HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Who is Umberger?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-04-2008, 02:25 PM
  #76
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CannonGoBoom View Post
The ice would be wider, not longer...thus creating more opportunities for long passed to send players on breakaways, or cross ice passes that allow a players to take the Dman wide and beat him.
do some geometry...move the boards in width left and right off the faceoff circles, now draw a line from the net to that point you've created. it's further away from the net. you've essentially created more dead ice out there as far as where a dangerous scoring chance is going to come from.

nothing wrong with that, certainly more skating room...but it isn't creating more danger.

Quote:
Play on a bigger rink and tell me its not more open, faster, more fun, more exciting, and higher scoring. This is again something you dont know what your talkign about because you dont play...beer league doesnt count. European players play a different kind of game so just because its not high scoring there doesnt mean it wouldnt be here.
Yeah? Neither does it mean it would be...and it should certainly halt any strong declarations that it would be. I don't particularly care, lets send the league over to Europe for a year and see if they score more goals...but all the evidence from over there, both statistically and in THEIR OWN discussion of the sport suggests that it would have no effect on the scoring.

Quote:
How is it that the flyers stopped AO/ Every time he touched the puck they had a body on him, if the ice was bigger we wouldnt have been able to do that and he would have got the puck and dangled all over hatcher and smith and eventually we would have lost that series.
Ooh look, the "what if" game that's impossible to prove and equally possible to effectively dispute. Fun that this means so much to you. So, you think that Ovechkin would gain a huge advantage dangling around further away from the net on the wider surface? Maybe...I bet Hatcher and Smith would simply maintain inside position between him and the net...and due to the laws of radial geometry, they wouldn't have to skate as fast as him because they wouldn't have to cover as much distance to stay between him and the danger areas on the ice...that are the same areas on the smaller rink.

Even on the small rink, slower defensemen don't recklessly close on guys because that exposes them to being burnt. They maintain position inside the man and close him off when the opportunity presents itself...more width doesn't mean they have to go out there and cover that space, it just means there's more width out there.

Moreover, the Flyers were one of the teams that COMPLETELY embraced collapsing into the slot on defense, so I'm not sure why you think the larger surface would effect them in the slightest. One of their main problems in puck possession all year was the fact that their wings tended to be down in the slot and not along the boards to get to pucks coming up the wall from the defense...

The defense would remain the same...keep the guy to the perimeter, just because there's more distance out there to cover doesn't mean you change what your perimeter is.

Quote:
Bye.
Bye.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 03:37 PM
  #77
Juicy Couturier*
CannonGoBoom
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philly Area
Posts: 4,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Juicy Couturier*
If AO had more room to skate he could easily take the puck wide and beat hatcher with his speed, we already talked about speed on defense. He would expose his speed so bad. The way the flyers contained him was by not letting him use his speed and hitting him before he got a chance to get moving, with more room on the ice they couldnt do that.

but back to fast players in the trap. Just because faster skilled players would be on both sides of the ices doesnt make it even. Briere is fast and skilled would you want him out there over someone like upshall? 3rd line players stay in the league because they play good defense, but if more skilled players came in the league a guy like upshall might not have played this year (he was a healthy scratch for a stretch). Just because a guy is fast and skilled on offense does not make him a good defensive player in the trap. AO is an extreme talent but Id still take upshall in the trap over him.

Dont be so full of yourself. You have already questioned my intelligence in the past day or two which had nothing to do with anything saying that because I was a college hockey player I didnt get a good education. so now its my turn. All you are is an idiot fan. A guy who never played real hockey so doesnt really know how things work but uses stats and situations outside of the game to pretend he knows.. You rely on stats because you cant put real life situations to work because you dont actually play the game at any decent level. You are the guy that stand there yelling at the TV saying shoot for the entire powerplay when theres nobody in front to screen. Your simply a fan who uses stats to cover for his lack of knowledge of the game. You think because you have a lot of posts that you are somehow better than me, I can see it in every post and it makes me laugh.


Last edited by Juicy Couturier*: 06-04-2008 at 03:44 PM.
Juicy Couturier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 04:05 PM
  #78
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CannonGoBoom View Post
You have already questioned my intelligence in the past day or two which had nothing to do with anything saying that because I was a college hockey player I didnt get a good education.
Actually, I was talking about professional athletes and coaches. You included yourself in that demographic on your own. At the time I knew jack squat about where you played and how much you played, so really couldn't make any statement about you whatsoever.

The rest of the rant was cute and ignorant, though.

The Flyers contained AO by having Timonen on the ice against him, no one else had any success containing AO. When the Flyers had the right talent on the ice, AO was a non-factor in that series. When he caught Smith or Modry on the ice, he destroyed them...In fact, your entire theory goes out the window looking at that series because in contracting you'd remove the guys from the ice surface that the Caps were actually capable of scoring goals on with any consistency.

