HFBoards

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

How many teams are we going to outplay and lose?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-20-2003, 02:13 PM
  #1
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
How many teams are we going to outplay and lose?

I am mostly talking about these games: St. Louis in St. Louis, Atlanta in Atlanta, Chicago in Nashville, Dallas in Nashville, Vancouver in Nashville, and LA in LA. We've outshot our opponents 171 to 135 in these games. Our opponents have managed to outscore us 15-7 in these games and we've been shutout twice. Instead of pulling out victories, we've managed only 1 point in these six games despite outplaying (IMO) the opposing teams. Now, we've snuck out with games without deserving the victory (Detroit) but not nearly as many as we've lost. 6 of 17 GP's are what I would consider bad losses. Games we should have come out with a W. Who is to blame for these? Vokoun? Our offense? Our Defense? Our toughness [or lackthereof in some cases]?

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 04:37 PM
  #2
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,459
vCash: 500
soft goals, lack of converted chances, defensive lapses

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 06:24 PM
  #3
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomorekids
soft goals, lack of converted chances, defensive lapses
Pick one thing that, above all else, is the biggest contributor to outplaying and still losing.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 06:45 PM
  #4
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
It will vary from game to game. Last night, inablity to capatalize was the biggest reason we didn't stand a chance.

In general...

#1) Defense
#2a) Inability to capatalize on chances
#2b) Vokoun not like a top3 goaltender in the league like he was last year. He's been average.

dulzhok is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 07:01 PM
  #5
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,459
vCash: 500
i think it all boils down to goaltending. were we a better team last year than we are now? no. the difference? vokoun. last year, we were able to get away with games like that...because the other teams simply couldn't score on us. he was playing lights out...and a few lucky goals would get us the win. he's playing average(if that), and we're going to be successful, if that's the case. i'm not sure what it is...maybe he was playing FAR above his head last year, and he's come back down to earth(something we all dreaded, in the offseason) or maybe he's in some kind of mental funk. either way, if it doesn't change, this is going to be a loooong season.

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 07:14 PM
  #6
Joe T Choker
Wookin' Pa Nub in...
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Melrose
Country: Italy
Posts: 25,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomorekids
i think it all boils down to goaltending. were we a better team last year than we are now? no. the difference? vokoun. last year, we were able to get away with games like that...because the other teams simply couldn't score on us. he was playing lights out...and a few lucky goals would get us the win. he's playing average(if that), and we're going to be successful, if that's the case. i'm not sure what it is...maybe he was playing FAR above his head last year, and he's come back down to earth(something we all dreaded, in the offseason) or maybe he's in some kind of mental funk. either way, if it doesn't change, this is going to be a loooong season.
You really expected Vokoun to make that 2-0 save on Kip last night, when Hamhuis vacated the premises and Zidlicky over played?

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 07:14 PM
  #7
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cookeville TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,844
vCash: 500
Soft goals are killing us this season, but many times they are a direct result of the thing that has been irking me all season.........

Our inability of clearing the crease.

Enoch is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 07:18 PM
  #8
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch
Soft goals are killing us this season.

I think it's a lack of goal scoring touch. We beat St. Louis, Chicago, Dallas easily if we have a goal scorer. I blame the refs for Vancouver (hey, why not? Trotz and Poile did). The Atlanta game was poor coaching, lack of fire at times, and running into a team that craps out lucky charms. The L.A. Kings game was a combination of all three bad things (no scoring, bad defense and poor goaltending).

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 07:22 PM
  #9
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven_Nation_Army
You really expected Vokoun to make that 2-0 save on Kip last night, when Hamhuis vacated the premises and Zidlicky over played?
there are obvious exceptions, but look back at the islander game. we DOMINATED that game, and STILL almost blew it. the colorado game, the blackhawks game, certain goals in the atlanta game, the vancouver game, just to name particular goals i have in mind. some of the saves that we say were "unstoppable," he was stopping, last year. should we just be thankful we got one good year out of him? you honestly can't say he's playing even close to the level he did last year...or even particularly well. i've seen maybe 2 or 3 saves from him this year that made me stop and say, "wow..." last year...we got 2 or 3 of those saves a NIGHT. he's playing below his ability and below the standard for what i think a goalie should be, in the NHL. will it get better? hopefully. maybe he's in a funk right now. does our season depend on it? you bet.

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
11-20-2003, 07:23 PM
  #10
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cookeville TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
I think it's a lack of goal scoring touch. We beat St. Louis, Chicago, Dallas easily if we have a goal scorer. I blame the refs for Vancouver (hey, why not? Trotz and Poile did). The Atlanta game was poor coaching, lack of fire at times, and running into a team that craps out lucky charms. The L.A. Kings game was a combination of all three bad things (no scoring, bad defense and poor goaltending).
Sorry Smokey, I was editing my post. I completely agree with your post, but I still feel the inability to clear the crease is hurting us the worst right now.

