HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Crosby proclaims Price the best goalie in the league.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-19-2013, 03:41 PM
  #251
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Cole View Post
The problem is that many of the folks that you are saying make their own opinion, well, they seem to simply parrot RDS.
You misread me, or I can't explain for ****, because I said the same thing

Mrb1p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 03:42 PM
  #252
NewHabsEra*
 
NewHabsEra*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Last year, Reimer was easily better than Price.
lol you didnt watch many Leafs games.. Their D core is hugely underrated and they are starting to have a pretty decent offense..


Last edited by NewHabsEra*: 09-19-2013 at 03:55 PM.
NewHabsEra* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 03:44 PM
  #253
Joe Cole
Registered User
 
Joe Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
He was in every possible measurable metric and it wasn't particularly close.
Be careful using metrics.

Joe Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 04:05 PM
  #254
windycity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Well duh
Posts: 3,128
vCash: 500
I'll ask Sid tonight if he was joking as I'll be at the Hawks-Pens game

windycity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 04:29 PM
  #255
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,133
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
You asked when was Reimer better, he showed you. If this doesn't convince you, nothing will. What would it take to prove to you Reimer was better?



Who's cherry-picking?



It's you who needs a course on statistics. Debate the points without personal attacks. Do you disagree with the notion that teams who give up the most shots also give up the most chances? This is basically not even debatable.

Over the course of an entire season, a team who consistently out-shoots his opponents will have undoubtedly out-chanced his opponents. Your shot-quality argument is an attempt at misdirection. It isn't true.

The rest of your post is just a bunch of miss-informed nonsense with no basis in reality.
Yes, I disagree with the notion that teams who give up the most shots also give up the most chances. I can give up 40 perimeter shots a game and not give a team anything in the slot.. and I can give up 15 shots all in the slot which are prime scoring chances.

What you are basically saying is that if I coached a team and told them.. forget systems, forget passing, forget playing with your team-mates, as soon as you get over the line, direct it toward the goaltender. If we have more shots than them, we'll have out chanced them and have a good chance of winning the game.

Okay, so I have 35 shots from the blue-line, quick wrist shots from nowhere, with no traffic, no net drive and you think I'm going to have a team that is more threatening than one that doesn't shoot everything, has patience, opens up seams and creates an attack that exploits areas of the ice that are more likely to result in goals or legitimate scoring chances.

Teams forechecked us, wore us down, waited for our defensive "scheme" to break down and ended up scoring goals on us like that. They didn't need 40 shots, because they ended up putting goals in early. You don't really need to see a whole lot of highlights of games we lost to see the majority of goals we let in were scored from threatening areas that we were too stupid to defend.

You'll have nameless posters who claim they were floaters from the point that were Price's fault but that doesn't change the reality that we didn't give up as many shots but we gave up a lot of prime scoring chances.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 04:52 PM
  #256
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewHabsEra View Post
lol you didnt watch many Leafs games.. Their D core is hugely underrated and they are starting to have a pretty decent offense..
Yeah ok, their underrated d core gave up way more shots than they garnered. The leafs d core is a mess. They luck boxed their way to the playoffs, that and Reimer carried them.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 04:53 PM
  #257
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Cole View Post
Be careful using metrics.
Yes be careful using the only tool available to measure performance. Instead we should go by magic moments and false statements.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 04:58 PM
  #258
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
Yes, I disagree with the notion that teams who give up the most shots also give up the most chances. I can give up 40 perimeter shots a game and not give a team anything in the slot.. and I can give up 15 shots all in the slot which are prime scoring chances.

What you are basically saying is that if I coached a team and told them.. forget systems, forget passing, forget playing with your team-mates, as soon as you get over the line, direct it toward the goaltender. If we have more shots than them, we'll have out chanced them and have a good chance of winning the game.

Okay, so I have 35 shots from the blue-line, quick wrist shots from nowhere, with no traffic, no net drive and you think I'm going to have a team that is more threatening than one that doesn't shoot everything, has patience, opens up seams and creates an attack that exploits areas of the ice that are more likely to result in goals or legitimate scoring chances.

Teams forechecked us, wore us down, waited for our defensive "scheme" to break down and ended up scoring goals on us like that. They didn't need 40 shots, because they ended up putting goals in early. You don't really need to see a whole lot of highlights of games we lost to see the majority of goals we let in were scored from threatening areas that we were too stupid to defend.

