HFBoards

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

Laraque Games

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-09-2003, 07:02 PM
  #1
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Laraque Games

Seeing as there is a huge problem of people remembering which games laraque plays well in and which ones he plays poorly in, I am staring this thread.

Oct. 10/03 - 5-2 win vs San Jose

Laraque was awesome.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-09-2003, 07:33 PM
  #2
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Seeing as there is a huge problem of people remembering which games laraque plays well in and which ones he plays poorly in, I am staring this thread.

Oct. 10/03 - 5-2 win vs San Jose

Laraque was awesome.
Yeah.....he was awesome in game one last year too though.

Scored a goal. Everyone was touting him as taking over Griers role. His job to lose etc. Lost it by about game three I would say.

I hope he can bring this more often this season.

He WAS awesome tonight.

gretzky2kurri is offline  
Old
10-09-2003, 08:57 PM
  #3
Mowzie
Asst. Dishwasher
 
Mowzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lebanon, Alberta
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 8,289
vCash: 500
maybe Torrid Raffe Torres will light a fire under his bum.

Mowzie is offline  
Old
10-14-2003, 11:06 AM
  #4
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
I would say that is 2 for 2 so far this year.

Once again, the 4th line was the best line we had, and unfortunately because of all the penalties, they probably didn't see as much time as they probably could have.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-14-2003, 12:26 PM
  #5
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
I would hardly call the Vancouver game indicative of a solid game from Laraque. That's stretching it to say the least. The entire team played poorly and Laraque himself included.

momentai is offline  
Old
10-14-2003, 01:28 PM
  #6
cram
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
I would hardly call the Vancouver game indicative of a solid game from Laraque. That's stretching it to say the least. The entire team played poorly and Laraque himself included.
Agreed, the Vancouver game was a pathetic team effort, one game in which Laraque did not bring it.

cram is offline  
Old
10-15-2003, 04:47 AM
  #7
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
I would hardly call the Vancouver game indicative of a solid game from Laraque. That's stretching it to say the least. The entire team played poorly and Laraque himself included.
He was still one of our best players that game, and he only saw 9.5 minutes of ice time.

Regardless, he had another good game against Calgary, and is at least 2 for 3, which is more than I can say for most of the rest of the team.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-16-2003, 04:21 PM
  #8
Game 8
Registered User
 
Game 8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,214
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Seeing as there is a huge problem of people remembering which games laraque plays well in and which ones he plays poorly in, I am staring this thread.

Oct. 10/03 - 5-2 win vs San Jose

Laraque was awesome.
One more check for Laraque. Easily won the fight helps motivate the team!!

Game 8 is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 05:19 AM
  #9
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
I think this game gets an N/A... he did a lot in his 4 minutes, but in the grand shceme of the game, he didn't have much of an impact.

So through 4 games, he has 2 solid games, 1 lackluster and one N/A.

Still 2 for 3.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 06:26 AM
  #10
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I think this game gets an N/A... he did a lot in his 4 minutes, but in the grand shceme of the game, he didn't have much of an impact.

So through 4 games, he has 2 solid games, 1 lackluster and one N/A.

Still 2 for 3.
"N/A" is not valid. he played the game right? if you can't give him a positive rating it means he played poorly (even though he only played 4 minutes).

that makes it 2/4.

i expect him to make it 3/5 against the avs or the oilers are in big trouble.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 06:28 AM
  #11
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
"N/A" is not valid. he played the game right? if you can't give him a positive rating it means he played poorly (even though he only played 4 minutes).

that makes it 2/4.

i expect him to make it 3/5 against the avs or the oilers are in big trouble.
Well in that case, he did everything he could in his limited playing time to spark the Oilers and help them win... I just don't see how you can give him a + or a - for last night.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 06:46 AM
  #12
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
You can't. It would be like Hemsky playing three shifts that were excellent and then getting hurt and saying he played bad because in "the grand scheme of the game" he didn't do anything.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 06:47 AM
  #13
Marconius
Registered User
 
Marconius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,519
vCash: 500
Does anyone know why he hardly saw the ice? I heard some rumors that he hurt his hand during the fight. If thats the case, I can't see giving him a '-' for the game. Laraque comes out and wins a fight in the opening period, letting his teammates know its time to step up and letting Buffalo know that they're in for an intense night.
I say

Marconius is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 07:02 AM
  #14
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marconius
Does anyone know why he hardly saw the ice? I heard some rumors that he hurt his hand during the fight. If thats the case, I can't see giving him a '-' for the game. Laraque comes out and wins a fight in the opening period, letting his teammates know its time to step up and letting Buffalo know that they're in for an intense night.
I say
agreed! If a rating has to be made then a "+" is def. in order.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 07:34 AM
  #15
Game 8
Registered User
 
Game 8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,214
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
agreed! If a rating has to be made then a "+" is def. in order.
The reason I gave him a thumbs up so early was because he delivered a message early in the game. How many times have people complained he does not seem to play with any intensity? Anyway for George a good fight is equal to scoring a goal which I am sure everyone realizes, from my point of view if he helps to set the tone early, that is his most important job…………….

Game 8 is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 08:15 AM
  #16
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
so it seems to me that the general concensus is he earned a + in his limited play time last night. that's fine too. hence, according to popular vote, i guess he's 3/4 in good games.

personally, i don't think he earned a + but i do appreciate democracy... so majority rules.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 08:18 AM
  #17
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Lol... hey, I was happy to give him a N/A...