Enoch is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 07:06 AM
  #11
gopreds98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Nashvegas, Tennessee U.S.A.
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to gopreds98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch
Soft goals are killing us this season, but many times they are a direct result of the thing that has been irking me all season.........

Our inability of clearing the crease.
Actually, my observation is that Vokoun plays like his old self when there's traffic there. It's those ridiculous softies he's letting in from the top of the faceoff circle. Like the two he let in against the islanders. And it's not like he was screened on those shots, or that they were even particularly hard shots.....he was just a little out of position, and they both found the corner of the net.

Vokoun's a good goalie though....he'll pull out of this. It's frustrating, but I'm not really worried yet. We're still seeing flashes of his earlier brilliance.

gopreds98 is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 08:27 AM
  #12
PredsMan
Registered User
 
PredsMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 902
vCash: 500
It's a simple as this:

We can't give up an average of 3 goals per game, and expect to win more than we lose. No team can.

With obvious exceptions, goal-scoring hasn't been our problem.

PredsMan is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 08:52 AM
  #13
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 18,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsMan
It's a simple as this:

We can't give up an average of 3 goals per game, and expect to win more than we lose. No team can.

With obvious exceptions, goal-scoring hasn't been our problem.

triggrman is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 11:26 AM
  #14
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsMan
It's a simple as this:

We can't give up an average of 3 goals per game, and expect to win more than we lose. No team can.

With obvious exceptions, goal-scoring hasn't been our problem.
Actually, three of those games, the other team scored no more than 2 goals. Vancouver had 4 goals but it's hard to argue that it's the D's fault for giving up 5-3 goals. Atlanta had 4 and yes it was the D's fault. L.A. had 3 and yes it was a the D's fault. But when St. Louis scores 1 goal and wins; Dallas scores one goal and ties; and Chicago scores two goals (1 EN) and wins, something is up. This 'obvious exception' constitutes 50% of the games in question.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 11:38 AM
  #15
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cookeville TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopreds98
Actually, my observation is that Vokoun plays like his old self when there's traffic there.
I seriously doubt that traffic in front of the net helps any goalie to stop the puck. Not only does it hinder him from seeing the shot, it also allows for easy rebound goals, and limits the goaltender's mobility. I think what you have been observing is mere coincidence. Many, many, many, many goals this year have come from the inability to keep people from out in front of Vokoun. Whether it be easy rebound goals *see Yzerman*, screened goals, or just a wide-open point blank shot *see Colorado * this is causing serious problems for our team. If the opposing team gains the zone, all they have to do is crash the net, and we are in huge trouble. IMO, this is why when we play a very physical game, we usually win. By being physical and hitting the opposing team, they are less likely to go to the front of the net and are unable to exploit our major weakness. Naturally we have a much higher chance of winning.

I know I'm being Captain Obvious here and am repeating myself over-and-over again, but I feel like this is the major issue that our defense has failed to address with Schnabel and Kloucek sidelined.

Enoch is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 12:22 PM
  #16
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 18,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
Actually, three of those games, the other team scored no more than 2 goals. Vancouver had 4 goals but it's hard to argue that it's the D's fault for giving up 5-3 goals. Atlanta had 4 and yes it was the D's fault. L.A. had 3 and yes it was a the D's fault. But when St. Louis scores 1 goal and wins; Dallas scores one goal and ties; and Chicago scores two goals (1 EN) and wins, something is up. This 'obvious exception' constitutes 50% of the games in question.
You expect way less from Vokoun if you only blame the d for all of the goals in Atlanta and LA. I still think Vokoun should have stopped 2 of the Atlanta goals, and 2 of the LA goals but whatever.

triggrman is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 12:45 PM
  #17
PredsMan
Registered User
 
PredsMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 902
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman
You expect way less from Vokoun if you only blame the d for all of the goals in Atlanta and LA. I still think Vokoun should have stopped 2 of the Atlanta goals, and 2 of the LA goals but whatever.
I agree..

But, my point earlier, isn't speaking of specific games...we're giving up 2.8 goals per game. In today's NHL that's too high. That's all I'm saying...we've gotten goal support, even in losses. Only a few times have we been shut down.

PredsMan is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 12:47 PM
  #18
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman
You expect way less from Vokoun if you only blame the d for all of the goals in Atlanta and LA. I still think Vokoun should have stopped 2 of the Atlanta goals, and 2 of the LA goals but whatever.
Against LA, I blame the D for two goals. The Avery goal (which I give partial blame to Vokie for not covering) and the Brennan goal. The Cammelari goal was just a bad bounce going off Allison, off the post and then in.

Against Atlanta, Vokoun gave up two goals. One was on a 5-3 which was nobody's fault but Kovalchuk's. One was a defensive breakdown that put Kovalchuk all alone with Vokoun. The other was a cheapo which goes to both Hamhuis and Vokoun. No way Vigier should have scored here. Hamhuis shouldn't have vacated the premises, Vokoun should have covered the bottom of the net COMPLETELY.

I don't see Vokoun stopping two of the Atlanta goals. Both Kovalchuk v. Vokoun goals were off the post and in. You just don't stop those. The Vigier goal, yes. But the EN, well, no.

