HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Goaltending

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-21-2012, 08:49 PM
  #1
B-rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,116
vCash: 500
Goaltending

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
because he didn't travel with the team. likely some other reasons.



I think Melanson is a fine goalie coach. I'm still furious about the last time we discussed this. Orcatown is basically crazy when it comes to Melanson and he's still flat out revising history and misinterpreting comments/events to suit his biases. Kevin Woodley of the Goalie Guild chimed in to lay down the real story and Orca responded by basically plugging his ears and going 'lalalalalalala I only hear what I want to hear.' It was an embarrassing and shameful display and I regret asking Kevin for his input in the first place. We showed how amateur hour we were on the Nucks forum.

I'll leave it at that.
I echo your sentiments exactly Wisp. Orcatown is out to lunch on this one with his revisionism.

B-rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 10:52 PM
  #2
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by B-rock View Post
I echo your sentiments exactly Wisp. Orcatown is out to lunch on this one with his revisionism.
How is anything revised.

Melanson got fired by Montreal because of his lack of success. Right?

Price played poorly under Melanson tutelage. Right?

And then way better after he left. Right?

Theodore played poorly under Melanson. Right?

Theodore apparently doesn't want to be coached by Melanson anymore. Right?

The changes Melanson tried to force on Luongo didn't work. Right?

Lack is not being successful under the changes introduced by Melanson. Right?

What's revised?

What I see is you doing is trying to sound intelligent by throwing around words like "revisionism" somehow thinking that using such words makes your point. If you really want to sound like you have anything between your ears you should try to make some reasoned and coherent argument supporting your ideas. Maybe you can although I haven't seen that in previous posts. But maybe give it a try. Go ahead and explain specifically where I'm wrong and how you believe I've revised the situation. At least that invites discussion.

What is really happening here IMO is that people really can't, in this case, think critically for themselves. Much better not to be critical and thus really never have to actually think for oneself. So let's not even examine the evidence. Let's all just know that Melanson is a wonderful coach and leave it at that. That way we don't really have to think and we can sleep soundly at night.

Problem is that there is a track record that is hard to ignore as upsetting as that may be. This record creates legitimate questions that at least deserve consideration. And the greater problem is that if you care about this team and if Melanson is screwing up an important piece of the future, namely Lack, there is a significant problem that should be addressed and not swept under the rug.

To me, Lack is struggling using the Melanson approach. If you Wisp or B-Rock have something to refute this then let's hear it. Go ahead and prove me wrong. But don't go off using some sort of authority you think you have. Instead base it upon the observations and evidence you have developed for yourselves. And don't just name call in the hope that this somehow that gets you off the hook from actually explaining yourselves.

Really you have taken no time to really consider what I have posted and given nothing to suggest it is wrong other than to agree with each other that it is wrong and then somehow deducing that agreeing with one another makes you right.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-21-2012, 11:50 PM
  #3
deckercky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Schneider is playing exactly the same style he's played through out his career. He was a top prospect who developed his game in the minors. I don't see any great modification of Schneider game since Melanson arrives. Hopefully he leaves Schneider alone.
I remember a number of interviews from Schneider 2 years ago about how he was adjusting to a completely new style, where his original style depended on getting into a rhythm or something.

deckercky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 12:09 AM
  #4
Zarpan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,717
vCash: 500
I believe Kevin Woodley mentioned how Melanson learned from his past experiences with Price and was more flexible in working with Luongo and Cory. As a result, they seemed to have a pretty good working relationship.

I guess the question is whether that flexibility would transfer over to his work with Lack since Lack doesn't have the same experience as the other two.

Zarpan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 12:32 AM
  #5
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Also it seems Sauve has a back injury. I think Sauve has been deservedly criticize this year but if he has been playing hurt maybe this situation should be factored in. It is hard to understand why Sauve has regressed so badly this year and this injury may offer some explanation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post

Saying that Lack was playing injured has zero basis in fact and is sheer speculation. Going on to say this might explain his problems is piling speculation upon speculation and really unworthy of response. You could suppose anything I guess, but doing it total absence of fact can lead only is to ridiculous discussions There was no suggestion of injury and I doubt he is playing if he is hurt. If you have any evidence of a hip flexor problem going into the season let's hear it.
So YOU speculate Sauve's poor play could be attributed to playing through injury and then go on to have a temper tantrum because I said Eddie Lack's hip flexor injury could have played a part in why he hasn't been moving well this year and has looked poor?