But I guess the thing is, we want Laraque to make positive contributions, and he did get the crowd jumping...

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-17-2003, 09:52 AM
  #18
IceDragoon
Registered User
 
IceDragoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South of Sanity
Posts: 3,874
vCash: 500
a definite +

IceDragoon is offline  
Old
10-19-2003, 03:33 AM
  #19
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
I didn't see the 3rd period, but I am thinking this game was a -.

I mean, they did some decent cycles, but didn't create many chances, and he didn't throw any "punishing checks"...

3 for 5 this year, but he has yet to be completely invisible yet, which is pretty good.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-19-2003, 08:30 AM
  #20
kraigus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to kraigus Send a message via MSN to kraigus
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I didn't see the 3rd period, but I am thinking this game was a -.

I mean, they did some decent cycles, but didn't create many chances, and he didn't throw any "punishing checks"...

3 for 5 this year, but he has yet to be completely invisible yet, which is pretty good.
If you're referring to the game against Colorado, he didn't get a lot of time again - all the special teams. However, if he gets a + for a game he didn't play many mins in but still contributed, he gets a - for last night. He didn't do anything to deserve a -, but he didn't do much to not deserve one either, except for not being on the ice when the 'lanche scored.

kraigus is offline  
Old
10-22-2003, 05:49 PM
  #21
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraigus
If you're referring to the game against Colorado, he didn't get a lot of time again - all the special teams. However, if he gets a + for a game he didn't play many mins in but still contributed, he gets a - for last night. He didn't do anything to deserve a -, but he didn't do much to not deserve one either, except for not being on the ice when the 'lanche scored.
I didn't see all of the Blues game, but he generated a few scoring chances in the first period... the 2nd period was the worst period I have seen the Oilers ever play (from goaltending out), and didn't bother watching the 3rd...

Going to have to go to the judges on this one:

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-22-2003, 06:23 PM
  #22
gretzky2kurri
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
3 for 5 this year, but he has yet to be completely invisible yet, which is pretty good.
Good point......he's still visible, even though i go with a (-) last night against the Blues.

I like how his lines always cycle well.....but hate how they throw it in front blindly after all that work, and lose the puck. They alluded to that last night on Sportsnet and I strongly agree. All that work.....the clock ticks away.......and a blind weak passes flutters out to an opponent in front. They harped about it last night when it happened with 5 minutes left saying there's lots of time. Very true, no need for a blind pass like that unless the last few ticks are left on the clock.

I really got riled last season when BG would have one guy hanging off his back, he would be pushing someone else away one arm and controlling the puck with the other arm. Then when he finally gets near the net.........he flutters a shot on goal with his free hand while off balance and the snow on the ice practically stops the puck before it gently comes to rest on the goalies paddle.

Then I would jump out of my chair and yell "Do you actually think that would go in?" Perhaps if the goalie had a stroke in that span.

I would rather he just run over the goalie instead of letting the goalie freeze it for a face off. Bertuzzi makes a living doing it. If he doesn't score....at least he pisses off the other goalie/team.

Had to get that off my chest.

gretzky2kurri is offline  
Old
10-23-2003, 05:22 AM
  #23
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
I think they need Torres back on that line.

Raffie has always had a nose for the net. He never scored all the flashy goals in junior that always get you noticed, he scored the goals from right in front of the net.

He always seemed to be in the right spot, and that does translate to goals in the NHL. I mean look at the first few games... those blind passes were always going to Torres.

Laraque puts those passes in a perfect place... providing an Oiler is there. They are always out of the defenders reach to an open area of the ice.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-23-2003, 10:55 AM
  #24
IceDragoon
Registered User
 
IceDragoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South of Sanity
Posts: 3,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I think they need Torres back on that line.

Raffie has always had a nose for the net. He never scored all the flashy goals in junior that always get you noticed, he scored the goals from right in front of the net.

He always seemed to be in the right spot, and that does translate to goals in the NHL. I mean look at the first few games... those blind passes were always going to Torres.

Laraque puts those passes in a perfect place... providing an Oiler is there. They are always out of the defenders reach to an open area of the ice.
We are 3 for 3. In the HORCOFF thread, then the TORRES thread and now the LARAQUE thread. Bring back TORQUE. It benefits each of them, the other lines, and the team as a whole.

IceDragoon is offline  
Old
10-25-2003, 10:27 AM
  #25
kraigus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to kraigus Send a message via MSN to kraigus
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I think they need Torres back on that line.

Raffie has always had a nose for the net. He never scored all the flashy goals in junior that always get you noticed, he scored the goals from right in front of the net.

He always seemed to be in the right spot, and that does translate to goals in the NHL. I mean look at the first few games... those blind passes were always going to Torres.

Laraque puts those passes in a perfect place... providing an Oiler is there. They are always out of the defenders reach to an open area of the ice.
I agree, although I think Izzy's been doing some pretty fine work playing with BG too. It's too bad he isn't a centre, then it could be Torres/Izzy/BG.

They need somebody with hands on BG's line, I think, is what it boils down to - but BG will never replace Dvorak or Hemsky on the top 2. What about putting York between Laraque and Torres?

kraigus 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 05:40 PM.

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.