And playing defense is about commitment and desire, that's why AO isn't a great defensive player...as is the case with most top-end offensive talent, playing defense isn't really their drug of choice.

So, if you want to continue to hold out the argumentative crutch of "I played hockey and you didn't, so I know better than you," go ahead...it doesn't impress. The large body of evidence from players who have played on both surfacs, league managers, and statistics -- basically any observable thing from everyone involved -- refutes your belief in the larger surface having any effect on scoring.

European players have said as much. The smaller surface places more pressure on the defense and leaves less room for making release passes from pressure...the very thing you think would help offense so much, also helps defenders relieve pressure...once again, we have equilibrium. The ability to apply pressure with greater ease on the smaller surface creates more opportunity for mistakes to occur, and mistakes are what tend to end up in the back of the net. A shot bouncing around is closer to the slot on the smaller rink...tons of things suggest everything you've said about the big rink is wrong.

Moreover, if you never laced up in a professional game...you're just as ignorant in talking about the way the game operates at that level as anyone else. The truth of every sport is that every shift in talent level brings with it a whole new learning curve. Things that work at one level cease to work at the next with a quickness.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 05:46 PM
  #79
Juicy Couturier*
CannonGoBoom
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philly Area
Posts: 4,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Juicy Couturier*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Actually, I was talking about professional athletes and coaches. You included yourself in that demographic on your own. At the time I knew jack squat about where you played and how much you played, so really couldn't make any statement about you whatsoever.

The rest of the rant was cute and ignorant, though.

The Flyers contained AO by having Timonen on the ice against him, no one else had any success containing AO. When the Flyers had the right talent on the ice, AO was a non-factor in that series. When he caught Smith or Modry on the ice, he destroyed them...In fact, your entire theory goes out the window looking at that series because in contracting you'd remove the guys from the ice surface that the Caps were actually capable of scoring goals on with any consistency.

And playing defense is about commitment and desire, that's why AO isn't a great defensive player...as is the case with most top-end offensive talent, playing defense isn't really their drug of choice.

So, if you want to continue to hold out the argumentative crutch of "I played hockey and you didn't, so I know better than you," go ahead...it doesn't impress. The large body of evidence from players who have played on both surfacs, league managers, and statistics -- basically any observable thing from everyone involved -- refutes your belief in the larger surface having any effect on scoring.

European players have said as much. The smaller surface places more pressure on the defense and leaves less room for making release passes from pressure...the very thing you think would help offense so much, also helps defenders relieve pressure...once again, we have equilibrium. The ability to apply pressure with greater ease on the smaller surface creates more opportunity for mistakes to occur, and mistakes are what tend to end up in the back of the net. A shot bouncing around is closer to the slot on the smaller rink...tons of things suggest everything you've said about the big rink is wrong.

Moreover, if you never laced up in a professional game...you're just as ignorant in talking about the way the game operates at that level as anyone else. The truth of every sport is that every shift in talent level brings with it a whole new learning curve. Things that work at one level cease to work at the next with a quickness.
No, you made your point stating that basically you wouldnjt expect me to know the physics of the game because I played in colege and therfor must not have taken my education seriously. In all reality I used hockey as a way of going to school for next to nothing. Here I am a couple years removed from college and I do not have a college loan to pay back, It all all completely paid off and that is the reason most athletes play at the collegiate level, not to go pro. And not only that but you do not know how my playing career happened to unfold or where I played after college, No i did not play in the NHL but I am much closer to that level than you are and some of the points you make about the game a kid in youth hockey would laugh at. Its not that Im better than you and know more because I play hockey, its that you make rediculous statements about the game that children would dispute because they are so wrong.
Your reasons for why a smaller rink creates more scoring is just stupid and ignorant. AO would burn players so much mor often if he had more room to skate. If im not mistaken he scored in game 1 and then not in game 2, 3, or 4 and I believe also game 5? You mean to tell me that Kimmo was out every shift against AO? In game 2 The caps had last change which means they would get him out against other defenders as much as possible. For you to say nobody else had success containing him is obviously wrong.
You are the first and last person I think I will ever see question AO's "commitment and desire". The guy is all out, all the time. This is again where your lack of knowledge of how to play the game comes into effect. Playing defense as a forward is a skill, it doesnt just take desire. A good defender on offense is able to play good position and has the ability to read plays before they happen which is something that you cannot teach. Players of elite skill do not always have that ability, AO does not, Briere does not, Malkin does not. AO was exposed as a defensive liability during that series and it wasnt because of a lack of desire. There are thousands of players that could put up equal numbers to players playing on 3rd lines around the league but the reason they dont crack the lineup is because they cant play defense. If upshall played D like briere does he wouldnt be in the NHL. If the leage was more skill players upshall ay not play which would eliminate a good defenser, briere would still be in the league. Elite offensive players can be one dimentional where the average 3rd liner needs to be solid defensivly or he will find himself out of the league. There are more defensive liabilities on first lines around the league than there are on 3rd lines.

