HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Minnesota Wild (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   Gameday thread: Wild @ Avalanche, Nov. 4 (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=25142)

theo6060 11-03-2003 11:00 AM

Gameday thread: Wild @ Avalanche, Nov. 4
 
Minny record 5-6-1.
Colorado record 6-5-0.

I'm gonna go with Minnesota 3-2. Goals by Gaborik, Dupuis and Zholtok.

Luke154 11-03-2003 12:05 PM

is Gaborik playing for sure

DW 11-03-2003 12:23 PM

No word of if he plays for sure, but I would count on him being in the lineup. He might not play a whole lot though.

AVE MAN 11-03-2003 12:25 PM

Does anyone know who'll be starting in between the Pipes tonight?

vitogor 11-03-2003 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVE MAN
Does anyone know who'll be starting in between the Pipes tonight?

I think Fernandez will get the start. But don't quote me on that. ;)

ceber 11-03-2003 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke154
is Gaborik playing for sure

Lemaire says yes: http://www.startribune.com/stories/1330/4192103.html

possible injury to Dupuis, though?

I say 4-3 Avs.

KillToronto 11-04-2003 03:19 AM

Who's starting tonite 11/4? Manny or Dwayne?
 
Any idea?

Kristofer 11-04-2003 02:40 PM

3-3
Brunette, Park, and Schultz

ceber 11-04-2003 07:04 PM

Well, normally I'd be happy with a tie against the Avs, but somehow this one feels like it could've been 5-2 or 6-3 in our favor. Oh well. Nice to see Gaborik skating again, although <joke about heavy wallet and no scoring on near-breakaway removed>! ;)

Goal of the game, IMO, was Brandner's... I liked that one!

aylib 11-04-2003 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceber
Well, normally I'd be happy with a tie against the Avs, but somehow this one feels like it could've been 5-2 or 6-3 in our favor. Oh well. Nice to see Gaborik skating again, although <joke about heavy wallet and no scoring on near-breakaway removed>! ;)

Goal of the game, IMO, was Brandner's... I liked that one!

I ve noticed that a lot of your predictions are within 1 goal of actual results. :handclap:

Wild Bill 11-04-2003 07:29 PM

Agreed, two seperate 2 goal leads blown, bad turnovers in the defensive end, a little disappointing. Bomber looked about as bad as I've ever seen him...turnovers, slow outlet passes...yuk! Still, a point in Colorado is nothing to shake a stick at. At least Gabby played a solid game, especially in overtime.

aylib 11-04-2003 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bloodyrags
Agreed, two seperate 2 goal leads blown, bad turnovers in the defensive end, a little disappointing. Bomber looked about as bad as I've ever seen him...turnovers, slow outlet passes...yuk! Still, a point in Colorado is nothing to shake a stick at. At least Gabby played a solid game, especially in overtime.

Bomber only played about 17 minutes, 2 goals for during that time, 2 goals against.

Wild Bill 11-04-2003 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aylib
Bomber only played about 17 minutes, 2 goals for during that time, 2 goals against.

Yeah, and he had nothing to do with the goals for and alot to do with the goals against. 17 minutes, two goals against and the ugliest turnover in our zone so far this year, IMO. He once was our steadiest D-man at moving the puck out of the zone...didn't look like it tonight. Alex Henry didn't look all that impressive either, although his size and strength down low was a welcome sight. Wouldn't mind seeing Roche get some ice time...

aylib 11-04-2003 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bloodyrags
Yeah, and he had nothing to do with the goals for and alot to do with the goals against. 17 minutes, two goals against and the ugliest turnover in our zone so far this year, IMO. He once was our steadiest D-man at moving the puck out of the zone...didn't look like it tonight. Alex Henry didn't look all that impressive either, although his size and strength down low was a welcome sight. Wouldn't mind seeing Roche get some ice time...

Bombers collection of turnovers is pretty impressive, even in a season thats about 10 games long. Roche isnt a whole lot worse than Bomber at this point if you ask me.

MN_Gopher 11-04-2003 09:27 PM

The good thing about Roche is he plays on the PP. Meaning rest time for Kuba. And then we do not have to see Mitchel and Bomber on the PP either, good D men not good scorers. Henry is only out there briefly for 5 on 5.

tk421 11-05-2003 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceber
Goal of the game, IMO, was Brandner's... I liked that one!

I agree.

I also hope that this game shows some Daigle bashers his value to the team. He is a great offensive player and PP guy. His passing rivals Brunette's, but he can move a lot quicker than Bruno.

