HFBoards

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

Let's talk about Petiot

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-18-2006, 01:17 PM
  #1
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Let's talk about Petiot

Sans the delay of game penalty and very limited icetime, I think he played great last night.
His reads were very good, he was in the right place at the right time, good on pokechecks.

What do you guys think?

 
Old
01-18-2006, 01:20 PM
  #2
fuzzerson
¡Ándele!
 
fuzzerson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 304
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to fuzzerson
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
Sans the delay of game penalty and very limited icetime, I think he played great last night.
His reads were very good, he was in the right place at the right time, good on pokechecks.

What do you guys think?
I have liked this kid since his Freshman year at CC. Remember this is his first year pro, so two or three years down the road we will have a keeper.

fuzzerson is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 01:26 PM
  #3
TubbyTerrion*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Studio City
Country: United States
Posts: 3,974
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TubbyTerrion*
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
Sans the delay of game penalty and very limited icetime, I think he played great last night.
His reads were very good, he was in the right place at the right time, good on pokechecks.

What do you guys think?
I was at the game... great seat... 112, row 16... good sight lines... Petiot... inconclusive, though he did not appear nervous at all. Only took a handful of shifts and did have that one where he found himself behind the Lightning net, and that was ok because he didn't panic, though he had a shooting opportunity about two strides before his journey ended.

He'll be fine I think, but to base any opinion on 6 minutes of ice... not gonna happen

TubbyTerrion* is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 01:31 PM
  #4
tc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to tc
I had no idea how well he skated. Would love to see him get some more ice time, even though he is not 5-9, 170.

Then again, he did show some offensive ability on that first rush, so he is probably Monarch-bound for the rest of the year.

Over six feet with some offensive ability. The kid is doomed.

tc is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 01:35 PM
  #5
TubbyTerrion*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Studio City
Country: United States
Posts: 3,974
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TubbyTerrion*
Quote:
Originally Posted by tc
I had no idea how well he skated. Would love to see him get some more ice time, even though he is not 5-9, 170.

Then again, he did show some offensive ability on that first rush, so he is probably Monarch-bound for the rest of the year.

Over six feet with some offensive ability. The kid is doomed.

EXCUSE ME... the cynic line starts behind me...

Seriously, when I had my chats with Al Murray a couple of years ago, they were raving about this kid, and in a way that you could feel a genuine excitement, so I give him the benefit of the doubt in all areas. Just that last night was hardly conclusive.

(Sidebar: I also continue to stand by my statement that Norstrom is just not terribly effective in "The New NHL" ... at least on the Kings side of the blue line. There were a few people in 112 within an earshot who were talking about how bad he has been for the most part all year long, and I know that the last time I brought it up here I got raked over the coals, but I still stand by it. The guy is a flatfoot in the defensive zone.)

TubbyTerrion* is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 01:39 PM
  #6
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TubbyTerrion
(Sidebar: I also continue to stand by my statement that Norstrom is just not terribly effective in "The New NHL" ... at least on the Kings side of the blue line. There were a few people in 112 within an earshot who were talking about how bad he has been for the most part all year long, and I know that the last time I brought it up here I got raked over the coals, but I still stand by it. The guy is a flatfoot in the defensive zone.)
I saw him get burned pretty badly a few times on TV. It must have been worse in person.

 
Old
01-18-2006, 01:49 PM
  #7
wabwat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
Posts: 6,674
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wabwat
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
I saw him get burned pretty badly a few times on TV. It must have been worse in person.

it has been, all year long... he's consistently defending with his stick or with a free hand.

wabwat is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 03:37 PM
  #8
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,161
vCash: 500
When I see Norstrom get into his "goaltending" mode, I cringe and expect a scoring chance for the opposition. Norstrom puts his stick down to the ice and goes into a "paddle down" you usually see goalies do. He hasn't been too strong in front of the net, clearing bodies. Matty seems to be playing the puck more than the body. Don't know if that is just him trying to adjust to the new NHL, but it isn't working too well.