Juicy Couturier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 05:56 PM
  #80
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
I was talking about statistics, not physics. In fact, I specifically said that physics is a whole other ball of wax. And I didn't say anything about you not knowing the physics or statistics of anything about the game because you went to college, I said that the athletes and coaches tend not to understand the topic -- in reference to you wanting to reference pro athletes speaking -- and then went on to specifically cite Joe Morgan talking about Moneyball.

You took that personally...not my fault you see slights where they don't exist. There wasn't a specific reference to your intelligence in any of my posts...I questioned your understanding of statistical analysis based on your "lucky bounces" discussion, something anyone aware of stat analysis understands are subsumed in large data samples. However, there are plenty of smart people that don't know stat.

And your perception of AO burning players on a larger surface isn't really backed up by anything but your own conjecture. You literally have nothing to back up those claims and throw a hissy fit about how you've played the game so much and thus know it to be true. His final year in the RSL, on the big rink I'd imagine, he scored 13 goals, 14 assists, and 27 points (37 games) against weaker competition than is in the NHL. The next year he scored 52 goals, 54 assists, and 106 points (81) against stronger competition as a rookie in the league.

My god he got screwed by the small rink in the NHL. Hell, the way Ovechkin plays is probably aided by the small rink because he can get on top of defenders with greater ease and force them into mistakes.

Alex Ovechkin doesn't have a strong commitment to playing defense...he likes to hang and cherry pick looking for breakout passes, just like a lot of good young offensive players in the league. The Mike Richards' of the world are rare. I didn't question his commitment and desire to the playing the game, I questioned his desire to sell out defensively at the expense of playing offense...which is irrefutably true to anyone who has watched him play the game. Same was true of Bure. And some first liners are defensive liabilities for reasons beyond their control -- Briere's size being a major handicap -- but the majority of "liability" in offensive players is in the fact that they're actively trying to score goals, and that opens up scoring opportunities behind them. It isn't that they can't play defense if they don't want to -- numerous players prove the fallacy of that claim -- it's that they don't sacrifice offense to be better defensively. Mike Modano is a great example of an exceedingly talented offensive forward who sacrificed offense in order to become a fantastic two-way player.


Last edited by Jester: 06-04-2008 at 06:01 PM.
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 06:00 PM
  #81
Shoeny
Registered User
 
Shoeny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 687
vCash: 500
i didnt know we were playing jeopardy.

Shoeny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 07:26 PM
  #82
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I was talking about statistics, not physics. In fact, I specifically said that physics is a whole other ball of wax. And I didn't say anything about you not knowing the physics or statistics of anything about the game because you went to college, I said that the athletes and coaches tend not to understand the topic -- in reference to you wanting to reference pro athletes speaking -- and then went on to specifically cite Joe Morgan talking about Moneyball.

You took that personally...not my fault you see slights where they don't exist. There wasn't a specific reference to your intelligence in any of my posts...I questioned your understanding of statistical analysis based on your "lucky bounces" discussion, something anyone aware of stat analysis understands are subsumed in large data samples. However, there are plenty of smart people that don't know stat.

And your perception of AO burning players on a larger surface isn't really backed up by anything but your own conjecture. You literally have nothing to back up those claims and throw a hissy fit about how you've played the game so much and thus know it to be true. His final year in the RSL, on the big rink I'd imagine, he scored 13 goals, 14 assists, and 27 points (37 games) against weaker competition than is in the NHL. The next year he scored 52 goals, 54 assists, and 106 points (81) against stronger competition as a rookie in the league.

My god he got screwed by the small rink in the NHL. Hell, the way Ovechkin plays is probably aided by the small rink because he can get on top of defenders with greater ease and force them into mistakes.

Alex Ovechkin doesn't have a strong commitment to playing defense...he likes to hang and cherry pick looking for breakout passes, just like a lot of good young offensive players in the league. The Mike Richards' of the world are rare. I didn't question his commitment and desire to the playing the game, I questioned his desire to sell out defensively at the expense of playing offense...which is irrefutably true to anyone who has watched him play the game. Same was true of Bure. And some first liners are defensive liabilities for reasons beyond their control -- Briere's size being a major handicap -- but the majority of "liability" in offensive players is in the fact that they're actively trying to score goals, and that opens up scoring opportunities behind them. It isn't that they can't play defense if they don't want to -- numerous players prove the fallacy of that claim -- it's that they don't sacrifice offense to be better defensively. Mike Modano is a great example of an exceedingly talented offensive forward who sacrificed offense in order to become a fantastic two-way player.
So you're saying then you'd rather have a 35-40 goal two way forward than a 65 goal sniper? Come on man, it's that line of thinking that has neutered offensively gifted players in this league. The whole 'two-way' player concept is completely overrated and once again, comes back to trap hockey. Ever since it came back, the rage has been on 'two-way' players. I'm tired of seeing offensive dynamos turned into back checking mongoloids because of the current style of play the NHL uses. We should be embracing the Ovechkins of the game for bringing back excitement and offense to the game. Instead, you're questioning his defensive committment and being another Mike Modano. If Ovechkin were to turn into the second coming of Mike Modano and not the second coming of Mike Bossy, I'd be pretty damned pissed off.........

