HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

oilers style

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-03-2003, 06:31 AM
  #1
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
oilers style

You know what, aside from 3 games (the two shutout losses, and the blowout by the Avs), I have really enjoyed watching this team play... bad defense and all.

I mean, was that red wings game not one of the most entertaining games you have seen in a while? There were a couple of nice hits, some beauty goals, a few big saves...

Call me old fashioned (or a hockey fan... whatever), but to me a good, entertaining game is more important than a win. I would have rather watched the game on Saturday, than a game where the Oilers get a 2-0 lead in the first and trap the hell out of the other team right on through to the end.

For the most part, the Oiler games have been really exciting, fast, and if you like offense, the team has been pretty effective at putting the puck into the net (averaging 4.14 goals per game at home).

It's not necessarily the best recipe for playoff success... but at least the games are fun.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 06:36 AM
  #2
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
see I prefer the other. I appreciate and enjoy watching teams play great defense. I wish that the Oilers would realize that an entire decade has past and the days of not playing defense are gone forever. I would much prefer to see a 2-0 lead in the first, trap the ba-jezus out of the team and come away with that same score at the end of the game, rather then continue to forcheck recklessly and all that until all of a sudden we are the ones playing catchup, and we still get to see a trap because the other team is smart and are going to protect their lead.

If the whole NHL could change, then well... ok. But the way it is, I think it's frustraiting that we won't trap for 30 minutes to lock up a win.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 06:50 AM
  #3
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,632
vCash: 500
i would rather the oilers never win another game for the rest of their existence than start to play the trap..... the oilers are the only reason i watch hockey anymore, the game is so boring now that my love for the oilers is the only thing that keeps me watching at *all*..... if they started playing the trap i would stop watching even the oilers play and the NHL would lose another fan

its funny this comes up today, because my dad who has watched hockey his entire life cant watch a game that the trap is even being played in.... even when the oilers are playing - if they are playing a team that traps he usually turns the game off after the 2nd period or so because he has grown bored/frustrated.... this really tells you how bad the state of the game is right now

personally i think that the NHL should come up with some way(s) to make the trap illegal (i know this is almost impossible but there must be *some* way)

jadeddog is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 06:58 AM
  #4
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
see I prefer the other. I appreciate and enjoy watching teams play great defense. I wish that the Oilers would realize that an entire decade has past and the days of not playing defense are gone forever. I would much prefer to see a 2-0 lead in the first, trap the ba-jezus out of the team and come away with that same score at the end of the game, rather then continue to forcheck recklessly and all that until all of a sudden we are the ones playing catchup, and we still get to see a trap because the other team is smart and are going to protect their lead.

If the whole NHL could change, then well... ok. But the way it is, I think it's frustraiting that we won't trap for 30 minutes to lock up a win.
I love great defense... well, sorry, I love great defensive plays...

I could easily handle a game where the shots are 21-18, as long as there is speed and flow to the game... I don't mind the trap, what I do mind is the interference. The trap isn't overly hard to beat... it is the hooking/holding, and interference run on the forecheckers that ruins it.

I mean, it's great that they cracked down on hooking and holding, but that is only one small part that the trap uses... I mean, remember when Laraque got that penalty on Gauthier? He was trying to get in on the forecheck, wasn't anywhere near the puck, and didn't even dump it in, but Gauthier stood him up and played him as if he had the puck (laraque ended up giving him a face rub, but that isn't the point).

If the NHL is really serious about eliminating the trap, or at least speeding up the game, they need a rule where you can't touch a non puck carrier if he isn't within 5 or so feet of the puck (you of course can still finish your checks and that, which is unrelated).

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 06:59 AM
  #5
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Well I think it'd be pretty easy to stop. You'd simply have to do something like what the NBA did in calling illegal defense. you could have a rule that if you have five goals in the neutral zone when the puck is in the opposing players end then the play is whistled down, and treated like an intentional offside and there is a face-off in the other end. If a team repeatedly does this, then the ref gives them a delay-of-game penalty. It would work pretty easily, although the zoning and the small points would have to be ironed out, but I think that it would be pretty doable.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 07:18 AM
  #6
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I mean, it's great that they cracked down on hooking and holding, but that is only one small part that the trap uses... I mean, remember when Laraque got that penalty on Gauthier? He was trying to get in on the forecheck, wasn't anywhere near the puck, and didn't even dump it in, but Gauthier stood him up and played him as if he had the puck (laraque ended up giving him a face rub, but that isn't the point).
I never understood why that was never a penalty for interference and this has been happening even before the trap. What Gauthier did is not even playing the trap. It's pure interference. The refereeing is just plain awful. I watch the Sens game on saturday on NHL centre ice. Hossa was hauled down right in front of the ref. On the replay, the ref was looking straight at the play. No excuses.