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 03:45 PM
  #9
Game Misconduct
Registered User
 
Game Misconduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 1,862
vCash: 500
I was at the game in PR6. I agree that you can't judge based on six minutes. I don't recall exactly what happened, and have not re-watched the game on TiVo yet, but during his first shift he made a mistake in the neutral zone that caused me to tell the people I was with that I didn't think he'd be getting any more shifts with seven D-men dressed. After that, he played better. He definitely is a candidate for supplying the physical presence we need at the blue line, but it remains to be seen whether he's ready.

Regardless of how he plays, I would prefer (for his benefit and the team's) that he get lots of ice time in Manchester rather than limited time in LA.

Game Misconduct is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 03:47 PM
  #10
Game Misconduct
Registered User
 
Game Misconduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 1,862
vCash: 500
I don't understand the criticism of Norstrom at all. You guys make him sound like some big oaf who can't skate, which is completely false. In fact, he is one of the best skaters on the team.

Game Misconduct is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 03:55 PM
  #11
Fat Elvis
Registered User
 
Fat Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Money Pit
Country: United States
Posts: 5,289
vCash: 500
Was at the game as well. Kept an eye on Petiot and I agree with the other posters, 6 min is not much. He had a chance to take the body a few times and didn't, not sure if it was nerves. It'd be nice to see him play as a 6th and 14-15 mins. to show more of what to expect.

Fat Elvis is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 05:37 PM
  #12
Kearney
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TubbyTerrion
(Sidebar: I also continue to stand by my statement that Norstrom is just not terribly effective in "The New NHL" ... at least on the Kings side of the blue line. There were a few people in 112 within an earshot who were talking about how bad he has been for the most part all year long, and I know that the last time I brought it up here I got raked over the coals, but I still stand by it. The guy is a flatfoot in the defensive zone.)
Agree. Miller was clearly our best defensive d-man before he went down. Gleason is second.

Kearney is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 07:15 PM
  #13
TubbyTerrion*
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Studio City
Country: United States
Posts: 3,974
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TubbyTerrion*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Game Misconduct
I don't understand the criticism of Norstrom at all. You guys make him sound like some big oaf who can't skate, which is completely false. In fact, he is one of the best skaters on the team.
This isn't Skating With Celebrities here... this is the new speedy NHL, and while he may be a good "skater" in your estimation, in the defensive zone he is not doing the things he needs to do to consistently defend his position on the ice. He clutches and grabs and waves and flails and seems to be a stride away or behind his man more often than not. He's just not looked great. I'm not ready to exile him to Siberia or to boo him, but he's not the dominant defensive presence he's portrayed as by some fans.

TubbyTerrion* is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 09:12 PM
  #14
viking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Temecula,CA
Country: Denmark
Posts: 94
vCash: 500
I agree that 6 min is not enough time to get an idea on a player, just like 8 games is enough to see a players future.

The critizism of Norstrom, IMHO, is not in his skating but his overall play. The thing with him is that he's supposed to be the physical punishing D-man that clears out the front of the net and battles hard in the corners. With Miller going down, our D is looking soft, we are not winning the physical battles and as a leader Norstrom needs to lead by example. The only player landing punishing hits is Brown. Other teams just walk into our zone without any trepidation. Our D needs to do more than just provide offense.

This is the biggest thing that I think Petiot will learn in this call-up. In the brief time that he has up he needs to establish a presence, like he did at CC. When opposing players came into the zone he punished them. This is what we are lacking on D.

viking is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 09:23 PM
  #15
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,307
vCash: 500
Petiot looked ok, but so did Grebeshkov for 4-5 games. Let's see how he does when the coaches force him into a role that he isn't prepared for.