Did this just happen?

Back away from the keyboard. You can't have a rational conversation involving Rollie Melanson.

And Schneider plays exactly the same way under Melanson as he did under Ian Clark? You've got to be kidding me.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 01:06 AM
  #6
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarpan View Post
I believe Kevin Woodley mentioned how Melanson learned from his past experiences with Price and was more flexible in working with Luongo and Cory. As a result, they seemed to have a pretty good working relationship.

I guess the question is whether that flexibility would transfer over to his work with Lack since Lack doesn't have the same experience as the other two.
I don't know that Woodley has said any more than they get along and have a good working relationship. That doesn't mean that its effective. Might be that a coach has real friendly relationship with his players. But that doesn't mean that he is necessarily improving his players. Comments that there was no friction between Melanson and Luongo so therefore he improved Luongo's game are senseless. Melanson might get on famously with some player but that doesn't mean he is doing a good job with the player. Some teacher might get on great with some students but that doesn't mean that he is effectively teaching them.

Just getting along isn't the point here. The point is that Melanson took a world class goalie and tried to change his style and made him worse. Luongo playing Melanson style at the beginning of last season and was, by any reckoning, worse. Sure people make excuses like Stanley cup hangover, Loungo always poor in November, etc.. But the truth is that Luongo's game did not start to come together until he abandoned the passive, backside deep in the net approach preached by Melanson. And basically the same thing happened with Price and Theodore. Price improved a lot when Melanson got canned and, after a down period, Theodore regained a lot of his earlier form.

To me, this raise huge red flags. And this is especially so as I watch Lack struggle with Melanson's methods. For those who say "nothing to see, here just move along" I say let's, at least, consider if Melanson is good for Lack. I don't want to be too definite here but given the track record isn't it at least a consideration.

I've watched Lack a lot both this year and last year (darn near every game he's played with the Wolves). At the beginning of last year he struggled with the Melanson's system. When he moved away from it in the latter part of the year he came on strong. This year he again is using the Melanson system and he looks much like he did at the beginning of last year - not that good. So isn't it a possibility that Lack should again abandon what Melanson is pushing on him? And isn't possible that Lack might develop better under a coach that builds on Lack's strengths? Can't that be a question that needs to be asked?

I see nothing out of posters like Wisp and B-rock that they have followed this carefully or even tried to analyse the situation. All they say is that it is a non-consideration without offering even a shred of thought or evidence. I doubt whether they have given any thought to whether Melanson's methods are effective with Lack at all but only respond b/c they need to believe that Melanson is doing a effective job.

But they are certainly free to prove me wrong.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 01:06 AM
  #7
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
What is really happening here IMO is that people really can't, in this case, think critically for themselves. Much better not to be critical and thus really never have to actually think for oneself. So let's not even examine the evidence. Let's all just know that Melanson is a wonderful coach and leave it at that. That way we don't really have to think and we can sleep soundly at night.
The Canucks have the best combined SV% in the NHL over the last 2 years under Melanson.

Luongo went from a .913SV% his last year under Clark to a .928SV% amd Vezina nomination his 1st year under Melanson.

Schneider went from prospect with no success at the NHL level to putting up a jaw-dropping .929 and .937 SV%. Better numbers than he posted against much inferior competition in the AHL.

Schneider has the best SV% in the NHL over the last 2 years under Melanson.

Eddie Lack was a complete stud last season under Melanson.

And finally, Eddie Lack has had a poor start to this season and has a hip flexor injury.

In your opinion, Luongo has ignored Melanson and had 2 good years because of it. Schneider hasn't changed a single aspect of his game and has looked dominant due to ignoring Melanson. Eddie lack has listened to every single word out of the goalie coach's mouth and it's why he's taken such a huge step back in his development.

I'm just glad you're able to think critically for yourself. You've really opened my eyes to what a horrible job Melanson has done with Luongo, Schneider and Lack. I'm just thankful Lack is the only one heeding his advice.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 02:41 AM
  #8
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
The Canucks have the best combined SV% in the NHL over the last 2 years under Melanson.

Luongo went from a .913SV% his last year under Clark to a .928SV% amd Vezina nomination his 1st year under Melanson.

Schneider went from prospect with no success at the NHL level to putting up a jaw-dropping .929 and .937 SV%. Better numbers than he posted against much inferior competition in the AHL.

