HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Islanders (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=22)
-   -   Two More Bad Goals Against (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=21402)

islandermaniac 10-20-2003 05:16 PM

Two More Bad Goals Against
 
snow better figure this thing out pretty quickly or he'll be lucky to see 20 games of action this entire season...provided, of course, that dipietro doesn't join him in the tank.

Islanders4Cups 10-21-2003 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by islandermaniac
snow better figure this thing out pretty quickly or he'll be lucky to see 20 games of action this entire season...provided, of course, that dipietro doesn't join him in the tank.

Now that is finding something negative in a whole lot of positive. C'mon, Snow played a solid game against a team that was flying and hitting early. Isles defense left Snow out to dry early and the Leafs had a lot of dangerous opportunites and Snow passed the test with flying colors.

Great Game by Snow #3 star in my opinion!

NYIsles1* 10-21-2003 04:33 AM

DiPietro will have his rough games and he will have his good games. For now it's a very good stretch of games worth enjoying. Winning defensive player of the week is a heck of an accomplishment for someone his age, who is really in his first weeks as a full-time NHL goalie.

As for Snow he played to his career trends last night. Some very good saves (which really was the difference in the final score) followed by one goal he should have had the post and another where he wandered (again) and left a wide open net for an easy goal.

There are reasons he has been a backup for most of his career. The second half of last year was his best run of consistent play and the first half he was not playing well enough as a backup.

Even Roberto Luongo has bad stretches. Anyone catch the two softies he let in last night that were the difference in Florida's loss?

blitzkriegs 10-21-2003 06:32 AM

there was no need for Snow to go THAT far to help clear the puck. He made a bad judgment call. Then when we got there, he whiffed on attempting to move the puck along the boards. While it was a 5-1 game at the time before the goal, a goal against like that in the second period (last night in the 3rd) could be a difference maker.

A bad goal is a momentum changer for both teams. The team with the goal against loses confidence/positive energy b/c of the goal. The team that 'magically' scored gains confidence/positive energy that may overcome the goal differential in the game. (See Salo, Osgood, Fichaud)

Does Snow still play that puck when the game is 3-1? Yes! Does it go in? Yes. That makes it 3-2 and with the Isles of the last several years (and already this year again) the last several minutes of a game are always interesting in their defensive zone.

NYI1 - Yes, Lindros' goal was a misplayed glove hand save by Luongo. That's ok, NYR victory gives them a false sense that THEY actually won the game. However, they were outplayed all night and Dunham was the only reason beyond Luongo's softies that NYR did not lose 6-2.

Seedy 10-21-2003 06:33 AM

Bad goals yes but atleast they are curable. I would be more concerned about positioning breakdowns, lack of physical aggression in defensive zone or laziness which I haven't seen yet this year take away 25 minutes in the season opener.

Garth still brings quality back-up minutes, experience and a positive attitude.

Trottier 10-21-2003 09:18 AM

No denying the "roaming" goal was a bad judgement, and may have hurt in a closer game. But those are hypotheticals.

I simply agree with the sentiment that we're looking for perfection in a world/sport that is imperfect.

As one who does not hesitate to point out NYI's weaknesses, at the moment, I can find virtually none. More glaring defensive breakdowns earlier on last night (let's not forget that the Leafs, despite their start, are not a poor team), but overall, one cannot find much fault with the result.

Darth Milbury 10-21-2003 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trottier
No denying the "roaming" goal was a bad judgement, and may have hurt in a closer game. But those are hypotheticals.

I simply agree with the sentiment that we're looking for perfection in a world/sport that is imperfect.

As one who does not hesitate to point out NYI's weaknesses, at the moment, I can find virtually none. More glaring defensive breakdowns earlier on last night (let's not forget that the Leafs, despite their start, are not a poor team), but overall, one cannot find much fault with the result.

Actually, I was sort of surprised the score was not closer last night. The Isles transition game was somewhat weak, and they got bogged down in their own zone a lot. The Laffs actually outshot us. They just weren't finishing and were't getting the puck in front enough. A couple of bad bounces and the game could have easily gone in another direction.

I can't believe the hustle Stirling is getting out of Kvasha. Its not just that Kvasha is putting up points - he is showing a shocking level of grit.

blitzkriegs 10-21-2003 09:45 AM

i'm glad the 'roaming goal' happened during a 5-1 game. However, the hypothetical is that Snow should know his limitations and not subject the score/team/momentum to play that does NOT require his assistance.

are we striving for perfection? No, just making points of how certain plays may have certain consequences under different circumstances (that are likely to be true).

Trottier 10-21-2003 10:52 AM

Blitzkrieg, I did not mean that as a criticism of your point, hope you didn't take it as such. The original post in this thread was just a bit over the top as far as over-reacting, IMO.