CechMY5HOLEman-ek! 11-05-2003 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
I agree.

I also hope that this game shows some Daigle bashers his value to the team. He is a great offensive player and PP guy. His passing rivals Brunette's, but he can move a lot quicker than Bruno.

Daigle would have more value to the team if his assets and/or his downfalls were unique. Daigle's playmaking and shot can be matched by other Wild players. His speed is not unique either.

Yet his weaknesses (size/strength) is prevalent throughout the lineup, and the team doesn't need another PP specialist that is considered vulnerable 5 on 5.

Despite playing similar minutes is Daigle, the "great offensive player and PP guy", more productive on the PP than Bruno? No, not right now. Is he more productive at even strength aided by moving "a lot quicker than Bruno"? No, not right now.

Zholtok and Bouchard (both lacking defense and Daigle speed...both most useful on the PP than ES or PK) are both outscoring Daigle in points per game.

Laaksonen, Park, and Walz (all more versatile players) are outscoring him. Daigle's usual linemates have the same number of points. Daigle is tied for 8th in scoring on the team.

I don't think anyone is "bashing" Daigle, his game has its place. However, the reality is in order for him to be most useful/valuable to the team (because he is predominately a one dimensional player) he has to put up points. If he can put up points he'll stay, but IMO he's not worth keeping around if he can't. When I look at the scoresheet and watch the games I see more to be desired.

That is not to say he can't turn it around, but based on the players the Wild already have invested in and history, I'd say the odds are against Alexandre.

tk421 11-05-2003 01:37 PM

Quote:

Daigle's playmaking and shot can be matched by other Wild players. His speed is not unique either.
I disagree, shot and speed can be matched yes, but his playmaking ability is probably one the best on the team. He is probably the second or third best passer on the team, and I've seen many teams respect his speed and playmaking ability by backing off and not aggressively forechecking like they would a Park or Bouchard.
Quote:

Yet his weaknesses (size/strength)
He is 6'0" 203 pounds. I don't think he has a size issue. I've seen him fight through several crowds near the boards to gain control of the puck.

He may not be blazing up the point sheet, but I've seen improvements in his game. He is on the team for his offensive potential which could put him as the #2 best offensive player if he meets that potential. If he doesn't then the point is moot. You need balance on a team. Right now Daigle has more he has to show, but I still think he has shown good improvement.
I predicted he would have 20 goals and 25-30 assists. For a guy making $500,000 that's not bad. We are stocked with defensive guys who only chip in only a handful of goals a year. Isn't it worth the gamble to have a guy on the team who could produce 20-30 goals in a year, but may need to be teamed up with better defensive players.
I would have traded a pure goal scorer in last years Western Conference Finals for all the Antti Laaksonens, Jim Dowds, and Richard Parks in the world. Our defensive players couldn't score when they needed to.

CechMY5HOLEman-ek! 11-06-2003 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
I disagree, shot and speed can be matched yes, but his playmaking ability is probably one the best on the team. He is probably the second or third best passer on the team,

What are you disagreeing with? I never said his shot, speed, or playmaking wasn't good or not one of the best/better on the team. I simply said it could be matched by other players...including players who regardless of ones opinion are currently outscoring Daigle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
He is 6'0" 203 pounds. I don't think he has a size issue. I've seen him fight through several crowds near the boards to gain control of the puck.

And just as often, if not more, he won't even go after the puck in open ice or race into the corner or get near the boards and gain possession because a defender is near or closing in. He has been extrememly inconsistent in that regard or IMO will shy away from contact any time he has time to make the decision to do so.

Also, if you watch him play, he doesn't use his size (hitting, driving to the net...he's knocked off the puck very easily, etc.) and his poke check is one of the weakest on the team. Strength and willingness to sacrifice his body is an issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
He is on the team for his offensive potential which could put him as the #2 best offensive player if he meets that potential. If he doesn't then the point is moot. You need balance on a team. Right now Daigle has more he has to show, but I still think he has shown good improvement.
I predicted he would have 20 goals and 25-30 assists. For a guy making $500,000 that's not bad.
... Isn't it worth the gamble to have a guy on the team who could produce 20-30 goals in a year, but may need to be teamed up with better defensive players.

I never stated that Daigle is not a worthwhile experiment. If it works out, great. I simply think there is a better than average chance it could end (history does have a tendency to repeat itself) this season, especially if he can't put up the numbers you predict.

The reality is Daigle has only scored 20+ goals (and 51 points) twice in his career and the last time that occured was over 6 years ago (in a higher scoring time in the NHL to boot).