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 08:21 PM
  #83
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
So you're saying then you'd rather have a 35-40 goal two way forward than a 65 goal sniper? Come on man, it's that line of thinking that has neutered offensively gifted players in this league. The whole 'two-way' player concept is completely overrated and once again, comes back to trap hockey. Ever since it came back, the rage has been on 'two-way' players. I'm tired of seeing offensive dynamos turned into back checking mongoloids because of the current style of play the NHL uses. We should be embracing the Ovechkins of the game for bringing back excitement and offense to the game. Instead, you're questioning his defensive committment and being another Mike Modano. If Ovechkin were to turn into the second coming of Mike Modano and not the second coming of Mike Bossy, I'd be pretty damned pissed off.........
The second coming of Mike Bossy? That would require a time machine to a time when the bottom 3 defenseman on virtually every team were garbage and goalies were the very definition of mediocre outside of a small handful. It's not a matter of simply encouraging offensive players to play their game. There are a lot of teams that play loose, offensive hockey. However, they are also the teams that find themselves missing the playoffs or out after the first round. Detroit has brilliant offensive players but they also happen to be equally brilliant two-way players. Zetterberg can score 100 points and still be a defensive beast.

Two-way play is overrated mainly by fans of teams that are out of the playoffs.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 10:42 PM
  #84
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
So you're saying then you'd rather have a 35-40 goal two way forward than a 65 goal sniper? Come on man, it's that line of thinking that has neutered offensively gifted players in this league. The whole 'two-way' player concept is completely overrated and once again, comes back to trap hockey. Ever since it came back, the rage has been on 'two-way' players. I'm tired of seeing offensive dynamos turned into back checking mongoloids because of the current style of play the NHL uses. We should be embracing the Ovechkins of the game for bringing back excitement and offense to the game. Instead, you're questioning his defensive committment and being another Mike Modano. If Ovechkin were to turn into the second coming of Mike Modano and not the second coming of Mike Bossy, I'd be pretty damned pissed off.........
Ovechkin is my favorite player in the league to watch, but he's not a defensively committed player and you can't even begin to argue that he is. His team went out in Rd. 1...Mike Richards team moved on. If you're protecting a 1 goal lead late in the game, Ovechkin isn't on the ice...Mike Richards is. If you're killing a key PK, Mike Richards is on the ice...Ovechkin is not. However, if you need a goal late, Mike Richards is out there, too.

That's a valuable player...and I know you're a person that has extolled the virtues of Mike Richards in this space...he is what he is because of his defensive commitment. You talk up Giroux constantly, another player drawing raves about his defensive responsibility.

There is a balance to all things, and playing like you're in an All-Star game doesn't work well when push comes to shove. Even Lemieux learned to play defense when the games got tight in the spring.

I know you hate players playing defense, but teams with two-way ability move on...the teams playing for the Cup Finals were both good defensive teams were both two-way teams, not one-dimensional offensive teams...

Now, Ovechkin scores enough (and plays wing) that the fact that he's not a defensive stalwart doesn't matter as much as if you have a center that doesn't feel like playing D (Modano, for example). Look at Briere this year...guy couldn't be out on the ice because he wasn't good enough defensively and it was hindering the ability to compete. Being good defensively paired with offense matters.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 11:52 AM
  #85
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
The second coming of Mike Bossy? That would require a time machine to a time when the bottom 3 defenseman on virtually every team were garbage and goalies were the very definition of mediocre outside of a small handful. It's not a matter of simply encouraging offensive players to play their game. There are a lot of teams that play loose, offensive hockey. However, they are also the teams that find themselves missing the playoffs or out after the first round. Detroit has brilliant offensive players but they also happen to be equally brilliant two-way players. Zetterberg can score 100 points and still be a defensive beast.

Two-way play is overrated mainly by fans of teams that are out of the playoffs.
Are you saying that Mike Bossy wouldn't have been a successful player in the league today? The guy could score from just about anywhere and was probably the best shooter I've ever seen. Not even Brett Hull was as great a shooter as Bossy was. The only reason his career was cut short was due to a bad back injury. Even then, his final season in the league, he still managed 38 goals.

I'm sorry, but Bossy wasn't a defensive cog either. He was a sniper, pure and simple. Trottier was the defensive cog of the line. You don't need to be a two way player to be successful. And yes, Ovechkin reminds me a whole lot of Bossy in that he shoots a lot and can score from just about anywhere.

