect to win, but I'll bet you were quietly hoping the boys could pull one out of a hat.
Some of you even criticized MacT's choices, preferring to see others play together.

Last night was not just "rest most of the regulars" or "get the young guys in a game before we cut them". MacT and co were counting on them to lose BIG TIME to see how well the young guys handle adversity with intense pressure. Would they suck it up or crumble?

As soon as I saw these lines: (thanx LT)

FORWARD LINES
Ethan Moreau-Shawn Horcoff-Ales Hemsky
Jason Chimera-Jarret Stoll-Fernando Pisani
Jani Rita-Chad Hinz-Jamie Wright
Raffi Torres-J.J. Hunter-Georges Laraque

DEFENCE PAIRINGS
Brent Henley-Steve Staios
Bobby Allen-Rocky Thompson
Marc-Andre Bergeron-Scott Ferguson

GOALTENDERS
Ty Conklin
Steve Valiquette


I knew the coaches were looking for "character" to show. I can just see them smiling and saying: "Let's see what they're made of when the fit hits the shan". They probably expected at least one guy (rocky?) to be thrown out for one too many fights. I think they had every intention of pushing MAB past empty (30+ minutes). And altho I don't know how MacT matched lines, I would venture a guess that everyone got more than a few shifts on the ice with Iginla, Conroy and McAmmond.

Moreau and Staios were the veteran, character stalwarts (to a lesser degree, BG and Fergie), out there to maintain a "steady hand" and lead by example.

A friend of mine went to the game and he told me that MacT did a lot of smiling during and after the game. I think he got exactly what he was looking for.

I also think that we're starting to see MacT step out of his comfort zone. He's going to throw us a few curve balls this year.

theoil 09-21-2003 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceDragoon
I have been really busy the last few days and have had little time to read, let alone post anything more than a few words. I just finished reading all the posts since yesterday, and you guys are great. There is such a good diversity of perspectives. It is going to be fun chatting with you all season.

Some of you did an excellent job of telling us what you saw last night.
Some of you noted that for the most part we iced an AHL team.
Most anticipated "Saturday night at the fights".
Most of you didn't expect to win, but I'll bet you were quietly hoping the boys could pull one out of a hat.
Some of you even criticized MacT's choices, preferring to see others play together.

Last night was not just "rest most of the regulars" or "get the young guys in a game before we cut them". MacT and co were counting on them to lose BIG TIME to see how well the young guys handle adversity with intense pressure. Would they suck it up or crumble?

As soon as I saw these lines: (thanx LT)

FORWARD LINES
Ethan Moreau-Shawn Horcoff-Ales Hemsky
Jason Chimera-Jarret Stoll-Fernando Pisani
Jani Rita-Chad Hinz-Jamie Wright
Raffi Torres-J.J. Hunter-Georges Laraque

DEFENCE PAIRINGS
Brent Henley-Steve Staios
Bobby Allen-Rocky Thompson
Marc-Andre Bergeron-Scott Ferguson

GOALTENDERS
Ty Conklin
Steve Valiquette


I knew the coaches were looking for "character" to show. I can just see them smiling and saying: "Let's see what they're made of when the fit hits the shan". They probably expected at least one guy (rocky?) to be thrown out for one too many fights. I think they had every intention of pushing MAB past empty (30+ minutes). And altho I don't know how MacT matched lines, I would venture a guess that everyone got more than a few shifts on the ice with Iginla, Conroy and McAmmond.

Moreau and Staios were the veteran, character stalwarts (to a lesser degree, BG and Fergie), out there to maintain a "steady hand" and lead by example.

A friend of mine went to the game and he told me that MacT did a lot of smiling during and after the game. I think he got exactly what he was looking for.

I also think that we're starting to see MacT step out of his comfort zone. He's going to throw us a few curve balls this year.


I think both coaches got what they wanted last night. Sutter wants to instill confidence and thinks that winning even in the pre-season is the way to make believers of his crew and MacT was looking for something else. Yours is a better analysis than any I had thought of.:bow:

Bicycle Repairman 09-21-2003 10:28 PM

Oh what a bunch of claptrap! What a bunch of Revisionist History. Are you implying your squad (fully cognizant of the fact it is indeed preseason) didn't try? If so, Craig MacTavish is guilty of a most heinous crime insofar as competive sports goes. No coach sets his team up to lose. The idea is preposterous.

