I don't think you can point to Bowman's numbers and say he didn't do enough to stay. I think you have to watch the game. The way Bowman and Sutter have played together, they have been a threat every shift. Bowman's numbers haven't been dazzling, but he's also a rookie just getting used to the league. If he continues to get the ice time with Sutter and continues to work as hard as he has, there's every reason to expect that his numbers will improve. I can't say the same for Dwyer, Ponikarovsky or several others.
IMO, Bowman should still be here. He's clearly been one of our better offensive threats lately. And he's only getting better.
I'm not too worried about Bowman or Dalpe going back down for now. This was really a chance for Muller to see them in person so he can assess what to do after the deadline and next year. That is assuming some guys are gone after the deadline (Ruutu? Poni? etc..).
Something to think about in the 'threat' discussion.
If someone is not good at putting the puck in the net, then they have to excel at other parts of the game. So when they look aesthetically good on the ice, but don't have any results, that's not by mistake. If they couldn't score, AND were bad at the other stuff, they wouldn't be in the NHL. But it in no way indicates its just a matter of time before they are going to start scoring.
I think that's why everyone is always so excited by the latest can't score player.
I remember last year, everyone was pointing to faceoffs as a reason for the team's suckage. Tripp wouldn't shut up about it all year.
Turns out, it's not all that important. Weird.
It's because the puck changes possession a gazillion times in a hockey game, only a small fraction of which are a result of a linesman dropping a puck.
Any gain made by a few extra percentage points in faceoffs is automatically negated by the fact that the puck will immediately be turned over by failing to clear it, skating directly into a defender, passing it to Chad LaRose, etc.
Not sure if this mentioned elsewhere (sorry if it is). Do the 'Canes plan on swapping out the fonts they use for the names on the back of the jerseys? From the italicized letters to the font that is used on the main website, IE as 'Carolina Hurricanes' is written here. It would be much more appealing I think.
It's because the puck changes possession a gazillion times in a hockey game, only a small fraction of which are a result of a linesman dropping a puck.
Any gain made by a few extra percentage points in faceoffs is automatically negated by the fact that the puck will immediately be turned over by failing to clear it, skating directly into a defender, passing it to Chad LaRose, etc.
It's a pretty important stat in regards to the PP and PK, I would imagine. Other situations, not as much. IMO. I have no stats to back that up.
Faceoffs are really important, regardless of the situation. A couple key points:
Quote:
In the first seven seconds after a face-off in your own end, you are 10 times more likely to be scored on if you lost the draw than if you won it. In fact, more than 10% of all the goals in the NHL during the 2003-04 season were allowed within 20 seconds of a team losing a face-off in its own defensive zone. Overall, that means that one out of every 40 lost face-offs resulted in a goal in the next 20 seconds. In a league where teams score just 2.5 goals per game, that makes a significant difference.
Quote:
The most significant result of this analysis is that teams should use their best face-off men on face-offs deep in their own end to decrease the likelihood of being scored on. Similarly, they should also use their best face-offs takers in the offensive zone. If a team improves its face-off winning percentage in these situations from 50% to 60% (say, by signing Yanic Perreault, assuming all other things are equal), it can expect, on average, to improve its goal differential by 25 goals over the course of the season.
Christ almighty, why do I even venture to the business board anymore? Nothing like Ghost and the pro-Quebec crowd throwing out misinformation and outright lies unabated. Much as I predicted, moving a team to Winnipeg didn't satiate these jackals, it just poured gasoline on a fire. And the Phoenix situation isn't making things any better. And it's just going to get worse with what's going on in New Jersey. Seriously, why the **** do I even bother going over there?
Christ almighty, why do I even venture to the business board anymore? Nothing like Ghost and the pro-Quebec crowd throwing out misinformation and outright lies unabated. Much as I predicted, moving a team to Winnipeg didn't satiate these jackals, it just poured gasoline on a fire. And the Phoenix situation isn't making things any better. And it's just going to get worse with what's going on in New Jersey. Seriously, why the **** do I even bother going over there?
Agree.
It gets annoying being told that you don't deserve a hockey team because you don't want to put good money into a crap product, especially by some 12 year old whose parents probably have had season tickets since the '80's.
The real world of buisness, where hockey teams have to compete with many other diversions for a persons' hard earned dollar is cast aside, and instead Columbus and Carolina HAVE to be like markets where Hockey has a monopoly, because (gasp!) it's a cultural thing.
But that's my rant. I just hate having idiots who make claims based on transient facts like yearly attendence.
Christ almighty, why do I even venture to the business board anymore? Nothing like Ghost and the pro-Quebec crowd throwing out misinformation and outright lies unabated. Much as I predicted, moving a team to Winnipeg didn't satiate these jackals, it just poured gasoline on a fire. And the Phoenix situation isn't making things any better. And it's just going to get worse with what's going on in New Jersey. Seriously, why the **** do I even bother going over there?
There's a reason I don't venture there often. The continual pro-Canadian anti-Southern circlejerk that's allowed to go on there is frustrating at best and antithetical to the best interests of the site, IMO. Users like shawa and Ghost are allowed to run rampant with their trolling and it's a shame. I have my theories as to why, but enough of that though before I wind up getting infracted.
You have to love that some users there don't have the mental wherewithal to realize that teams aren't just wallpapering grocery stores with free tickets - usually that business that's offering free tickets have paid a fairly sizable promotional/sponsorship deal with that team. How much has Kangaroo Express paid the Hurricanes, for instance, for ads on the boards and that Kangaroo Express weekend ticket offer? I'm thinking in the end it more than makes up for the difference between what would have been paid for those tickets. Otherwise, why go to the trouble of involving the middleman?
I swear, I think somewhere in his grave Joseph Goebbels is smiling at how his fine work has been carried on by the Canadian hockey media. Tell the big lie often enough and people buy it whole hog. I don't get it - in just about any other sport, fans are thrilled with the idea of that sport catching on and spreading to places where it's not been as popular. Except for Canadians with hockey. This is the mistake of so closely tying your national identity with a sport. Why is it again, you have Canadians drooling over the notion of the Panthers relocating to Moose Factory but you don't hear NFL fans clamoring to relocate the Jaguars to places like Canton, Akron, Frankford, Providence, or Portsmouth? Oh - right...because they lack the delusion that relocating to some farflung third-tier city will somehow make it all better and accept the reality that sports is business.
Faceoffs are really important, regardless of the situation. A couple key points:
One out of every 40 defensive zone faceoffs lost? We had 16 def-zone faceoffs, and Boston had 10 on Saturday. So lets say 13 is an average number of Def-Zone faceoffs.
At 50%, you lose 6.5 per game.
At 60%, you lose 5.2 per game.
For a difference of 1.3 per game.
So if every 40 extra losses results in a goal, winning 10% more d-zone faceoffs results in one less goal against as described every 30.7 games. Or about goals 2.5 per season.
In the end though, the 'All things being equal' caveat that makes this all interesting but only so meaningful. Of course the choice between Eric Staal winning faceoffs and Eric Staal not winning faceoffs, you take Staal winning. But that's not the choice people were clamoring for. It was things like moving Staal and Sutter to wing so we could find someone to win 5% more of the draws.
And thankfully Staal has improved in a big way in that area. Still, he's nowhere near the beast in the circle that Brindy was, really the only player league wide that even comes close is Toews.