EDIT: In their first three seasons, Bossy scored 173 goals. Ovechkin scored 163. Yeah, I'd say that Ovechkin is pretty close to being the second coming of Mike Bossy


Last edited by BobbyClarkeFan16: 06-05-2008 at 11:58 AM.
BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 11:56 AM
  #86
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Ovechkin is my favorite player in the league to watch, but he's not a defensively committed player and you can't even begin to argue that he is. His team went out in Rd. 1...Mike Richards team moved on. If you're protecting a 1 goal lead late in the game, Ovechkin isn't on the ice...Mike Richards is. If you're killing a key PK, Mike Richards is on the ice...Ovechkin is not. However, if you need a goal late, Mike Richards is out there, too.

That's a valuable player...and I know you're a person that has extolled the virtues of Mike Richards in this space...he is what he is because of his defensive commitment. You talk up Giroux constantly, another player drawing raves about his defensive responsibility.

There is a balance to all things, and playing like you're in an All-Star game doesn't work well when push comes to shove. Even Lemieux learned to play defense when the games got tight in the spring.

I know you hate players playing defense, but teams with two-way ability move on...the teams playing for the Cup Finals were both good defensive teams were both two-way teams, not one-dimensional offensive teams...

Now, Ovechkin scores enough (and plays wing) that the fact that he's not a defensive stalwart doesn't matter as much as if you have a center that doesn't feel like playing D (Modano, for example). Look at Briere this year...guy couldn't be out on the ice because he wasn't good enough defensively and it was hindering the ability to compete. Being good defensively paired with offense matters.
I'm not saying that Ovechkin is. What I am saying is that if you turn him into a 'two-way' player, you lose the most important thing he brings to the ice - his goal scoring capability. He's also one of those guys that can change the momentum of a game with a single play. You turn him into a two-way player, you lose a part of that aspect of his game. Yeah, he might become better in coming back to back check a bit, but I'd rather leave him up at the blue line and hit him with that home run pass that sends him in on the break. If you have him deep in the defensive zone backchecking, you lose that game breaking ability from Ovechkin.

You're right in that you get a player on the line that can cover for him defensively. You leave Ovechkin to do the thing he does best - create scoring opportunities and score goals

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 12:08 PM
  #87
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
I'm not saying that Ovechkin is. What I am saying is that if you turn him into a 'two-way' player, you lose the most important thing he brings to the ice - his goal scoring capability. He's also one of those guys that can change the momentum of a game with a single play. You turn him into a two-way player, you lose a part of that aspect of his game. Yeah, he might become better in coming back to back check a bit, but I'd rather leave him up at the blue line and hit him with that home run pass that sends him in on the break. If you have him deep in the defensive zone backchecking, you lose that game breaking ability from Ovechkin.

You're right in that you get a player on the line that can cover for him defensively. You leave Ovechkin to do the thing he does best - create scoring opportunities and score goals
He's a wing...and that's a big factor, cuz as we're discussing Briere moving to the wing, it's far less important that your wings be defensively responsible as opposed to your centers, who need to help out the D down low. However, Ovechkin needs to learn to straddle the line a bit better, because at times he really leaves his team out to dry by leaving the zone a bit too early. It looks great in the highlights, but it's tough to win when your best player is a minus player.

I just don't think it's possible to be a consistently successful team the way the game is played today without strong defensive players down the middle...you have more leeway on either wing. You want those guys scoring, but Briere scored and was a -22 this year...that's not good enough.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 01:36 PM
  #88
Juicy Couturier*
CannonGoBoom
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philly Area
Posts: 4,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Juicy Couturier*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
He's a wing...and that's a big factor, cuz as we're discussing Briere moving to the wing, it's far less important that your wings be defensively responsible as opposed to your centers, who need to help out the D down low. However, Ovechkin needs to learn to straddle the line a bit better, because at times he really leaves his team out to dry by leaving the zone a bit too early. It looks great in the highlights, but it's tough to win when your best player is a minus player.
I just don't think it's possible to be a consistently successful team the way the game is played today without strong defensive players down the middle...you have more leeway on either wing. You want those guys scoring, but Briere scored and was a -22 this year...that's not good enough.
Stellar point...Ovechkin was a +28 this year which was 2nd best in the Eastern conference and 7th best in the NHL

Please dont bring up last year when his team was in 2nd to last place, its irrelevant.

Juicy Couturier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 02:12 PM
  #89
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
He's a wing...and that's a big factor, cuz as we're discussing Briere moving to the wing, it's far less important that your wings be defensively responsible as opposed to your centers, who need to help out the D down low. However, Ovechkin needs to learn to straddle the line a bit better, because at times he really leaves his team out to dry by leaving the zone a bit too early. It looks great in the highlights, but it's tough to win when your best player is a minus player.