There is no gray area here. It's either interference or it's not.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 07:21 AM
  #7
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. van Nostrin
I never understood why that was never a penalty for interference and this has been happening even before the trap. What Gauthier did is not even playing the trap. It's pure interference. The refereeing is just plain awful. I watch the Sens game on saturday on NHL centre ice. Hossa was hauled down right in front of the ref. On the replay, the ref was looking straight at the play. No excuses.

There is no gray area here. It's either interference or it's not.
I know the Flames weren't trapping at the time, I just wanted to use a play that was still somewhat fresh as an example of the interference.

I was always pretty sure that should be a penalty, and I really think when they started to not-call that, it was the beginning of the end.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 07:22 AM
  #8
OYLer
Registered User
 
OYLer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Win Desperate & Mad!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Well I think it'd be pretty easy to stop. You'd simply have to do something like what the NBA did in calling illegal defense. you could have a rule that if you have five goals(you mean skaters just waiting?) in the neutral zone when the puck is in the opposing players end then the play is whistled down, and treated like an intentional offside and there is a face-off in the other end. If a team repeatedly does this, then the ref gives them a delay-of-game penalty. It would work pretty easily, although the zoning and the small points would have to be ironed out, but I think that it would be pretty doable.
Gosh, And I can't believe I'm saying this, but I like this idea of some new rules. I think this idea should be explored in depth but I've got to trudge off to the the salt mine and eek out a living. Catch ya'll on the flip side.

OYLer is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 08:00 AM
  #9
s7ark
Registered User
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Well I think it'd be pretty easy to stop. You'd simply have to do something like what the NBA did in calling illegal defense. you could have a rule that if you have five goals in the neutral zone when the puck is in the opposing players end then the play is whistled down, and treated like an intentional offside and there is a face-off in the other end. If a team repeatedly does this, then the ref gives them a delay-of-game penalty. It would work pretty easily, although the zoning and the small points would have to be ironed out, but I think that it would be pretty doable.
Just to throw in my 2 cents.

1. Death before the trap. Oilers start trapping I return my seasons tickets. Just that simple, if I want to nap it won't be at an Oilers game.

2. This won't work, there are ligit times when a team needs to have all 5 people in the neutral zone, like when lines are being changed...

s7ark is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 08:17 AM
  #10
AVE MAN
Registered User
 
AVE MAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
see I prefer the other. I appreciate and enjoy watching teams play great defense. I wish that the Oilers would realize that an entire decade has past and the days of not playing defense are gone forever. I would much prefer to see a 2-0 lead in the first, trap the ba-jezus out of the team and come away with that same score at the end of the game, rather then continue to forcheck recklessly and all that until all of a sudden we are the ones playing catchup, and we still get to see a trap because the other team is smart and are going to protect their lead.

If the whole NHL could change, then well... ok. But the way it is, I think it's frustraiting that we won't trap for 30 minutes to lock up a win.
Thank God, you're not the GM!! We would have 2000 season ticket holders. I thought you were from Oiler country. Trap is a four letter word around here. Win or Lose there is only 1 way to play hockey in Edmonton - Leave trap Hockey for the Minnesota's and Calgary's of the NHL. People around the leaque talk about "Oiler Hockey" and you're talking trap - Move down highway 2 if you want to talk that Junk!

AVE MAN is online now  
Old
11-03-2003, 08:38 AM
  #11
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,819
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Well to respond to many of the things:
1. I don't like the trap. I hate it. But if we want to see a team that can win and improve then we have to trap like the rest of the league. It's just that simple.
2. As for the legit times of having 5 players in the neutral zone- like I said, finer points would be worked out. If it is for the purpose of making line changes then the whistle isn't blown. It's that damn simple. Like I said, it would be easy to say ok, the call will not be made they are A)changing lines ..... and so on and so forth, it would work EVERY EASILY. But for the main situations, when a team has the puck in their end the other team must have atleast ( I dunno, one or two?) playeres in the their offensive zone until the puck is in the neurtal zone. A simple rule like that would cure the NHL of all these problems they are having.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 08:45 AM
  #12
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Well to respond to many of the things:
1. I don't like the trap. I hate it. But if we want to see a team that can win and improve then we have to trap like the rest of the league. It's just that simple.
I think that is the point all of us (on this thread) are arguing against... do you want to sacrifice (as a fan) entertainment for winning? I personally don't and that is why I am glad the Oilers don't play the trap. If in the end, all you do is look at wins and losses, then I can understand why you would want a trap.