For L.A., it's either way. I see the Avery goal as partially his fault. He can't allow that rebound like that. And the Brennan goal was just awkward. He could have made the save but 2-0, any save would be spectacular. The Cammi goal was unsaveable IMO.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 01:51 PM
  #19
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 18,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
Against LA, I blame the D for two goals. The Avery goal (which I give partial blame to Vokie for not covering) and the Brennan goal. The Cammelari goal was just a bad bounce going off Allison, off the post and then in.

Against Atlanta, Vokoun gave up two goals. One was on a 5-3 which was nobody's fault but Kovalchuk's. One was a defensive breakdown that put Kovalchuk all alone with Vokoun. The other was a cheapo which goes to both Hamhuis and Vokoun. No way Vigier should have scored here. Hamhuis shouldn't have vacated the premises, Vokoun should have covered the bottom of the net COMPLETELY.

I don't see Vokoun stopping two of the Atlanta goals. Both Kovalchuk v. Vokoun goals were off the post and in. You just don't stop those. The Vigier goal, yes. But the EN, well, no.

For L.A., it's either way. I see the Avery goal as partially his fault. He can't allow that rebound like that. And the Brennan goal was just awkward. He could have made the save but 2-0, any save would be spectacular. The Cammi goal was unsaveable IMO.
See that's just it, your opinion of what is stoppable and mine are different.

triggrman is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 03:59 PM
  #20
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman
See that's just it, your opinion of what is stoppable and mine are different.
Just curious (and I won't flame you either way), why do you view these goals as stoppable? If you want, you can analyze all 6 applicable goals in both games and tell me your thoughts.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 08:33 PM
  #21
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 18,921
vCash: 500
I'll play your silly game. In the LA game, Averys goal would have been stopped by most rec leagues goalies, it's not enough just to stop it you have to cover it too. Brennan's goal also should have been stopped, but you know we still loose 1-0, but you and I both know, when your goalie struggles you grip your stick a little tighter. In the Atlanta game if Vigier doesn't score there's not an empty net to shoot in, right.

Vokoun also needs to do a better job with the rebounds it's tough as a defenseman to clear a puck when the goalies is droping right behind your back. You guys are blaming the defense when most of those pucks you want cleared should be either covered or pushed into the corner by Vokoun, that's what being a NHL goal is all about, it's not enough just to stop the first shot.

We won tonight but Vokoun tried to give it away. IMHO he's the one that looks like he needs a trip to Milwaukee.

triggrman is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 08:39 PM
  #22
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman
In the Atlanta game if Vigier doesn't score there's not an empty net to shoot in, right.

You can't play that game. If Vigier doens't score, who's to say Legwand isn't knocked out with a blown knee? So many different things happen because of certain events. You can't say, oh Vokie stops Vigier and we don't need to worry about the empty net. I could just as easily say, if Hamhuis doesn't bail, we don't have to worry about the EN? Neither works because goals aren't scored in a vacuum. A goal or no goal sets off a chain of events that would likely never have happened if the opposite had occured. If Vokoun gives up 1 bad goal but the defense has two costly errors that force the issue, I don't see how you can't level blame on atleast both.

And I agree with the rebounds. Vokoun is a shell of last year. He's playing a very unorthodoxed style. Sometimes, he goes down. Sometimes, he stays up. It's like he's Chechmanek one shot, and Roy the next. And his puck play has been pathetic. He needs to be smarter and cover more often.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 08:49 PM
  #23
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
I think some people give our over-estimate our current defensive play.

York last year >>> York this year
Skrastins defensively >>> Hamhuis defensively
Houlder defensively > Zidlicky defensievely
Hulse = Allison

Not say our defensive play last year was good, but this year, it's another step or two below.

dulzhok is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 08:51 PM
  #24
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 18,921
vCash: 500
Thank you for the chain of events speach, I now know how the world works. Defensemen get beat all the time, it's a fact, even the best get beat if they didn't we wouldn't need Vokoun. Vokoun is there to cover up mistakes the defensemen make.

****, I've already said it's obvious we see the game different, just leave it at that.

triggrman is offline  
Old
11-21-2003, 09:14 PM
  #25
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman
Defensemen get beat all the time, it's a fact, even the best get beat if they didn't we wouldn't need Vokoun. Vokoun is there to cover up mistakes the defensemen make.
By your philiosophy, why the hell do we even have defenseman?

Vokoun hasn't been fatastic this year, but welcome to the life of an NHL goaltender. No goaltender is consistently fantastic. The only one that remotely comes close is Martin Brodeur. Meanwhile, guys like Khabibulin, Giguere, Cujo, Theodore, Checkmanek, Salo, Dunham, Turco, Kolzing, etc will all of their ups and downs. Sometimes they will be fantastic, sometimes they will be average. Right now, Vokoun is average. Expecting him to be fantastic all the time and cover up all the defenseman's mistakes all the time is asking quite a lot.

dulzhok 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 06:35 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.