Boondock Saint 09-21-2003 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
Oh what a bunch of claptrap! What a bunch of Revisionist History. Are you implying your squad (fully cognizant of the fact it is indeed preseason) didn't try? If so, Craig MacTavish is guilty of a most heinous crime insofar as competive sports goes. No coach sets his team up to lose. The idea is preposterous.

No one is saying that the Oil threw the game, but that MacT dressed a weak lineup to see how some of the youngsters would fare with their backs up against the wall.

Don't get all huffy, BR.... Let's try reading all future posts nice and slowly before replying.

Bicycle Repairman 09-21-2003 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boondock Saint
No one is saying that the Oil threw the game, but that MacT dressed a weak lineup to see how some of the youngsters would fare with their backs up against the wall.

Don't get all huffy, BR.... Let's try reading all future posts nice and slowly before replying.

I'm not the least bit huffy. And yes, I do concur that preseason is a time for experimentation. However, no one remotely associated with the pinnacle of competiveness (namely the professional NHL) is worthy of their stature if they decide to lose a game purposely. That's a mockery of the level they've obtained. They compete over hotel breakfast waffles for chissakes. If they don't go all out even for something as meaningless as an exhibition game, then they don't deserve to be called "professional."

creative giant* 09-21-2003 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
I'm not the least bit huffy.

A sure sign of huffiness is your above use of the phrase " What a bunch of claptrap! " :joker:

Relax, they were trying to figure out ( as I was) why MacT would ice a lineup that was heavy on AHL talent. Just floating ideas, don't worry. The Flames deserve full credit for the win. The Flames ruled the hockey universe on September 20 and crushed the Oil with a mighty display of offense and goaltending. Too say it was spectaculor would be an understatement. The Oilers gave 110% but fell short to the overpowering Flames. They did not deserve to be on the same ice for this massive pre-season battle of two long-time rivals.

Happy?

Chayos 09-21-2003 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
I'm not the least bit huffy. And yes, I do concur that preseason is a time for experimentation. However, no one remotely associated with the pinnacle of competiveness (namely the professional NHL) is worthy of their stature if they decide to lose a game purposely. That's a mockery of the level they've obtained. They compete over hotel breakfast waffles for chissakes. If they don't go all out even for something as meaningless as an exhibition game, then they don't deserve to be called "professional."

I think his point was to see how the Rooks would deal with the pressure of a game where there were no veterans to pull the fat out of the fire. The preseason is a time to try things like this and put some pressure on your rookies. Hey if the youngsters step forward and win a game like that when the odds were stacked against them you have learned something about them and what they can do.

Remember even Neo Didn't make the Jump the 1st time because no one makes the jump the 1st time, but we stil hope it can happen

Allan 09-22-2003 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chayos1
Remember even Neo Didn't make the Jump the 1st time because no one makes the jump the 1st time, but we stil hope it can happen

What the hell are you talking about?

Allan 09-22-2003 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
I'm not the least bit huffy. And yes, I do concur that preseason is a time for experimentation. However, no one remotely associated with the pinnacle of competiveness (namely the professional NHL) is worthy of their stature if they decide to lose a game purposely. That's a mockery of the level they've obtained. They compete over hotel breakfast waffles for chissakes. If they don't go all out even for something as meaningless as an exhibition game, then they don't deserve to be called "professional."

I don't think anyone is saying that the players didn't try, or the coaching staff didn't try to have that lineup win. They are saying, IMO, that they used a lineup which had only a slim chance of winning in order to see how the kids who are going to be counted on this season would deal with the pressure, when it fell on them instead of the more established vets who weren't playing.

Mr Sakich 09-22-2003 02:59 AM

after watching comodore try to remove devo's knee the other day, mact was probably happy to rest his star players. Calgary plays physical but when they get down by a couple, they have some real cheap shot artists. In pre-season, a lot of the guys have to get noticed to stick around and going after a knee or chin is one way to do it.

oilswell 09-22-2003 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
If they don't go all out even for something as meaningless as an exhibition game, then they don't deserve to be called "professional."

