I still haven't seen the "switch" go on for Vermette quite yet - he is getting some chances, but also looks a little timid out there. I'm waiting another 3-4 games before I expect him to flip that on automatic - he'll have had enough practice time and games with us by then...
I'm not sure there will be any "switch" that goes on for Vermette. That line is now a much greater scoring threat, not only in Vermette, but because his presence opens things up for his line mates. He's also playing a responsible defensive game. Having said all that, yes I expect things will only get better.
Another player you and I have discussed is Stone and I've seen three quality performances of four.... impressive. Granted is toi is limited (as it should be), but from where I thought he was in camp, I'm very pleased...
Its hard to believe Hanzal only got 10 assists last season. That was such an anomaly.
Marty's potential is.... I don't know if limitless is a good word, but hear this out:
Two, three years ago on the azcentral boards a girl known as stephanielovesbryz stated that she thought Marty could become "our Joe Thornton". Everyone, but I ridiculed her. He's got play making potential and while he may not rise to Thornton numbers, I felt "our Joe Thornton" meant that he could be a big contributor offensively by garnering assists. Time will tell and he may go about it differently, but I still think the little lady may have been on to something.
I like that we're gradually giving more ice time to Summers-Stone. Last couple games the top four guys have been goin above 22/24min a game. Was a bit lower this game. As much as I root for Stone/Summers, we need someone experienced back there. If ONE of ours Dmen who are MIA return, that would help immensely. We could potentially get three guys back by the end of the year.
Agreed, they are performing admirably and it's great that they are getting some quality experience, but we could use our more experienced players.
I actually see Martin Hanzal as the "anti Joe Thorton player" as well as the anti big impact player across the league- Joe has simply been taken out of the equation when we play them... he has done the same with nearly every first line impact player the Coyotes face...
I consider him the heart and soul of this team. yeah, that was maybe or not a quick whistle but it would have been a goal without the confusion, refs are human too...
someone looks very happy to be playing somewhere else than Columbus.
• Center Antoine Vermette....nearly scored his first goal with Phoenix in the first period but the goal was disallowed after a video review. What follows is the official ruling from the NHL:
"At 6:16 of the first period in the Coyotes/Oilers game, the Toronto situation room initiated a review after Lauri Korpikoski's shot was stopped but Antoine Vermette poked the rebound into the net. The referee informed the video room that he had been in the act of blowing the whistle after the save on the original shot by Korpikoski and prior to the Vermette shot. The referee's call on the ice stands. No Goal Phoenix."
The bigger fault was that the puck wasn't in the goalies control. On tv we could see that the puck was still active. The play shouldn't have been blown dead
The bigger fault was that the puck wasn't in the goalies control. On tv we could see that the puck was still active. The play shouldn't have been blown dead
except for that pesky rule about when an official loses sight of the puck, bottom line is it was just another blown play by the official- everyone gets them.. but for the most part it works out a draw over a season .. Vermette knows what time it is, he gonna be jus' fine as a Yote.
I actually see Martin Hanzal as the "anti Joe Thorton player" as well as the anti big impact player across the league- Joe has simply been taken out of the equation when we play them... he has done the same with nearly every first line impact player the Coyotes face...
I consider him the heart and soul of this team.
That's the point (I think) of "our Joe Thornton"... ridiculous defense with playmaking ability that is somewhat similar to big Joe.
Should have never gone to the booth then.... they called it a goal on the ice. Apparently the official who didn't signal a goal had the intent.
That happens from time to time. Once they get buzzed they have to talk to Toronto. Sometimes Toronto wants to know the call to see if it is reviewable. This happened in the Dallas v. Phoenix game where the call on the ice was a pass with a high stick before it was tipped in. Toronto buzzed and the referee told them he called it on the pass, which made it an unreviewable judgment call. They still needed to deal with Toronto because they got buzzed.
except for that pesky rule about when an official loses sight of the puck, bottom line is it was just another blown play by the official- everyone gets them.. but for the most part it works out a draw over a season .. Vermette knows what time it is, he gonna be jus' fine as a Yote.
I have a problem with the official out at center ice blowing a play dead over the ref who is behind the net (and called the goal) The process itself is fine, even with the 'intent' grey area. It just ends up being the wrong ref or linesman making a call in the vast majority of controversial situations. None of the players thought the play was dead, and neither did the ref with a clear view of where the puck was. In this sort of situation common sense should overrule strict adherence to guidelines. Another official has a differing opinion, and in this case was actually in a better position. He should have the final on ice call.
Of course the play was blown quick looking back, but I have never watched a perfectly called game in my life- when you start wandering off away from the "strict adherence to guidelines" approach it opens up that can of what we all hate, refs accused of affecting the game's outcome.
I have been pretty happy how the NHL refs are allowing teams to play the game this season, remember a couple of years ago when every little stick infraction was pulling a hooking call?- consistency in managing games has been pretty good all season long if you ask me.
Mick McGeouh on a typical night would regularly ignore aggravated assault with intent right in front of him while calling a holding the stick at the other end of the ice at least once a night... remember?? at least he was consistent...
as to that call, the ref behind the net's view is going to be blocked in frozen pucks in front of the net, I suppose he lost sight a second or two before the one that had sight of the puck blew that whistle- so I suppose he could have blown the whistle way before if the rule was strictly adhered to the letter... gotta keep the game in perspective.
I am a big Vermette fan and I thought the eventual call was correct.