It remains to be seen if he can transfer his opportunity into a season long success story, but we will see.

tk421 11-06-2003 01:08 PM

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html

The State of Hockey is no longer in a state of panic now that Marian Gaborik is back. If Alexandre Daigle and Christoph Brandner can continue to play as well as they have, the Wild's forwards could end up being better than they were last year.

CechMY5HOLEman-ek! 11-06-2003 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html

The State of Hockey is no longer in a state of panic now that Marian Gaborik is back. If Alexandre Daigle and Christoph Brandner can continue to play as well as they have, the Wild's forwards could end up being better than they were last year.

I guess that's proof! :shakehead :)

tk421 11-07-2003 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CechMY5HOLEman-ek!
I guess that's proof! :shakehead :)

Hey, I wasn't trying to start an argument. All I was trying to say was Daigle was playing well, and those people who said that he might be sent to Houston should reevaluate
their opinions. Then you come on and pretty much make the case that Daigle is doing nothing, and provides nothing we couldn't get from anybody else on the team.

What I posted was just a indicator that other people in the Hockey world also believe that Daigle is playing well, and brings more to the team than last year.

So I don't understand the hostility. If you can't debate without resorting to sarcasm then go to forum.canucks.com and go to the trash talk section.

tk421 11-07-2003 08:33 AM

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twinci...ts/7202291.htm

Coach Jacques Lemaire has singled out the checking unit of Brandner, center Marc Chouinard and right wing Alexandre Daigle for its defensive work against opponents' top lines. Because Brandner and Daigle also bring an offensive pedigree to the mix, the trio has been dangerous with the puck.

...

Chouinard, Daigle and Brandner benefited from this big time. They're our best checking line," Lemaire said Thursday. "They scored a goal the other night against Colorado. Finished a plus against one of their top lines. They've been great."

CechMY5HOLEman-ek! 11-07-2003 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
Then you come on and pretty much make the case that Daigle is doing nothing, and provides nothing we couldn't get from anybody else on the team.

I never said Daigle is "doing nothing", but yes, we can get his individual assets other places on the team. That much is obvious. The dispute lies with how one evaluates his entire package when inserted into the lineup.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
What I posted was just a indicator that other people in the Hockey world also believe that Daigle is playing well, and brings more to the team than last year.

You posted what a single individual - Jon A. Dolezar - thinks. Moreover, unless you or anyone else here can supply some background on why Mr. Dolezar has a well-informed opinion (he's actually seen every Wild game this season?) there is no reason to hold his opinion up as more valuable than a random poster on these boards. And I don't know about you, but I'm naturally skeptical so I am not swayed by just anyone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
So I don't understand the hostility. If you can't debate without resorting to sarcasm then go to forum.canucks.com and go to the trash talk section.

I don't know why you sense hostility. I'm curious why what I said is to be interpreted as "hostile." You were referring to people as "Daigle bashers", which could be considered as name calling. Were you intending to be hostile? I assume(d) not.

There is no intended hostility coming from me. That's what the smiley face is for. I think it's funny that anyone would post what you did as support in this "debate", especially by its lonesome (w/o comments/support about how you intend it to be interpreted), because I find it to be a very uncompelling appeal to authority and not useful to the discussion. That's all.

If we agree about anything, I think we should call it (the "hostility") a misunderstanding promoted by the emotionless face of the internet and refrain from aiming below the belt.

CechMY5HOLEman-ek! 11-07-2003 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tk421
From the St. Paul Pioneer Press

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twinci...ts/7202291.htm

"Chouinard, Daigle and Brandner benefited from this big time. They're our best checking line," Lemaire said Thursday. "They scored a goal the other night against Colorado. Finished a plus against one of their top lines. They've been great."

Even though you're still appealing towards proof by authority, this quote is from someone with known credentials and someone most of us here trust. You still refrain from dissecting his comments though, which leaves it open for criticism/examination.

For instance it is obvious to assume that Jacques loves Chouinard's checking ability, because he plays him more than any other Wild forward (including the old #1 checking center Wes Walz) on the penalty kill and at even strength. So to me it is logical that Chouinard by himself makes this line rate very high in Jacques' mind.

The quote does argue towards Jacques liking the line and therefore one could use that as support for Daigle's spot is safe, but the quote is short on elaboration and says nothing about Daigle specifically, which IMO like Daigle, leaves a lot to be desired.

But this quote is far more useful than the first one when it comes to the issue at hand.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50 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.