No, dude. You WANT Calgary to make it into the playoffs. They draft latter and give into their delusions that they aren't 3 years overdue blowing things up and doing a full rebuild. Let them have hope until all of their core have become too old or have become free agents. They won't get jack squat done in the playoffs.
its always a gamble but yeah i would rather the flames make it in, i live in calgary and seeing the misery of them losing in the playoffs is way way better than them not making it.
You can't give Calgary and Kipper the chance to make the playoffs. You know what can happen when a hot goalie rips through the playoffs. Loser points for everyone and I hope Edmonton keeps winning!
Gagner is hardly a problem on a PP. Supports puck possession well. 8.42GFOn/60mins would be considered prolific on most clubs.
Incomprehensible really though that people spend game after game *****ing about PP personnel decisions when we have the league leading PP.
Heres a hint. Theres nothing wrong with our PP.
Also to clarify another point. Petry played over 2mins of the OT.
It's fairly simple. RNH is a much better PP player than Gagner so he should get 1st unit PP time. I don't understand the mentality that because the PP is #1 that RNH doesn't deserve to replace Gagner on the top PP unit.
Gagner isn't a problem on the PP but he isn't the best option either. Put RNH on the 1st unit PP and the chances of scoring a PP goal greatly increases, pretty simple stuff.
Also, i didn't realize that Petry played so much in the OT. I hardly noticed him at all in OT but noticed a lot of Potter and Whitney.
Fourth game in a row where Schultz was fifth in D TOI. I thought this guy was supposed to be a Top 4 option?
Yeah, well he should be but Renney is a big dummy so there's that.
WE all know that Potter is a better option than Schultz, right RIGHT?
How anybody can defend Renney is beyond me.
Ryan Whitney costed us alot of goals in the past couple games.
How does he get punished? Leader on TOI with 24 minutes.
While Petry, aka The Beast, gets 21
huh?
As I said in the game thread: YES RENNEY PLAY WHITNEY AND POTTER FOR ALL OF OVERTIME, IT WAS WHAT WE WERE ALL BEGGING FOR.
I think it's pretty funny people were blaming the refs in this game, where there were maybe a couple of bad/missed calls. It was a pleasure to watch compared to the TO, Philly, or Dallas games.
Oilers weren't really getting any great chances and it puzzles me how we usually play SJ quite well.
Ryan Whitney costed us alot of goals in the past couple games.
How does he get punished? Leader on TOI with 24 minutes.
While Petry, aka The Beast, gets 21
huh?
Hmm, that would seem a bit short-sighted. Which of the two Sharks goals would you say Theo Peckham directly contributed to? You're equating Theo's game with Whitney's from the night before, but whose giveaways led to the Sharks goals? Sometimes just reading the stat line the next morning doesn't tell the full story. You have to actually, you know, watch the games.
its always a gamble but yeah i would rather the flames make it in, i live in calgary and seeing the misery of them losing in the playoffs is way way better than them not making it.
sorry dude. I'd rather have them finish 9th to 11th again. gives them no hope for the present or future, and eliminates the chance that Kipper plays like he can and they go on a run.
With the way the refs are not calling the game now, it can be like that crap hockey the flames played in 2004.
Dubnyk is the most frustrating playing to watch. He'll stone Marleau point blank on a great post to post stretch, having whiffed on a mediocre clapper to his glove hand from Vandermeer. The giveaway, just lack of concentration.
Hmm, that would seem a bit short-sighted. Which of the two Sharks goals would you say Theo Peckham directly contributed to? You're equating Theo's game with Whitney's from the night before, but whose giveaways led to the Sharks goals? Sometimes just reading the stat line the next morning doesn't tell the full story. You have to actually, you know, watch the games.
Lol, buddy, i have season tickets, and my cousin is in the NHL. Lawl. Must be Theo's girlfriend..