Heck, the game was too open by Stirling hockey standards! Getting to the point where I'm disappointed if the opposition gets more than 20 shots on goal.

blitzkriegs 10-21-2003 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trottier
Blitzkrieg, I did not mean that as a criticism of your point, hope you didn't take it as such. The original post in this thread was just a bit over the top as far as over-reacting, IMO.

Heck, the game was too open by Stirling hockey standards! Getting to the point where I'm disappointed if the opposition gets more than 20 shots on goal.

nope - i think you pointed something out, but didn't realize it sort of opened up another area of conversation. No biggie either way. as you may know, i like to highlight some of the smaller things and bring them out on a larger scale for points/debate.

agreed: the original post in the thread was a little excessive, but the continuing posts were pretty substantive.

i agree that i think the shots against are a little higher than I originally thought. But hey, thinking positive that boosts the goalies stats if they let 1-2 in per night

islandermaniac 10-22-2003 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trottier
Blitzkrieg, I did not mean that as a criticism of your point, hope you didn't take it as such. The original post in this thread was just a bit over the top as far as over-reacting, IMO.

Heck, the game was too open by Stirling hockey standards! Getting to the point where I'm disappointed if the opposition gets more than 20 shots on goal.

couldn't disagree more. why is that over the top? pointing out snow's constant inconsistency is over the top? the fact of the matter is this: snow let's in a bad goal per game it seems (going back to last season) and this is not the type of team that can overcome one of those per game. he has no puckhandling skills whatsoever yet continues to pretend as though he does. over the top? no way.

Trottier 10-22-2003 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by islandermaniac
couldn't disagree more. why is that over the top? pointing out snow's constant inconsistency is over the top? the fact of the matter is this: snow let's in a bad goal per game it seems (going back to last season) and this is not the type of team that can overcome one of those per game. he has no puckhandling skills whatsoever yet continues to pretend as though he does. over the top? no way.

You wish to get worked up every time a player makes an error, go for it. Personally, over the course of an 82 game schedule, I don't think it's worth it.

"Let's in a bad goal per game"??? Guy is 34 y/o veteran, has been in the league a decade. From when exactly has he let in a bad goal per game? Maybe the first two games of the year? Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiig deallllllllllllll!

As for "overcoming" a mistake: making an error as he did in a 5-1 game in October is not the same as making that error in the last minutes of a tied Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Seems to me the team overcame it just fine on Monday.

OK, not "over the top". Much ado about nothing. But again that's my opinion on your opinion, nothing personal.

islandermaniac 10-22-2003 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trottier
You wish to get worked up every time a player makes an error, go for it. Personally, over the course of an 82 game schedule, I don't think it's worth it.

"Let's in a bad goal per game"??? Guy is 34 y/o veteran, has been in the league a decade. From when exactly has he let in a bad goal per game? Maybe the first two games of the year? Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiig deallllllllllllll!

As for "overcoming" a mistake: making an error as he did in a 5-1 game in October is not the same as making that error in the last minutes of a tied Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Seems to me the team overcame it just fine on Monday.

OK, not "over the top". Much ado about nothing. But again that's my opinion on your opinion, nothing personal.

i guess i'll view this as me holding players to a higher standard. btw, why am i not allowed to critique player performances? should i only pick on regular targets around here (ie.) czerkawski?

i should mention, btw, that he does indeed let in bad goals. too many actually. i even recently read a scouting report that suggests the same thing. i quote, "has a propensity to give up too many rebounds and the occasional bad goal. is a tad slow in terms of lateral mobility." (waymoresports.com)

what disturbs me about snow is that by now (after being in the league a decade as you point out) he should realize that he is limited in certain areas (i.e) puckhandling. so, he probably shouldn't venture away from the crease, but still does it anyway. i believe that if he continues to do such idiotic things (like pretending to be martin brodeur out of the crease) then he, indeed, should be benched. that is why i believe my original argument is valid, and therefore, not "much ado about nothing." imo, this team can't afford his mental mistakes.

Le Golie 10-22-2003 05:32 PM

Bad goals happen, that's a fact. But anyone who just accepts that and doesn't find away to minimize the amount of times they occur isn't a gamer.

If Snow continues to give up a bad goal a game (he has been known to do this, it isn't anything new and that's why he's a career back-up) I hope he doesn't hit the ice.

I for one am not simply going to shrug off a bad goal per game because that's going to lead to a lot of ties and losses. He hasn't impressed me and as much as I don't like being overly critical, there is no room on a 'wannabe' contending team for an inconsistant goaltender.

Trottier 10-22-2003 07:57 PM

I'd be concerned if Garth Snow and Stirling were, in fact, fixated on a mistake in a 5-2 win(!). Pretty certain they are not.

BTW, Garth Snow is a mediocre NHL goalie, as most backups are. Always has been, always will be. Anytime your goalie gives up 2 goals in a game, especially a goalie who is rapidly becoming your #2, it's a reason for :), not :mad:.

Just my opinion.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:35 PM.

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.