Schneider has the best SV% in the NHL over the last 2 years under Melanson.

Eddie Lack was a complete stud last season under Melanson.

And finally, Eddie Lack has had a poor start to this season and has a hip flexor injury.

In your opinion, Luongo has ignored Melanson and had 2 good years because of it. Schneider hasn't changed a single aspect of his game and has looked dominant due to ignoring Melanson. Eddie lack has listened to every single word out of the goalie coach's mouth and it's why he's taken such a huge step back in his development.

I'm just glad you're able to think critically for yourself. You've really opened my eyes to what a horrible job Melanson has done with Luongo, Schneider and Lack. I'm just thankful Lack is the only one heeding his advice.
Luongo statistically was as strong before the arrival of Melanson as he was after. Indeed probably his best statistical years were between 2006 and 2010. And you can make the case that Luongo was getting these stats in years when the team was not as strong as it has been for the last two years. In some of those years, Luongo had to basically carry the team.

Moreover the team goaltending stats have little altered pre and post Melanson. And again you can argue these stats were maintained pre Melanson in a time when the team wasnít as good and the back- up goal situation was definitely weaker.
Given this, Luongoís play was not altered or improved by the presence of Melanson since Luongoís play was only an extension of his previous play.

Moreover, Schnieder was a great young goalie before Melanson got here. His development has followed a path suggested by his earlier development. He was already established as an elite prospect and perfected much of his game under an earlier goal coaching regime. It is difficult to make the case that Melanson somehow turned Schneiderís game around. Maybe the best you could say that Melanson did not get in the way of Schneider development and that might mostly be owed to the fact that Schneider played a style already very much like the one Melanson taught.
Trying to make the case that Melanson has much improved the goal tending seems a tenuous one to me.

In fact, he inherited a tremendous situation (maybe the best in the League) and left it much as it was. And certainly he did not improve the playoff performances of Luongo which was perhaps the best test of Melanson's ability to improve the goal tending situation.

But beyond all the statistical mucho jumbo I think there is a real question as to whether Melanson is good for Lack. This you donít even address except with some weak sarcasm and some claims of irrationally on my part. I think the lack of success of Melanson with other goal tenders and his attempt to impose his system even when the evidence suggests it isnít working is a consideration. It may be that Schneider really suits the Melanson mode but with others, such as Price and Luongo, it didnít . My concern is that it may not be working with Lack. And that is based not just in theory or some contrived stats but in watching Lack play. He just doesnít look good so deep in the net and down so early on everything. Maybe you have the opinion that it is working and that Melanson is doing a good job with Lack. Maybe you have some good insights that show this to be true. Maybe you can explain them for my edification. But for my part and based on t my observation of Lack in most of the games he has played this year, I donít see it working. I worry that like some others that Melanson has worked with (including Luongo at the beginning of last season) that Lack maybe regressing and going backward in his development. As stated before, I think if so this is a critical concern for the team.

Thatís really the issue here and just posting some generalized and somewhat conveniently interpreted stats does nothing to address the question I am raising. If you want to have legitimate discussion here, I think this is the starting place.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 10:52 AM
  #9
brownbello
Registered User
 
brownbello's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Powell River
Country: Canada
Posts: 248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
How is anything revised.

Melanson got fired by Montreal because of his lack of success. Right?

Price played poorly under Melanson tutelage. Right?

And then way better after he left. Right?

Theodore played poorly under Melanson. Right?

Theodore apparently doesn't want to be coached by Melanson anymore. Right?

The changes Melanson tried to force on Luongo didn't work. Right?

Lack is not being successful under the changes introduced by Melanson. Right?

What's revised?

What I see is you doing is trying to sound intelligent by throwing around words like "revisionism" somehow thinking that using such words makes your point. If you really want to sound like you have anything between your ears you should try to make some reasoned and coherent argument supporting your ideas. Maybe you can although I haven't seen that in previous posts. But maybe give it a try. Go ahead and explain specifically where I'm wrong and how you believe I've revised the situation. At least that invites discussion.

What is really happening here IMO is that people really can't, in this case, think critically for themselves. Much better not to be critical and thus really never have to actually think for oneself. So let's not even examine the evidence. Let's all just know that Melanson is a wonderful coach and leave it at that. That way we don't really have to think and we can sleep soundly at night.