You'll have nameless posters who claim they were floaters from the point that were Price's fault but that doesn't change the reality that we didn't give up as many shots but we gave up a lot of prime scoring chances.
I didn't bother reading your entire post, it's based on a false premise, we're not talking about a game or two, here or there. We're talking about a full season or half season.

Teams that get out shot also give up more quality chances, this is undeniable. Those that create more shots also create more chances. The idea that teams are ever limited to only perimeter shots is not even remotely true.

Consider the fact that the habs played most of the season with the lead. Game situation/score can influence the shot differentials. When you play with an absurd amount of time with the lead, you are expected to give up more shots, and we still dominated. The habs defensively were one of the most sound teams in the league, largely due to outstanding puck movement on the back end

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 05:12 PM
  #259
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Yeah ok, their underrated d core gave up way more shots than they garnered. The leafs d core is a mess. They luck boxed their way to the playoffs, that and Reimer carried them.

He carried them so hard... That they wasted huge assets to get another goaltender.. Who will be handed the starter position even though he never played one full season

Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
I didn't bother reading your entire post, it's based on a false premise, we're not talking about a game or two, here or there. We're talking about a full season or half season.

Teams that get out shot also give up more quality chances, this is undeniable. Those that create more shots also create more chances. The idea that teams are ever limited to only perimeter shots is not even remotely true.

Consider the fact that the habs played most of the season with the lead. Game situation/score can influence the shot differentials. When you play with an absurd amount of time with the lead, you are expected to give up more shots, and we still dominated. The habs defensively were one of the most sound teams in the league, largely due to outstanding puck movement on the back end
You're not even trying to argue a point or to refute something, you're just trying to force a point into our head.. I don't see why you're here anymore, you clearly don't want to change opinion...

Mrb1p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 05:18 PM
  #260
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,133
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
I didn't bother reading your entire post, it's based on a false premise, we're not talking about a game or two, here or there. We're talking about a full season or half season.

Teams that get out shot also give up more quality chances, this is undeniable. Those that create more shots also create more chances. The idea that teams are ever limited to only perimeter shots is not even remotely true.

Consider the fact that the habs played most of the season with the lead. Game situation/score can influence the shot differentials. When you play with an absurd amount of time with the lead, you are expected to give up more shots, and we still dominated. The habs defensively were one of the most sound teams in the league, largely due to outstanding puck movement on the back end
Okay...

Toronto was 28th for Shots for in the league...
Yet 6th for Goals for in the league...
Ottawa 23rd for shots against in the league (7th worst)
Yet 2nd in Goals Against..
Dallas 11th for Goals for in the league.. yet they had the 29th fewest shots per game..

You can try to bend your stats all you want.. stats will never and can never tell the whole story about a game, a series, or an entire season. Law of averages do dictate that if you shoot more, you should score more yet law of averages also dictates if you are always shooting from a prime scoring area, you will need less shots to score.

It's crazy how this eludes you.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 05:26 PM
  #261
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Rangers fan for 50 years and to me McDonagh is already in their top 5 D over that period. Park, Leetch, Beck, Zubov.

Nobody beats McDonagh one on one and at even strength he was top 5 in points for D last year.
Everybody knows in this board that I think McDonagh is a stud. Was just replying to some people who in here try to think that McDo isn't that good.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 05:29 PM
  #262
Sumoki Dachiba
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireBergevin View Post
As a player, and especially as a captain, aren't you supposed to be pumping your own goalie's tires?

I mean I know it's clear that Price is way better than MAF but come on, Sid.

Also thanks for the bulletin board material in the Bruins dressing room.
I think this post may actually have a lot of truth to it, except you were thinking of Sid as a captain on the wrong team.

Crosby will undoubtedly captain Team Canada this year unless he is injured. He is probably aware of all the media and fans questioning our country's goalies and cleverly responding to that here by pumping the tires of Canada's next No.1 goalie (in his and many other eyes).

Sumoki Dachiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 05:48 PM
  #263
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,097
vCash: 500
It's easy to criticize people who disagree with Crosby or who suggest he's doing a service to Team Canada. But these people should also go on record and answer the question: is Carey Price the best goaltender in the Nhl?

It's easy to disagree with those who disagree but are you willing to put your name out there and answer the question?

