Thoughts on the Patrick Kaleta penalty
View Single Post
01-23-2013, 12:05 AM
coolest hf sabre fan
Join Date: Oct 2009
Originally Posted by
Pat going after Kessel
You, as well as some of the posters defending Pat, are missing the main point of why what Pat did is a good thing and will help build a stronger team. Its no different than Stafford fighting Hartnell. Its not really about deterrence so much as its about team building and developing an attitude of everyone having everyone else's back. Most successful teams play this way. Something GrigsandGirgs pointed out in this thread and the GDT.
I get the feeling I've been unclear. I don't care for PK's actions if they are the sign of a forming trend. Not every accidental slight needs rough justice in return. What, is Kessel not going to
bump Miller again because some third liner knocks him to the ice? It's not like Tootoo taking a flying leap here.
Everything comes at a cost.
That it does. Playing the way you've suggested (take the PP and try and make them pay by scoring on it) is how this team has operated for the last several years. The cost to playing that way has been either missing the playoffs all together or early exits when we made it. The only "cost" to last nights game was a nail biting finish but we won.
Vancouver made game 7 of the finals never sticking up for their players
. I don't think that tipped the balance.
And in terms of what it cost them last night, they went from a 5-4 for two minutes to a 4-4 where they ended up taking a penalty. It
have been a lot worse. Miller made sure it wasn't, and I'm not sure he'd make that trade
in this instance
Btw statistically speaking, teams rarely make the other team pay when they turn the other cheek and take the PP chance. Just look at the PP conversion rates in the NHL the last few years. Last season they ranged from a best of 21.6% to the worst 13.5%. There are rarely more than a handful of teams above 20%. Now look at the PK rates and see how rarely teams pay for taking penalties. 76.7% on the bottom last year and 89.6% at the top with 24 teams at or above 80%.
A 15% chance at a goal? Sign me up.
Teams don't really pay that high of a price for aggressive play and frankly more than a few teams have used that mixed with skill players to have successful playoff runs. I'll take a team looking to rebrand its identity playing a harder game that will cost us PP opportunities and makes us PK a few more times over the passive version we had for the last few years.
There's a difference between aggressive play and retaliatory penalties, no?
View Public Profile
Bucky Gleason's albums
Find More Posts by Bucky Gleason