A universal quality of the preseason is that rookies and fringe players get way more ice time than during the regular season. If winning counted so much in the preseason, this wouldn't happen. Clearly, you're exaggerating.

As far as being a REAL professional, I would imagine each and every one of the NHL coaches would be willing to lose every single preseason game (purposefully!) if, by doing so, it meant winning a single regular season game they would otherwise have lost. Some experiment during the preseason might just make that difference in the season.

oilswell 09-22-2003 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceDragoon
Last night was not just "rest most of the regulars" or "get the young guys in a game before we cut them". MacT and co were counting on them to lose BIG TIME to see how well the young guys handle adversity with intense pressure. Would they suck it up or crumble?

Interesting angle. I never really thought about it that way. At first glance, it sounds plausible, but I have doubts. My first thought, upon seeing the lineup, was "great, prime minutes for the fringe players, good idea".

While I believe every player on the ice (and every coach) was wanting to win, I would think that each player was more interested in showing the coach what they could do, and try to do whatever they could to stick with the club. Thus, each shift they were (or should have been) motivated to do their thing, even if losing 10-0. So, for instance, when losing 4-0, a guy like Chad Hinz might have been thinking "OK, another great chance, I'm gonna go out and show MacT why I should be here" instead of looking at the scoreboard and thinking "this is useless, I'll save my energy for next game when we have a chance".

Other thoughts as I saw the lines:
  1. Moreau-Horcoff-Hemsky. Moreau will drop with anyone coming near Hemsky. Good call. Horcoff/Hemsky given another try...MacT's interested in putting together a 2nd line from these two?
  2. Chimera-Stoll-Pisani. Checking line of the future? Or Bulldog redux?
  3. Rita-Hinz-Wright. WTF?
  4. Torres-Hunter-Laraque. Good, Laraque's there. Still worried about Hemsky.
  5. Henley, Staios, Allen, Thompson, Bergeron, Ferguson: we're going to lose.

Quote:

I would venture a guess that everyone got more than a few shifts on the ice with Iginla, Conroy and McAmmond.
Judging from the shift chart, Its close. It looks like he put Horcoff's line more often than against Iginla in the first period and tried the Rita line against him in the 2nd (with disasterous results). The Stoll line got matched up at least once in the 3rd (again, disasterous results).

Quote:

Moreau and Staios were the veteran, character stalwarts (to a lesser degree, BG and Fergie), out there to maintain a "steady hand" and lead by example.
Moreau, Ferguson, and Laraque are all willing fighters. I think Ferguson had only 4 fewer fights than Laraque last year. If you ask me, it looks like MacT was trying to ensure it would be a calm affair for the small guys. Laraque barely saw the ice in the 3rd period: its pretty hard to lead by example from the bench.

Quote:

A friend of mine went to the game and he told me that MacT did a lot of smiling during and after the game. I think he got exactly what he was looking for.
Maybe its just me, but he frequently seems to smile when the rough stuff gets going.

That was a pathetically inexperienced lineup. When Moreau, Horcoff, and Laraque are your only forewards with significant experience....wow.

Shibumi 09-22-2003 04:51 AM

"What the hell are you talking about?"

Think Matrix.

Allan 09-22-2003 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shibumi
"What the hell are you talking about?"

Think Matrix.

Heard of it, never seen it. Thanks for filling me in.

IceDragoon 09-22-2003 09:36 AM

Most of you understood that I was not disagreeing with what was said, merely trying to add another dimension to the perspectives. Just another piece in the big puzzle. Thanx.
Quote:

Originally Posted by oilswell
Interesting angle. I never really thought about it that way. At first glance, it sounds plausible, but I have doubts. My first thought, upon seeing the lineup, was "great, prime minutes for the fringe players, good idea".