I just don't think it's possible to be a consistently successful team the way the game is played today without strong defensive players down the middle...you have more leeway on either wing. You want those guys scoring, but Briere scored and was a -22 this year...that's not good enough.
One last thing. I don't 'hate' defensive hockey. Let's make that clear. There's a difference between defensive hockey and trap hockey. I hate trap hockey because really, it takes no skill to play the trap. If anything, it requires that if you're a skill player, you give up a good chunk of your skill to play within the trap system perimeters. I think teams can be successful defensively without having to rely on the trap. For instance, back in the 80's, the Flyers were a great defensive squad that didn't rely on the trap. Same with the Oilers. These teams could also play offensive hockey.

That's what disappoints me about the game now. Every team uses some form of the trap when protecting a lead and it chokes down the game. There's no reason why a team like Detroit or Pittsburgh should ever have to rely on the trap. And until the league can find a way to eliminate the trap completely and eliminate any sort of defensive system that is trap inspired, we'll never see the end of trap hockey. That's the defensive hockey that I hate.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 02:46 PM
  #90
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
Are you saying that Mike Bossy wouldn't have been a successful player in the league today? The guy could score from just about anywhere and was probably the best shooter I've ever seen. Not even Brett Hull was as great a shooter as Bossy was. The only reason his career was cut short was due to a bad back injury. Even then, his final season in the league, he still managed 38 goals.

I'm sorry, but Bossy wasn't a defensive cog either. He was a sniper, pure and simple. Trottier was the defensive cog of the line. You don't need to be a two way player to be successful. And yes, Ovechkin reminds me a whole lot of Bossy in that he shoots a lot and can score from just about anywhere.

EDIT: In their first three seasons, Bossy scored 173 goals. Ovechkin scored 163. Yeah, I'd say that Ovechkin is pretty close to being the second coming of Mike Bossy
I was more trying to point out that the wide-open offensive only hockey of 20 years ago will never come back due to the increased talent of the league and every player at least has to think about defense these days. Sure, Ovechkin is a generational talent that can put up so much offense that it will virtually guarantee that he's on the ice for more goals than he gives up. However, for the vast majority of players, being defensively responsible is a necessity if they want their team to advance past the first round of the playoffs. It's a two-way game now, the talent gap between the best players in the league and average players is no longer astronomical like it used to be.

Ovechkin is putting up Bossy-like numbers. However, gone are the days when a lot of non-star caliber players could put up 100 point seasons.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 02:47 PM
  #91
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CannonGoBoom View Post
Stellar point...Ovechkin was a +28 this year which was 2nd best in the Eastern conference and 7th best in the NHL

Please dont bring up last year when his team was in 2nd to last place, its irrelevant.
Daniel Briere was +17 last year, whatcha think of his defensive skills? It's interesting that one who claims such first hand knowledge would use the stat that is most ridiculed in all corners of the sport...all while citing the very reason it's ridiculed with your final caveat.

The man had 75 points not on the man advantage this past season, and is a wing...meaning he's not the one dictating defense. He should be a heavy plus, but if you think he's a strong defensive player and doesn't cheat offensively, you're not watching games.

John Leclair was +20 his final season as a Flyer and he was a simply horrid defensive player. Handzus covered Leclair and Recchi's ass, and let them get up ice.

There's a reason Ovechkin isn't on the ice with the lead in the final minute. Thanks for quoting his +/-, though. Proves so much...and +28 on 75 non-PP points isn't terribly impressive. The Caps gave up 163 goals that weren't PP goals.

Doing a quick analysis, Ovechkin was definitely on ice for 47 goals against that resulted in a minus (it was more, because he didn't factor into every single even strength goal that was scored while he was on the ice), or 29% of the goals scored against the Capitals at even strength. He played 23 minutes a night, meaning he was on the ice for 38% of the minutes in a game (not accounting for OT) -- and we're also ignoring that he doesn't play the PK much at all, so his minutes are going to be heavier for when those 163 goals were scored at that. 38% of 163 goals would be 62 goals against, meaning that's the threshold at which the Caps would become a weaker defensive team with Ovechkin on the ice than without. So, if Ovechkin was on ice for a very modest 15 goals for without registering a point, his line performs at a weaker defensive level than his teammates and the opponent is more likely to score against them.

Now, Ovechkin scores more than enough to make up for all of that, so, as said, it isn't a huge issue. However, he isn't a good defensive player. If Ovechkin was playing on a strong defensive line -- again, center's influence this more than wings -- he would have been +40 this year minimum. However, at best his line didn't improve the defense of the Caps at all, and in reality with weighted minutes it was almost definitely a weak defensive line.

However, it's a whatever situation as he's a fantastic player and does more good than bad. And, lest you think you "got me" on thinking that he was minus during the regular season, he was -1 against the Flyers in their playoff series. In the playoffs, when teams have more time to game plan for each other...tendencies like wingers cheating up have more time to be dealt with and drilled home...and taken advantage of.

Tough to win when your best player is minus...