Problem is that there is a track record that is hard to ignore as upsetting as that may be. This record creates legitimate questions that at least deserve consideration. And the greater problem is that if you care about this team and if Melanson is screwing up an important piece of the future, namely Lack, there is a significant problem that should be addressed and not swept under the rug.

To me, Lack is struggling using the Melanson approach. If you Wisp or B-Rock have something to refute this then let's hear it. Go ahead and prove me wrong. But don't go off using some sort of authority you think you have. Instead base it upon the observations and evidence you have developed for yourselves. And don't just name call in the hope that this somehow that gets you off the hook from actually explaining yourselves.

Really you have taken no time to really consider what I have posted and given nothing to suggest it is wrong other than to agree with each other that it is wrong and then somehow deducing that agreeing with one another makes you right.
I'm sorry Orca, but this discussion just continues to look bad for you. It makes it hard to take your assessments seriously. Discussion is great, but this discussion has been had and we're all past it. Orca just let it go.

brownbello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 11:57 AM
  #10
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Thatís really the issue here and just posting some generalized and somewhat conveniently interpreted stats does nothing to address the question I am raising. If you want to have legitimate discussion here, I think this is the starting place.
No, I didn't post some 'generalized and somewhat conveniently interpreted stats'. I posted the body of work from our 3 goaltenders under Melanson which by any metric are outstanding results.

Why have you left out Matt Climie? The guy you said has looked outstanding this season and looks like a potential option for our backup position in the NHL. Look what Melanson has done for this player. Or is this simply another case of Climie tuning Melanson out and thus improving significantly because of it?

Eddie Lack came over to the AHL as an unheralded player passed over in the draft and posted back to back .930SV% seasons under 2 seasons of guidance from Rollie Melanson. Is it wise to assume Melanson has been ruining this prospect?

Luongo, Schneider, Lack and Climie have all performed exceptionally well over the last 2 plus seasons. A handful of poor games this year from Lack just isn't enough evidence to change that fact. Especially with the question marks surrounding his health.

You said let's examine the evidence. I just did. There isn't a team in the NHL getting better goaltending from their top 2,3 or 4 goalies than we're seeing.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 12:51 PM
  #11
B-rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
How is anything revised.

Melanson got fired by Montreal because of his lack of success. Right?

Price played poorly under Melanson tutelage. Right?

And then way better after he left. Right?

Theodore played poorly under Melanson. Right?

Theodore apparently doesn't want to be coached by Melanson anymore. Right?

The changes Melanson tried to force on Luongo didn't work. Right?

Lack is not being successful under the changes introduced by Melanson. Right?

What's revised?

What I see is you doing is trying to sound intelligent by throwing around words like "revisionism" somehow thinking that using such words makes your point. If you really want to sound like you have anything between your ears you should try to make some reasoned and coherent argument supporting your ideas. Maybe you can although I haven't seen that in previous posts. But maybe give it a try. Go ahead and explain specifically where I'm wrong and how you believe I've revised the situation. At least that invites discussion.

What is really happening here IMO is that people really can't, in this case, think critically for themselves. Much better not to be critical and thus really never have to actually think for oneself. So let's not even examine the evidence. Let's all just know that Melanson is a wonderful coach and leave it at that. That way we don't really have to think and we can sleep soundly at night.

Problem is that there is a track record that is hard to ignore as upsetting as that may be. This record creates legitimate questions that at least deserve consideration. And the greater problem is that if you care about this team and if Melanson is screwing up an important piece of the future, namely Lack, there is a significant problem that should be addressed and not swept under the rug.

To me, Lack is struggling using the Melanson approach. If you Wisp or B-Rock have something to refute this then let's hear it. Go ahead and prove me wrong. But don't go off using some sort of authority you think you have. Instead base it upon the observations and evidence you have developed for yourselves. And don't just name call in the hope that this somehow that gets you off the hook from actually explaining yourselves.

Really you have taken no time to really consider what I have posted and given nothing to suggest it is wrong other than to agree with each other that it is wrong and then somehow deducing that agreeing with one another makes you right.
LOL, yeah, I'm TRYING to sound intelligent by using words that are commonly used in the English language.

Sweet ad hominem attack though.

Your attack on Melanson has been refuted by almost every poster on the forum, as well as a solid source in Kevin Woodley but you refuse to even look at the evidence against your argument. I'd suggest you take a step back and reassess.

It's pointless to argue with someone who won't acknowledge another perspective.