My first thoughts were: OUCH!!! It's gut check time. Coaches want to see what kind of character you're made of boys.
Quote:

While I believe every player on the ice (and every coach) was wanting to win, I would think that each player was more interested in showing the coach what they could do, and try to do whatever they could to stick with the club. Thus, each shift they were (or should have been) motivated to do their thing, even if losing 10-0. So, for instance, when losing 4-0, a guy like Chad Hinz might have been thinking "OK, another great chance, I'm gonna go out and show MacT why I should be here" instead of looking at the scoreboard and thinking "this is useless, I'll save my energy for next game when we have a chance".
Agreed.
Quote:

Other thoughts as I saw the lines:

Moreau-Horcoff-Hemsky. Moreau will drop with anyone coming near Hemsky. Good call. Horcoff/Hemsky given another try...MacT's interested in putting together a 2nd line from these two?
Yup. Could be. Probably had the best chance of looking good.
Quote:

Chimera-Stoll-Pisani. Checking line of the future? Or Bulldog redux?
I'd say yes to question #1, altho I think Chimmer has more upside.
Quote:

Rita-Hinz-Wright. WTF?
:lol: You took the words right out of my mouth. I think Rita was the one in the lion's den and under the microscope here.
Quote:

Torres-Hunter-Laraque. Good, Laraque's there. Still worried about Hemsky.
and Rita. Out there to keep the Flames honest.
Quote:

Henley, Staios, Allen, Thompson, Bergeron, Ferguson: we're going to lose.
:D
Quote:

Judging from the shift chart, Its close. It looks like he put Horcoff's line more often than against Iginla in the first period and tried the Rita line against him in the 2nd (with disasterous results). The Stoll line got matched up at least once in the 3rd (again, disasterous results).
Makes sense, thanx.
Quote:

Moreau, Ferguson, and Laraque are all willing fighters. I think Ferguson had only 4 fewer fights than Laraque last year. If you ask me, it looks like MacT was trying to ensure it would be a calm affair for the small guys. Laraque barely saw the ice in the 3rd period: its pretty hard to lead by example from the bench.
Agreed. Early on at camp, Laraque pulled his groin. He apparently aggravated it enough to "lead by example from the bench".
Quote:

Maybe its just me, but he frequently seems to smile when the rough stuff gets going.
I've noticed that too, but he also gets agitated when things are not going his way. He may have also been thinking about all the work his assistants had to do on Sunday. Assessments after that game had to be a beach. One of my old coaches used to say; "You'll learn more from your failures than you ever will from your successes".
Quote:

That was a pathetically inexperienced lineup. When Moreau, Horcoff, and Laraque are your only forewards with significant experience....wow.
After Moreau, Laraque, Staios and Fergusson; you could count the NHL experience in minutes. ;)
Quote:

Originally Posted by thor dyck
after watching comodore try to remove devo's knee the other day, mact was probably happy to rest his star players. Calgary plays physical but when they get down by a couple, they have some real cheap shot artists. In pre-season, a lot of the guys have to get noticed to stick around and going after a knee or chin is one way to do it.

Agreed.

copperandblue 09-22-2003 09:45 AM

I don't know if it's far fetched thinking or not but do guys think that the opposing coaches coordinate their lines in the pre-season?

If you look at the Oilers and Flames, they are both teams with probably 80% of their roster set and an over abundance of kids fighting for the remaining few spots.

Wouldn't it make sense that if you are trying to guage your young players you would want to see how they do against NHLer's instead of AHL's.

So, first game we saw quite few Oiler NHLer's against quite a few Calgary youngters. Gives Sutter the opportunity to see how the kids fair against decent talent.

2nd game it was the opposite.

Just seems to me that it works well for both teams and we shouldn't really get concerned about wins, losses or even system play right up till now because this was supposed to be where the individual was supposed to step up.

However with that last round of cuts, I guess we can start guaging the team starting tonight.

OYLer 09-22-2003 10:42 AM

Keep the paying fans happy
 
EDMONTON VS VANCOUVER from Game Day Notes http://www.edmontonoilers.com/

"Tonight’s game is the first of two pre-season games between the Oilers and Canucks in 2003-04. It is the 24th pre-season game between the Oilers and Cancucks, with Edmonton holding a 14-6-3 (.674) record, outscoring Vancouver 103-72. Edmonton is 7-2-1 at home, 6-2-2 at Vancouver, 1-2-0 on neutral ice and 1-0-1 in overtime.

The Oilers and Cancuks met five times during the 2002-03 regular season with Edmonton losing the series with a record of 0-2-1-2 and were outscored 20-13 by Vancouver...