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 02:51 PM
  #92
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
One last thing. I don't 'hate' defensive hockey. Let's make that clear. There's a difference between defensive hockey and trap hockey. I hate trap hockey because really, it takes no skill to play the trap. If anything, it requires that if you're a skill player, you give up a good chunk of your skill to play within the trap system perimeters. I think teams can be successful defensively without having to rely on the trap. For instance, back in the 80's, the Flyers were a great defensive squad that didn't rely on the trap. Same with the Oilers. These teams could also play offensive hockey.

That's what disappoints me about the game now. Every team uses some form of the trap when protecting a lead and it chokes down the game. There's no reason why a team like Detroit or Pittsburgh should ever have to rely on the trap. And until the league can find a way to eliminate the trap completely and eliminate any sort of defensive system that is trap inspired, we'll never see the end of trap hockey. That's the defensive hockey that I hate.
The problem isn't that they "have to rely" on the trap...it's that it's just so damn effective when implemented by professional players. If they take out the obstruction rules it makes it harder to play defense across the board, which makes it harder to play the passive game with the lead...but even that is problematic, because the Devils friggin led the league in scoring off of counter rushes built off trap turnovers. It can be really effective offensively if you have good speed to turn the puck around quickly.

The trap and other such defensive systems simply won't go away...it's too effective and too stupid not to do it. The league simply needs to focus on the Refs not sliding back to their old ways, where no one can skate anywhere without getting hooked and held up. That won't make the trap go away, but it will free up players to get some more goals.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 05:13 PM
  #93
mikedifr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
So you're saying then you'd rather have a 35-40 goal two way forward than a 65 goal sniper? Come on man, it's that line of thinking that has neutered offensively gifted players in this league. The whole 'two-way' player concept is completely overrated and once again, comes back to trap hockey. Ever since it came back, the rage has been on 'two-way' players. I'm tired of seeing offensive dynamos turned into back checking mongoloids because of the current style of play the NHL uses. We should be embracing the Ovechkins of the game for bringing back excitement and offense to the game. Instead, you're questioning his defensive committment and being another Mike Modano. If Ovechkin were to turn into the second coming of Mike Modano and not the second coming of Mike Bossy, I'd be pretty damned pissed off.........
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The problem isn't that they "have to rely" on the trap...it's that it's just so damn effective when implemented by professional players. If they take out the obstruction rules it makes it harder to play defense across the board, which makes it harder to play the passive game with the lead...but even that is problematic, because the Devils friggin led the league in scoring off of counter rushes built off trap turnovers. It can be really effective offensively if you have good speed to turn the puck around quickly.

The trap and other such defensive systems simply won't go away...it's too effective and too stupid not to do it. The league simply needs to focus on the Refs not sliding back to their old ways, where no one can skate anywhere without getting hooked and held up. That won't make the trap go away, but it will free up players to get some more goals.
BCF16, I dont completely disagree in theory. I for one think the decision to play the trap kills the skill of the league sometimes. However, I actually think I would rather have the 40 goal two way player than a 65 goal sniper. Players like Hull, Yzerman, Modano, etc. didnt win cups until they bought into the whole two-way play philosophy. We see how far the run and gun has gotten Buffalo who up until this year had arguably the most skilled team in the league for several years.

Like it or not, and I dont always, that is what wins these days and that is what we are stuck with

mikedifr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 06:26 PM
  #94
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikedifr View Post
BCF16, I dont completely disagree in theory. I for one think the decision to play the trap kills the skill of the league sometimes. However, I actually think I would rather have the 40 goal two way player than a 65 goal sniper. Players like Hull, Yzerman, Modano, etc. didnt win cups until they bought into the whole two-way play philosophy. We see how far the run and gun has gotten Buffalo who up until this year had arguably the most skilled team in the league for several years.

Like it or not, and I dont always, that is what wins these days and that is what we are stuck with
OT: Megan Fox is sooooooooooo yummy

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 07:59 PM
  #95
Juicy Couturier*
CannonGoBoom
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philly Area
Posts: 4,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Juicy Couturier*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Daniel Briere was +17 last year, whatcha think of his defensive skills? It's interesting that one who claims such first hand knowledge would use the stat that is most ridiculed in all corners of the sport...all while citing the very reason it's ridiculed with your final caveat.

The man had 75 points not on the man advantage this past season, and is a wing...meaning he's not the one dictating defense. He should be a heavy plus, but if you think he's a strong defensive player and doesn't cheat offensively, you're not watching games.

John Leclair was +20 his final season as a Flyer and he was a simply horrid defensive player. Handzus covered Leclair and Recchi's ass, and let them get up ice.

There's a reason Ovechkin isn't on the ice with the lead in the final minute. Thanks for quoting his +/-, though. Proves so much...and +28 on 75 non-PP points isn't terribly impressive. The Caps gave up 163 goals that weren't PP goals.