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:09 PM
  #264
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Your post once again is not supported by reality. The habs were more than fine when Emelin went down. Price hit an all time low during that stretch, **** happens, but it's what happened. If you think Emelin has that much value you're out of control.

Aside from that, none of the numbers support you, zero, and the eye test shows this even more clearly, Price stunk for close to a month, and even in the beginning they were winning games despite Price. He didn't steal many games, but he certainly cost his share. You can say the same old things over and over, it won't make them any more true.
Not sure what you're talking about here man. The guy's numbers were stellar until Emelin went down and several analysts were saying they saw him as a Vezina candidate at that point. So yeah, you are out to lunch on that one.

As for after Emelin went down I don't deny Price was bad (putrid in fact) for a few games. That Leaf game he let in something like four goals on five shots and they were pucks he should've stopped. The guy's not perfect and as I said, he went through a horrible stretch. But yeah, the team didn't play well in that final stretch either. Price didn't play well but like I said he doesn't get much help back there.

And I don't expect it to be any different this year either. Our blueline sucks. I don't care who our goalie is btw, that blueline sucks and we can't expect to advance with it. Maybe we'll go a round or maybe two at the most but I don't see us moving on. And I'd feel that way with Lundqvist or Quick or whatever goalie you want to name back there. We're not built for the playoffs and all the goaltending in the world won't change this.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 09-19-2013 at 06:15 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:15 PM
  #265
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Rangers fan for 50 years and to me McDonagh is already in their top 5 D over that period. Park, Leetch, Beck, Zubov.

Nobody beats McDonagh one on one and at even strength he was top 5 in points for D last year.
Staal is pretty solid defensively too. The Rangers blueline has suddenly become one of the best defensive units in the league. I wouldn't have said that a few years ago but it's a pretty good group now.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:15 PM
  #266
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Not sure what you're talking about here man. The guy's numbers were stellar until Emelin went down and several analysts were saying they saw him as the Vezina candidate at that point. So yeah, you are out to lunch on that one.

As for after Emelin went down I don't deny Price was bad (putrid in fact) for a few games. That Leaf game he let in something like four goals on five shots and they were pucks he should've stopped. The guy's not perfect and as I said, he went through a horrible stretch. But yeah, the team didn't play well in that final stretch either. Price didn't play well but like I said he doesn't get much help back there.

And I don't expect it to be any different this year either. Our blueline sucks. I don't care who our goalie is btw, that blueline sucks and we can't expect to advance with it. Maybe we'll go a round or maybe two at the most but I don't see us moving on. And I'd feel that way with Lundqvist or Quick or whatever goalie you want to name back there. We're not built for the playoffs and all the goaltending in the world won't change this.
I'd like to know which, in your opinion, blueline sucks so that we could compare the goalies that plays behind such a bad defensive core. Again, it makes me laugh when I keep hearing almost as if Lundqvist, Rask, and everybody else have no merit as they are suppose to be playing behind such a great defensive squad or a great defensive team, and yet, I've never how Dubnyk is surely the best goalie in the league based on how increidbly bad hsi team is in front of him....So let's not talk about those great goalies 'cause they have no merit, and for everybody else who plays with bad team, let's not talk about them either 'cause they just plain suck because...they suck (based on their numbers, which has to reflect how bad the team they are playing in are but we're not going to remember that)....So it leaves Price as the greatest I guess......

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:20 PM
  #267
Analyzer
#WeAreBoston
 
Analyzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Renfrew, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 41,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewHabsEra View Post
lol you didnt watch many Leafs games.. Their D core is hugely underrated and they are starting to have a pretty decent offense..
Leafs were outshot in 75% of their games.

Analyzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:25 PM
  #268
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrb1p View Post
So, you're actually saying that s hot from the blue line is the same as a shot from the slot, right ? That a shot by Stamkos is the same as a shot by Moen ?

There's always a probability that the puck goes in the net on any shots, some are higher than the other. This is pretty simple to understand.
I challenge you to prove that more goals aren't scored on redirected shots from farther out (and/or ensuing rebounds/bounces) than from actual "prime" slot areas. Meaning, whatever your idea of "dangerous area" might mean, shots don't discriminate where they come from - the function relies on what's in between the puck and the goalie even more so than the location or relative reaction time required (a goalie will stop any shot they can see, whether it's from the hash marks or centre ice). Forcing teams to shoot from the outside doesn't protect your goalie as much as it "should" if you get in the way and make him track it through your legs, for example, or get your stick in the way and make the puck fly funny, for another.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:37 PM
  #269
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
It's easy to criticize people who disagree with Crosby or who suggest he's doing a service to Team Canada. But these people should also go on record and answer the question: is Carey Price the best goaltender in the Nhl?