B-rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 08:51 PM
  #12
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Eddie Lack stepped into the AHL as an undrafted 22 year old and posted back to back .930SV% seasons under the tutelage of Rollie Melanson. This summer the goalie guild ranked Lack the 2nd best goaltending prospect in the world behind Jacob Markstrom. Now you want to use a 5-10 game sample size this season to determine Melanson is failing the kid?

I would like to hear your opinion about the play of Matt Climie and how Melanson's influenced his game.

I will take your word for it that Luongo and Schneider refused to listen to anything Melanson has taught them and that's why we've had the best SV% in the NHL in the 2 years Melanson has been in Vancouver.
Ok so I get dragged back in and thanks for trying to turn it back into a discussion

What I am saying is that Lack looked better playing his original style. I watched many of the games last year and Lack did not start that strong coming out of the camp where Melanson had worked with him. He got better when he went back to a more aggressive style. I think I probably watched more Wolve games last year and maybe saw this process play out better. Maybe not. To me, it raised red flags about how whether Melason's style really suited Lack.

This year I am watching Lack and I see him once again going back to the style that Melanson wants his goalies to play, and once again he struggles. That makes me question again whether Melanson is effective with Lack.

You can say Lack has worked with Melanson the last couple of years but it seems to me that he did best when he turned away from the style Melanson was trying to make him adopt.

So I not just basing it on this the sample size of this season but on last year as well
True these are observations and others may differ in how they see Melanson working with Lack but when you consider that Melanson has had poor success with other young goalies and was dumped because of this it increases your concern increase. And the situation with Luongo last year also increases those concerns.

As far as Climie goes I don't think he plays anything like Melanson's style. He is much more up right and usually at the top of his crease. You watch when he butterflys and it is usually right at the top of the crease not back on the goal line. Seems to me that he plays exactly the same style he played since he came to the Wolves.

At some point, we have to agree to disagree. You think Melanson is doing a good job and is a good fit for the team I have real concerns that he is not. One way or another this will play out.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 10:10 PM
  #13
vanuck
#Gaunce4GM
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,169
vCash: 500
Do we know for certain that Melanson has been working with Lack all year? Wasn't it a one-time visit or something?

vanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 12:10 PM
  #14
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
You can say Lack has worked with Melanson the last couple of years but it seems to me that he did best when he turned away from the style Melanson was trying to make him adopt.

As far as Climie goes I don't think he plays anything like Melanson's style.

At some point, we have to agree to disagree.
So far you've said Luongo refused to play the way Melanson wanted and had 2 terrific seasons because of it.

Schneider didn't alter his game to what Melanson wanted and has been outstanding.

Lack turned away from Melanson's style and put up 2 terrific years in the AHL.

And finally Climie doesn't play anything like Melanson's style and has looked very very good.

What you're saying is, all the success of our goalies is from ignoring Melanson's teachings, yet any struggles can be attributed to them reverting back to his style.

Yeah, let's agree to disagree.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 01:51 PM
  #15
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,851
vCash: 457
While I don't agree with Orca, he does raise a potential problem. Orca watches a lot of the Wolves games and he has said that he has noticed Lack's playstyle is different. If his not so great play was due to the injury I'd assume that his playstyle wouldn't be different from his past style.

We just need more voices in this debate. Has anyone else who watches a lot of Wolves games (Tiranis, Feebster) notice a change in playstyle from Lack? Do we have any other sources telling us about Lack's relationship between him and Melanson? etc.

shortshorts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 04:42 PM
  #16
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortshorts View Post
While I don't agree with Orca, he does raise a potential problem. Orca watches a lot of the Wolves games and he has said that he has noticed Lack's playstyle is different. If his not so great play was due to the injury I'd assume that his playstyle wouldn't be different from his past style.

We just need more voices in this debate. Has anyone else who watches a lot of Wolves games (Tiranis, Feebster) notice a change in playstyle from Lack? Do we have any other sources telling us about Lack's relationship between him and Melanson? etc.
I don't want to get involved in this conversation because I made my opinions clear the last time it happened (and also was the one to ask for someone two tweet Kevin Woodley). I don't see Lack making the huge sweeping changes that orcatown talks about. I've seen minor adjustments and him going down too early, just like has in the past when he has struggled. Lack also stated in an interview that he was dealing with his hip problems for "a while", whatever that means — I'm guessing longer than a few games.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 05:10 PM
  #17
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
Not a bad start for Archibald here. I realize he's scoring, but does he look like he could be a 2nd line forward in the NHL someday or is he more of an AHL 1st liner like Haydar was?
I would say he's more of a 3rd liner that can one day be a part of the 2nd unit PP in the NHL if he keeps developing. He doesn't really contribute enough offensively at ES to be a 2nd liner. But yeah, there's definitely some potential there. He's excellent in front of the net.