The teams will meet six times in 2003-04 as the Oilers host the Canucks on Dec. 20/03, Feb. 21/04 and Mar. 12/04 and visit Vancouver on Oct. 11/03, Dec. 27/03 and Apr. 3/03."


Ya think the Oilers lineup for Tuesday's pre-season tilt might sport a few more rested and not banged up starter? ;)

OYLer 09-22-2003 10:47 AM

Mistake corrected
 
Oops meant tonights preseason opener not Tuesdays

G-Double 09-22-2003 11:18 AM

do the Oilers play the canucks in ancouver on tuesday? if so i'll try and make it to that game..., wait, nevermind i have work...well do they play anyway?
hahaha

IceDragoon 09-22-2003 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G-Double
do the Oilers play the canucks in ancouver on tuesday? if so i'll try and make it to that game..., wait, nevermind i have work...well do they play anyway?
hahaha

Tomorrow - the boys move to Jasper.
Saturday - Minnesota comes to Skyreach.
Next Tuesday, Sep 30, 7pm @ GM place. :)

creative giant* 09-22-2003 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
Oh what a bunch of claptrap!

I almost died laughing...

Behind Enemy Lines 09-22-2003 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bicycle Repairman
Oh what a bunch of claptrap! What a bunch of Revisionist History. Are you implying your squad (fully cognizant of the fact it is indeed preseason) didn't try? If so, Craig MacTavish is guilty of a most heinous crime insofar as competive sports goes. No coach sets his team up to lose. The idea is preposterous.

Albeit extreme, I agree with Bicycle Boy. The integrity and credibility of pro sports in at stake whenever games are played. Granted the Oilers used Saturday night to evaluate young prospects against a heated opponent but they were challenged to succeed. It is a great way to measure heart and desire in these young players - kinda like throwing them in the deep end and forcing them to swim. The goal of any professional team is to win all of its games but in pre-season there is room to gamble and challenge the youth with no real risk or downside... other than some wounded pride in losing to our hated rivals.

Without the assurance that all pro teams are committed to winning all of its games, the game itself risks becoming pro wrestling.

kraigus 09-22-2003 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oilswell
That was a pathetically inexperienced lineup. When Moreau, Horcoff, and Laraque are your only forewards with significant experience....wow.

Laraque's got 7 years of pro experience, all in the Oilers system - that's nothing to sneeze at. Moreau's got 10 years of pro experience, including 4 full seasons with the Oilers - fairly impressive, by Oilers standards. Who else besides Smyth has as many as those two up front? Even on the blueline, Smith, Staios, and Cross are the old guys - well, Fergie too.

IceDragoon 09-22-2003 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Behind Enemy Lines
Albeit extreme, I agree with Bicycle Boy. The integrity and credibility of pro sports in at stake whenever games are played. Granted the Oilers used Saturday night to evaluate young prospects against a heated opponent but they were challenged to succeed. It is a great way to measure heart and desire in these young players - kinda like throwing them in the deep end and forcing them to swim. The goal of any professional team is to win all of its games but in pre-season there is room to gamble and challenge the youth with no real risk or downside... other than some wounded pride in losing to our hated rivals.

Without the assurance that all pro teams are committed to winning all of its games, the game itself risks becoming pro wrestling.

But you see, we don't disagree. Just because you're expected to lose, doesn't mean you try to lose. Coaches were looking for "I want to succeed, against all odds" character.

oilswell 09-22-2003 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraigus
Laraque's got 7 years of pro experience, all in the Oilers system - that's nothing to sneeze at. Moreau's got 10 years of pro experience, including 4 full seasons with the Oilers - fairly impressive, by Oilers standards. Who else besides Smyth has as many as those two up front? Even on the blueline, Smith, Staios, and Cross are the old guys - well, Fergie too.

Sorry, but its still pathetically inexperienced, even by the young Oilers' standards. You can maybe make a case that a single foreward line could be made that is reasonably seasoned.

Smyth, Dvorak, York, Reasoner, Isbister,...that's 5 "vets" out at least. I see what you're saying and sympathise, but at the same time....man alive, it was an experienced lineup and pointing out Moreau and Laraque just doesn't change it.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:23 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.