It's easy to disagree with those who disagree but are you willing to put your name out there and answer the question?
The question is more along the line of ... In a team based sport, how can you properly rank goaltenders ? Again, theres a group of goalies that are elite or above the others, that group, can on any given night be the best. This group is always changing also, as we saw last year that Bob got to that level. Its alot harder to rank goalies 1-2-3-4-5... than to rank skaters(Which is an incredibly hard task.) I'd say, beyond a point its almost impossible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
I'd like to know which, in your opinion, blueline sucks so that we could compare the goalies that plays behind such a bad defensive core. Again, it makes me laugh when I keep hearing almost as if Lundqvist, Rask, and everybody else have no merit as they are suppose to be playing behind such a great defensive squad or a great defensive team, and yet, I've never how Dubnyk is surely the best goalie in the league based on how increidbly bad hsi team is in front of him....So let's not talk about those great goalies 'cause they have no merit, and for everybody else who plays with bad team, let's not talk about them either 'cause they just plain suck because...they suck (based on their numbers, which has to reflect how bad the team they are playing in are but we're not going to remember that)....So it leaves Price as the greatest I guess......
It's not that they have no merit. They are damn good goalies, if you put Budaj in nets, this team will not be where it is, but if you put the goalies that belong in the said group of elite goalies, nothing will change (Albeit, if its based on the goalie A la devils.(And the goalie style needs to be similar too.))
Dubnyk is not a bad goaltender, BTW.
Give Hank, Quick, Niemi, Bob, Price, Rask, Rinne to a bad team and they will have a poor record. See Bryzgalov, Rinne, Kipprussof, Miller...
Then put a player on a defensively capable team and you will see his stats inflate... Bobrovsky being the prime example.
Now go take a look at both Crawford and Emery's stats, astonishing.
Even further, you could look at Ottawa... How could you explain three goaltenders having such inflated stats ? Do they have 3 starters ?

Mrb1p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:45 PM
  #270
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
I'd like to know which, in your opinion, blueline sucks so that we could compare the goalies that plays behind such a bad defensive core. Again, it makes me laugh when I keep hearing almost as if Lundqvist, Rask, and everybody else have no merit as they are suppose to be playing behind such a great defensive squad or a great defensive team, and yet, I've never how Dubnyk is surely the best goalie in the league based on how increidbly bad hsi team is in front of him....So let's not talk about those great goalies 'cause they have no merit, and for everybody else who plays with bad team, let's not talk about them either 'cause they just plain suck because...they suck (based on their numbers, which has to reflect how bad the team they are playing in are but we're not going to remember that)....So it leaves Price as the greatest I guess......
Never said they don't have any merit and I don't believe this. Please don't exaggerate my position because I know you're smart enough to see that I haven't been saying this.

What I said was that you can't just look at things in a vacuum. I gave you the example of Tavares earlier. He's on his own and may not put up some of the numbers that some other guys do but if you've watched the guy play, you know he's an elite talent. How elite? I'd put him right below the big four but he's close even if his numbers aren't. It's more than just numbers and that's all I'm saying.

Yeah, I think Price's numbers would be better and those other goalies' would be worse. I think Price is every bit the goalie that Rask is and the difference is in the D. Right now I think we have maybe the worst defensive group in the league. I can't think of too many that aren't as bad. So when I say that I don't think we could win anything with Lundqvist I mean it. There's no way we're going to win anything with this group (nevermind the small forward problem.) And I do think that if you swap out Price with Rask the B's wouldn't miss a beat.

I think there's a group of about a half a dozen goalies who are in the same class. I see parity between these guys with Lundqvist being a little ahead of the rest. That is not dismissing these guys at all. I've gone out of my way to tell you this so please don't talk like I've dismissed them.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:45 PM
  #271
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,133
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I challenge you to prove that more goals aren't scored on redirected shots from farther out (and/or ensuing rebounds/bounces) than from actual "prime" slot areas. Meaning, whatever your idea of "dangerous area" might mean, shots don't discriminate where they come from - the function relies on what's in between the puck and the goalie even more so than the location or relative reaction time required (a goalie will stop any shot they can see, whether it's from the hash marks or centre ice). Forcing teams to shoot from the outside doesn't protect your goalie as much as it "should" if you get in the way and make him track it through your legs, for example, or get your stick in the way and make the puck fly funny, for another.
I have to place a comment in on this, Ohashi.