Osprey is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 09:34 PM
  #16
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TubbyTerrion
This isn't Skating With Celebrities here... this is the new speedy NHL, and while he may be a good "skater" in your estimation, in the defensive zone he is not doing the things he needs to do to consistently defend his position on the ice. He clutches and grabs and waves and flails and seems to be a stride away or behind his man more often than not. He's just not looked great. I'm not ready to exile him to Siberia or to boo him, but he's not the dominant defensive presence he's portrayed as by some fans.
When your linemate is either Nathan Dempsey or Mike Weaver.......especially Dempsey, you're not only playing one position, but actually two. Matti is being caught "running around" and lately has been all over the shop. It has nothing to do with passion, smarts, or skating ability (because he's one of the best)........but quite simply he has to do too much. Dempsey has been the Kings most atrocious player bar-none! 90% of the time, he's not moving his feet, and his decisions are ridiculously slow......causing other players to scramble (including Matti). If you don't want the puck or a game for that matter, stay off the ice......and keep that gay slap shot for pick-up hockey.
Part of the blame should also go to the coaching staff. If we're this crippled (injuries).....now more than ever should you give some of the kids in the back a look. Hopefully Petiot gets thrown in the fire next game with some serious minutes. I also wouldn't mind seeing Tambellini again.

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
01-18-2006, 10:38 PM
  #17
ILuvLA
Registered User
 
ILuvLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Lost in LA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,744
vCash: 500
Have you guys seen the post game interviews with Hardy & Murray on the Kings site? Both were asked about Petiot. Murray tap danced around without saying anything specific about Richard. Spoke in more general terms about all of the call ups from Manchester. Hardy on the other hand, acknowledged Petiot's limited play, but had good things to say about him.

ILuvLA is offline  
Old
01-19-2006, 11:31 AM
  #18
Kearney
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
Petiot looked ok, but so did Grebeshkov for 4-5 games. Let's see how he does when the coaches force him into a role that he isn't prepared for.
Just for fun, what were the coaches' other options the past couple of games?

(And you can't say Petiot because you just admitted he wouldn't be ready for that role either.)

Kearney is offline  
Old
01-19-2006, 04:56 PM
  #19
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearney
Just for fun, what were the coaches' other options the past couple of games?
I don't follow you. I think you misinterpreted my post.

Osprey is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 09:09 AM
  #20
Kearney
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
I don't follow you. I think you misinterpreted my post.
You were clearly criticizing the coaches for 'forcing' Grebs into a role he wasn't ready for.

What other options did the coaches have?

Kearney is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 04:48 PM
  #21
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearney
You were clearly criticizing the coaches for 'forcing' Grebs into a role he wasn't ready for.
Ok, I understand you now. I thought that you meant Petiot before.
Quote:
What other options did the coaches have?
To pair him with a more stable defenseman in a role that receives fewer minutes and has fewer responsibilities (i.e. the role that he looked ok in before he was moved to assume Visnovsky's responsibilities, a role that "he isn't prepared for").

Osprey is offline  
Old
01-20-2006, 05:12 PM
  #22
Kearney
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
Ok, I understand you now. I thought that you meant Petiot before.To pair him with a more stable defenseman in a role that receives fewer minutes and has fewer responsibilities (i.e. the role that he looked ok in before he was moved to assume Visnovsky's responsibilities, a role that "he isn't prepared for").
Well, first, Grebeshkov earned increased minutes in my opnion by playing well in his first couple of games.

Secondly, I don't know what 'fewer responsibilities' means. If anything, pairing Grebeshkov with Corvo did give him fewer responsibilities because Corvo creates a lot of offense and Grebs could concentrate on the defensive end without worrying about producing points.

And thirdly, there wasn't anyone to pair Grebeshkov with, based on your criteria. If he was paired with a good defensive player (Norstrom or Gleason), he'd be playing too many minutes; and if he was paired with any of the others (Dempsey or Weaver) the pairing would be an even greater defensive liability. By your own criteria Corvo was a decent compromise.

I really think you're just taking random potshots at Andy Murray.

To me, the only argument that makes a little sense would be that Grebeshkov should have been playing with Norstrom. But that doesn't seem to be your point because he would have been logging even more minutes.

I don't think we have any "more stable defensemen" playing fewer minutes than Corvo, so I think you're asking for the impossible.

Kearney is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:11 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.