I was thinking. Pechma was drafted 75th overall. in 2006. There can't be 75 players from that draft who are better than him. so maybe we've come out ahead. lol
Hmm, that would seem a bit short-sighted. Which of the two Sharks goals would you say Theo Peckham directly contributed to? You're equating Theo's game with Whitney's from the night before, but whose giveaways led to the Sharks goals? Sometimes just reading the stat line the next morning doesn't tell the full story. You have to actually, you know, watch the games.
Well definitely the second one. Yeah it's mainly Dubnyk's fault for coughing it up like that, but Peckham was they guy that got back there and did absolutely nothing to prevent the goal.
And if you actually watched the game, you'd see that he still panics the instant you put pressure on him if he has the puck in his own zone.
t0nedeff: "RNH should be on the PP, his production proves it"
Replacement: "I never mentioned RNH"
C'mon...you may not have mentioned him specifically, but when you retort with "there's nothing wrong with the PP" after someone asserts they'd rather see RNH on the PP than another player, it seems pretty weak to come back with "I never mentioned RNH" when another poster challenges you on that point.
And on this point, my opinion is that just because the team is good at something doesn't mean they should be complacent about improving it...especially when the numbers scream that a particular player (hey, I didn't mention RNH!) has every right to be on that PP unit ahead of most everyone else on the team.
huh?
I said nothing about RNH, and mean nothing about RNH in that conversation. Probably because I don't believe that tthere needs to be static formations on PP units. What we have here instead is a wealth of players that can play well on the PP and move the puck around with confidence.
A team with this good problem to have should be moving people around and in and out of units depending on if that player has zip on any givent day. I don't really even tend to look at it as units 1, units, 2. Obviously I want all of our good players to get looks on the PP. Many advantages to actually having more of a PP platoon rather than hard and fast 1 and 2 units. Keeps the opponents guessing a whole lot if theres some change in the configurations and setup. Remember how bad we were when just Hemsky was running most of the PP?
Cup made an odd comment that Gagner wasn't any good on a pp and I responded. thats it.
Cup: Strawberries should never be on cereal. They don't belong on cereal. They just ruin cereal.
Rep: I love strawberries on cereal.
tonedef: What the hell do you have against blueberries.
Rep: Odd response, I never mentioned blueberries. I like blueberries a lot.
hope this is clearer.
Last edited by Replacement: 03-07-2012 at 10:00 AM.
Well definitely the second one. Yeah it's mainly Dubnyk's fault for coughing it up like that, but Peckham was they guy that got back there and did absolutely nothing to prevent the goal.
And if you actually watched the game, you'd see that he still panics the instant you put pressure on him if he has the puck in his own zone.
I'm not saying Peckham's perfect. He's a physical 6-7 who should never touch the puck or play against top level competition, but seeing a -2 stat line and reading the game thusly seems a might ignorant. Then again, judging by CardMonkey83's response to me, I think it's safe to assume he's not exactly the "thoughtful" type.
It's fairly simple. RNH is a much better PP player than Gagner so he should get 1st unit PP time. I don't understand the mentality that because the PP is #1 that RNH doesn't deserve to replace Gagner on the top PP unit.
Gagner isn't a problem on the PP but he isn't the best option either. Put RNH on the 1st unit PP and the chances of scoring a PP goal greatly increases, pretty simple stuff.
Also, i didn't realize that Petry played so much in the OT. I hardly noticed him at all in OT but noticed a lot of Potter and Whitney.
Like I said to digger I'm not a believer in set PP units. I'm a believer in them being non static and rotating people around and changing them up. Especially when you have the good problem of having so many players on a PP. For instance posts that grief and moan about Horcoff getting PP time would number in the thousands here. Except that some people realize(and I give credit as you and others have mentioned it) Horcoff is actually good on a PP unit. May not get a lot of pts but supports production well.
Which leads me to my next point is that I like to look at GFON to see how players support production on a PP. Because the important thing is the team scores a goal on the PP, using all the players on the PP effectively.