As a goalie, slot areas are more dangerous shots because you have less time to react to them. Deflections and screens are very detrimental things to goalies, can't see it, can't save it, or if you are tracking a particular flight pattern and it suddenly changes, it's hard to react to the quick change in flight pattern.

However, a pass from behind the net to the blue-line gives a goalie more time to set up for the shot and the recipient. Time to know what handedness the player receiving the puck is and more time to get into the shooting lane, get big, square, all of these things.

Where as a pass from behind the net into the slot, you have less time to get set, you are in desperation from the get go. It's also harder to read a shot from in close, you are basically guessing and trying to get as close to the shooter as possible to cut down the potential angle of flight before the puck can get there.

As goalies, we are taught, if there is a deflection threat, you cut and try to get on top of that players stick, so if the puck is deflected, it has no where to go but into you. The same principle applies to quick shots in the slot, you don't have the time for your eye to register the exact angle, flight pattern or location, so you're trying to get as close to the shooter so that it can't get to the intended location.

So yes, screens and deflections are difficult shots to stop but let's not sell the prime scoring areas short.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:46 PM
  #272
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I challenge you to prove that more goals aren't scored on redirected shots from farther out (and/or ensuing rebounds/bounces) than from actual "prime" slot areas. Meaning, whatever your idea of "dangerous area" might mean, shots don't discriminate where they come from - the function relies on what's in between the puck and the goalie even more so than the location or relative reaction time required (a goalie will stop any shot they can see, whether it's from the hash marks or centre ice). Forcing teams to shoot from the outside doesn't protect your goalie as much as it "should" if you get in the way and make him track it through your legs, for example, or get your stick in the way and make the puck fly funny, for another.
It's impossible to prove, the only way to see that is to actually watch the game...

As for the bolded part, it's not true at all. The puck travels a lot faster than what they human eye can perceive.

A shot from the point can be dangerous. A shot from P.K. Subban is by all means dangerous, through traffic or not. A shot by Lafleur coming down the wing is dangerous.
A shot from the blue line, right in the crest from Gionta ? ... Not so sure.

Do this little exercise.
Which shot as the most chance of going through ?
Stamkos sitting in his bureau
Subban at the point
Holmstrom in front of the net
Gionta shooting just on top of the circles....

All with traffic and no traffic.

Mrb1p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:56 PM
  #273
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrb1p View Post
It's impossible to prove, the only way to see that is to actually watch the game...

As for the bolded part, it's not true at all. The puck travels a lot faster than what they human eye can perceive.
It might be close from the side or above, but coming at you, as a focused professional, responsible for guarding far less than 15 degrees of vertical scoring area from as close as 15 feet, we all know that's not true.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 06:58 PM
  #274
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
It might be close from the side or above, but coming at you, as a focused professional, responsible for guarding far less than 15 degrees of vertical scoring area from as close as 15 feet, we all know that's not true.
Yeah, I got that wrong I didn't mean to say it like that, more in line with what WTK says about shooting from the slot and the panic mode.

Mrb1p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2013, 07:04 PM
  #275
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
I have to place a comment in on this, Ohashi.

As a goalie, slot areas are more dangerous shots because you have less time to react to them.
We also know that goalies aren't facing enough 100 mph slap shots from 15 feet out to outweigh the vast majority of shots from the slot which probably clock much closer to half of that. So while I'm sure you're technically correct not just in theory, but also in practice, players are also typically pressured far more (and less prepared) on shots from close in and are thus a) less likely to see the actual space(s) available to them (let alone have time to evaluate which one makes the best target), b) take the time to aim directly at a selected spot, and c) generate the same speed on their shots that we see at all-star weekend skills competitions.

As a fun thing you can do for yourself watching games, watch point shots through traffic versus shots from closer in through traffic, and notice which ones turn into tips/deflections and which ones more often just get knocked down/stopped dead along the way. Loaded up shots from farther out can easily be "more dangerous" (depending on the shooter) than rushed shots from much closer for a variety of reasons.


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 09-19-2013 at 07:09 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu 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 07:04 AM.

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.