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 05:45 PM
  #18
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 17,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Lack could have been playing through the hip flexor injury all season - would explain his struggles and poor movement. Often when a player looks like crap, health issues are the reason why. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if this is the case here with the lanky Swede.
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Saying that Lack was playing injured has zero basis in fact and is sheer speculation. Going on to say this might explain his problems is piling speculation upon speculation and really unworthy of response. You could suppose anything I guess, but doing it total absence of fact can lead only is to ridiculous discussions There was no suggestion of injury and I doubt he is playing if he is hurt. If you have any evidence of a hip flexor problem going into the season let's hear it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Lack also stated in an interview that he was dealing with his hip problems for "a while", whatever that means ó I'm guessing longer than a few games.
Orcatown - is it safe to say my suggestion wasn't exactly 'leading to ridiculous discussion'?

Like I said previously, Lack's struggles and poor movement were likely attributed to the hip flexor problem. Can't say I'm surprised in the least Lack has alluded to the fact this has been an ongoing issue this season.

At least we can put to bed the notion that Melanson is hurting Lack's development. Obviously there were physical factors at play here, which IMO should have been pretty obvious once we heard the initial reports of this hip flexor problem.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 05:46 PM
  #19
arsmaster
semantic romantic
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 24,362
vCash: 500
Can we get a Rollie Melanson thread going here instead of this?

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 05:49 PM
  #20
arsmaster
semantic romantic
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 24,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
I would say he's more of a 3rd liner that can one day be a part of the 2nd unit PP in the NHL if he keeps developing. He doesn't really contribute enough offensively at ES to be a 2nd liner. But yeah, there's definitely some potential there. He's excellent in front of the net.
I've never watched Dwight King or Jordan Nolan at the AHL level, but is there a ton of difference between their skating and Archibald's?

Is it way too ahead of the game to think he could do that for us someday at the NHL level?

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 07:12 PM
  #21
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,958
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortshorts View Post
While I don't agree with Orca, he does raise a potential problem. Orca watches a lot of the Wolves games and he has said that he has noticed Lack's playstyle is different. If his not so great play was due to the injury I'd assume that his playstyle wouldn't be different from his past style.
i wouldn't trust that opinion at all so no it's not really a potential problem until someone comes and substantiates it

Verviticus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-23-2012, 07:44 PM
  #22
Wilch
Unregistered User
 
Wilch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Under your bed
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 10,659
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
i wouldn't trust that opinion at all so no it's not really a potential problem until someone comes and substantiates it
Someone as in who? From the team? By the time the issue is known the media, it's close to being terminal cancer.

Anything that can be resolved internally or isn't a big issue usually gets covered up.

Wilch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 05:59 AM
  #23
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
i wouldn't trust that opinion at all so no it's not really a potential problem until someone comes and substantiates it
Substantiate what???

It is my opinion that Melanson techniques (which one Habs fan describes as Melanson = butterfly to death) aren't working with Lack. And the stats seem to bear that out. Nor did they seem to work with Price, Theodore or Loungo IMO.

You might think they are working or maybe will work given time. But I don't see how you go about substantiating my opinion through some outside source. That doesn't make sense to me.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 11:51 AM
  #24
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Luongo's game definitely went downhill with this playing deep business. Was letting in a lot of soft goals. "All" you have to do for confirmation is look back at the post game threads.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 12:18 PM
  #25
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,649
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Substantiate what???

It is my opinion that Melanson techniques (which one Habs fan describes as Melanson = butterfly to death) aren't working with Lack. And the stats seem to bear that out. Nor did they seem to work with Price, Theodore or Loungo IMO.

You might think they are working or maybe will work given time. But I don't see how you go about substantiating my opinion through some outside source. That doesn't make sense to me.
You keep just repeating the same thing over and over, even though both Lack and Luongo have had terrific seasons with Melanson. This is not a conversation. It's you obstinately refusing to acknowledge reality if you pretend those guys haven't had terrific seasons under Melanson.

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 12:25 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.