For instance. Omark will accrue slightly more PP pts/min than Gagner. But Gagner might support twice as many goals/minute being scored on a PP. Due to the different ways in which they tend to move, or retain the puck.
Which is the better PP player?
That said I don't mind seeing either on a PP.
As far as PP is concerned we have an embarassment of riches here. Use it. One of the things that keeps our PP fresh and consistently intense is how many people we can rotate in and out of those units. Everybody likes being there. Spread the fun around a bit, its good for morale and PP results.
ps Do you forget I've always been one of the biggest RNH backers on this board? Not sure how people are reading something into this discussion.
Like I said to digger I'm not a believer in set PP units. I'm a believer in them being non static and rotating people around and changing them up. Especially when you have the good problem of having so many players on a PP. For instance posts that grief and moan about Horcoff getting PP time would number in the thousands here. Except that some people realize(and I give credit as you and others have mentioned it) Horcoff is actually good on a PP unit. May not get a lot of pts but supports production well.
Which leads me to my next point is that I like to look at GFON to see how players support production on a PP. Because the important thing is the team scores a goal on the PP, using all the players on the PP effectively.
For instance. Omark will accrue slightly more PP pts/min than Gagner. But Gagner might support twice as many goals/minute being scored on a PP. Due to the different ways in which they tend to move, or retain the puck.
Which is the better PP player?
That said I don't mind seeing either on a PP.
As far as PP is concerned we have an embarassment of riches here. Use it. One of the things that keeps our PP fresh and consistently intense is how many people we can rotate in and out of those units. Everybody likes being there. Spread the fun around a bit, its good for morale and PP results.
ps Do you forget I've always been one of the biggest RNH backers on this board? Not sure how people are reading something into this discussion.
Agreed about Horcoff, i don't get the moaning about him on the PP. He actually plays the supporting role pretty well and is surprisingly good in front of the net.
I understand what you're saying about spreading out the wealth over 2 units but it's not the same as spreading out the scoring at even strength for instance because 2 scoring lines will generally get a similar amount of icetime. When talking about the PP, generally the 1st unit will get a good deal more PP time than the 2nd unit especially if they are an effective unit because they will generally control the PP in the offensive zone so any PP with RNH getting less PP time is a less dangerous PP.
RNH-Eberle-Hall is one of the most deadly PP combinations in the league, Gagner-Eberle-Hall is not.
Agreed about Horcoff, i don't get the moaning about him on the PP. He actually plays the supporting role pretty well and is surprisingly good in front of the net.
I understand what you're saying about spreading out the wealth over 2 units but it's not the same as spreading out the scoring at even strength for instance because 2 scoring lines will generally get a similar amount of icetime. When talking about the PP, generally the 1st unit will get a good deal more PP time than the 2nd unit especially if they are an effective unit because they will generally control the PP in the offensive zone so any PP with RNH getting less PP time is a less dangerous PP. RNH-Eberle-Hall is one of the most deadly PP combinations in the league, Gagner-Eberle-Hall is not.
But this statement is false.
Either configuration is good and would move the best PP numbers on any NHL team. Theres nothing wrong with changing it up a little either way and not having the units be static lineups.
In anycase the thing is working good. Its the one thing in the shed that doesn't look to require repairing.
I don't even care who's 1 and 2 as long as our special teams are effective.
As a side note of course a lot of second guessing of all things goes on at this board. I just don't see as much of a need to second and third guess the one thing thats working excellently. Regardless of who's on first base.
The best thing around penalties yesterday. The Oilers figured out calls are not going to be made, so they joined in wholeheartedly at doing stuff that used to be called penalties. And with their abilities in the defensive zone, I say, go for it.
The best thing around penalties yesterday. The Oilers figured out calls are not going to be made, so they joined in wholeheartedly at doing stuff that used to be called penalties. And with their abilities in the defensive zone, I say, go for it.
Smid was just laughing about this on the bench.
Body slams somebody down on the ice, looks around, no penalty. He's talking about it on the bench and I imagine saying "I guess I can do that **** now"