To me there is nothing more exciting than end to end hockey, especially in the 3rd period of a close game.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 09:03 AM
  #13
kruezer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6,271
vCash: 500
Am I crazy or did Laraque HAVE the puck when he came in on Gauthier and Gauthier stood him up and this caused Laraque to rage and take a needless penalty? Maybe I'm thinking of something different though...my memory is shot from studying for midterms....

But anyway....don't you think offense is really created from defense though? It's not vice-versa and especially not nowadays. Offense doesn't create defense like it did for the 80's Oilers. Its the reverse.

And is it just me or is hockey FAR more entertaining this year? Am I just watching all the right games? They've all been great IMO.

kruezer is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 09:37 AM
  #14
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by kruezer
Am I crazy or did Laraque HAVE the puck when he came in on Gauthier and Gauthier stood him up and this caused Laraque to rage and take a needless penalty? Maybe I'm thinking of something different though...my memory is shot from studying for midterms....

But anyway....don't you think offense is really created from defense though? It's not vice-versa and especially not nowadays. Offense doesn't create defense like it did for the 80's Oilers. Its the reverse.

And is it just me or is hockey FAR more entertaining this year? Am I just watching all the right games? They've all been great IMO.
you're crazy...

No Laraque didn't have the puck on that play... I mean it's a great play because it works and doesn't get called (much like McCabe and the infamous can-opener)... unfortunately it should be called.

Good defense is one thing... staying tight on your man in your own end, blocking passing lanes, controlling the boards... that I will gladly live with. It's the taking the offensive speed completely out of the game that hurts it.

And I guess it depends on what games you are watching... because there have been a lot of really bad games this season... but conversely, there have been some really good ones. Maybe you are lucky, or maybe I'm not

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 10:18 AM
  #15
itsmagic
Registered User
 
itsmagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Here is another vote against the Oilers using the trap. I'm with others who feel that solid entertainment is more important to the typical fan than wins.

Having had seasons tickets in Calgary a few years ago, I can recall games where I dozed off in my seat. If I want to fall asleep watching hockey, I rather be in my easy chair at home. I stopped buying tickets because the entertainment value was often limited. I am sure that is NOT what management wants to happen.

In theory, I suppose, this means that the team could go 0-82 and I'd be happy as long as the games were fun to watch. This isn't far from the truth, but realistically if they can play with consistency at the level they are capable of, they'll give other teams fighting for a playoff spot a good run.

itsmagic is offline  
Old
11-03-2003, 01:20 PM
  #16
LoudmouthHemskyfan#1
Registered User
 
LoudmouthHemskyfan#1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: E-town
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Well to respond to many of the things:
1. I don't like the trap. I hate it. But if we want to see a team that can win and improve then we have to trap like the rest of the league. It's just that simple.
2. As for the legit times of having 5 players in the neutral zone- like I said, finer points would be worked out. If it is for the purpose of making line changes then the whistle isn't blown. It's that damn simple. Like I said, it would be easy to say ok, the call will not be made they are A)changing lines ..... and so on and so forth, it would work EVERY EASILY. But for the main situations, when a team has the puck in their end the other team must have atleast ( I dunno, one or two?) playeres in the their offensive zone until the puck is in the neurtal zone. A simple rule like that would cure the NHL of all these problems they are having.
This team can only win if it DOESN'T trap. It is not built to trap, and when it tries, it gets lit up. All you had to do to see this is notice the scheme they attempted at times against Detroit. The Oilers would sit back, and all of a sudden the Wings would be at our blue line. We only win with hard forechecking and opportunistic hockey. We're built for it, we should play it, and when we do, we not only win some games, we win ALOT of games against the very best teams.

Also, illegal defence isn't really an applicable idea for the NHL, it would complicate things WAY too much.

Something no one ever notices in modern hockey, as opposed to the 80's that everyone seems to love, is that in the 80's, the whistle was blown much more readily when there was a corner scrum. Today players are allowed to grind it out alot more. We all know alot of scoring chances come off faceoffs. Anyone think this kinda thing would "help"? I personally think the game shouldn't really be messed with, but I know alot of people want it to be. I really think we are only a short time away from seeing a rise in the offensive style of game again. There's a reason we play so well against the best teams, and that style is why. If we could put the team out there that could win that way, things would change in a hurry. Other teams are moving in this direction/would move in it as well.

LoudmouthHemskyfan#1 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.