Doing a quick analysis, Ovechkin was definitely on ice for 47 goals against that resulted in a minus (it was more, because he didn't factor into every single even strength goal that was scored while he was on the ice), or 29% of the goals scored against the Capitals at even strength. He played 23 minutes a night, meaning he was on the ice for 38% of the minutes in a game (not accounting for OT) -- and we're also ignoring that he doesn't play the PK much at all, so his minutes are going to be heavier for when those 163 goals were scored at that. 38% of 163 goals would be 62 goals against, meaning that's the threshold at which the Caps would become a weaker defensive team with Ovechkin on the ice than without. So, if Ovechkin was on ice for a very modest 15 goals for without registering a point, his line performs at a weaker defensive level than his teammates and the opponent is more likely to score against them.

Now, Ovechkin scores more than enough to make up for all of that, so, as said, it isn't a huge issue. However, he isn't a good defensive player. If Ovechkin was playing on a strong defensive line -- again, center's influence this more than wings -- he would have been +40 this year minimum. However, at best his line didn't improve the defense of the Caps at all, and in reality with weighted minutes it was almost definitely a weak defensive line.

However, it's a whatever situation as he's a fantastic player and does more good than bad. And, lest you think you "got me" on thinking that he was minus during the regular season, he was -1 against the Flyers in their playoff series. In the playoffs, when teams have more time to game plan for each other...tendencies like wingers cheating up have more time to be dealt with and drilled home...and taken advantage of.

Tough to win when your best player is minus...
Way to break out more rediculous stats that just make you look like a complete loser with too much time on his hands. Tough to win when your best player is a minus?

Ill say it one more time for you...
Ovechkin was a +28 this year which was 2nd best in the Eastern conference and 7th best in the NHL.

Bend the stats any way you want...he wasnt a minus you idiot.

I never said he was a good defensive player, I said he WAS NOT A MINUS!

Juicy Couturier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 08:10 PM
  #96
nevermore
Cap space since 2005
 
nevermore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CannonGoBoom View Post
Way to break out more rediculous stats that just make you look like a complete loser with too much time on his hands. Tough to win when your best player is a minus?

Ill say it one more time for you...
Ovechkin was a +28 this year which was 2nd best in the Eastern conference and 7th best in the NHL.

Bend the stats any way you want...he wasnt a minus you idiot.

I never said he was a good defensive player, I said he WAS NOT A MINUS!
You may want to read the last paragraph again. Jester's talking about the playoffs.

nevermore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 06:24 AM
  #97
Juicy Couturier*
CannonGoBoom
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philly Area
Posts: 4,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Juicy Couturier*
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevermore View Post
You may want to read the last paragraph again. Jester's talking about the playoffs.
When he first said it he wasnt talking about the playoffs, he was talking in general and then he decided to change it to the playoffs because his point was rediculous. And yes a team that gets knocked out of the playoffs in the first round has a good chance to have players that are a minus. Mike Richards was an even 0 in the playoffs on a team that did much better in the playoffs, does that mean ovechkin is pretty much just as good on D? He decided to change it to the playoffs when he realized it didnt make sense cause the guy was a +28.

Juicy Couturier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 09:06 AM
  #98
mikedifr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CannonGoBoom View Post
When he first said it he wasnt talking about the playoffs, he was talking in general and then he decided to change it to the playoffs because his point was rediculous. And yes a team that gets knocked out of the playoffs in the first round has a good chance to have players that are a minus. Mike Richards was an even 0 in the playoffs on a team that did much better in the playoffs, does that mean ovechkin is pretty much just as good on D? He decided to change it to the playoffs when he realized it didnt make sense cause the guy was a +28.
Last time I checked, the goal is to win in the playoffs, who gives a flying **** about the regular season. A player can be a +84 in the regular season, but if he is a - player in the playoffs and his team does not advance past the first round, that +84 is completely frigin meaningless.

Sorry man, but you are not helping yourself acting like a jackass and calling people a loser. That the quickest way to having no one respond to you anymore like has happened to some others.

mikedifr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 09:08 AM
  #99
mikedifr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
OT: Megan Fox is sooooooooooo yummy
Yes, my future 2nd wife is very yummy!!!!! Hot as all hell, LOVES having sex and loves playing video games. Doesnt get any better than that!!!

(I just need to convince her that Brian Austin Green is not the right guy for her)

mikedifr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 09:33 AM
  #100
Juicy Couturier*
CannonGoBoom
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philly Area
Posts: 4,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Juicy Couturier*
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikedifr View Post
Last time I checked, the goal is to win in the playoffs, who gives a flying **** about the regular season. A player can be a +84 in the regular season, but if he is a - player in the playoffs and his team does not advance past the first round, that +84 is completely frigin meaningless.

Sorry man, but you are not helping yourself acting like a jackass and calling people a loser. That the quickest way to having no one respond to you anymore like has happened to some others.
I never said anythign about the regular season being more important. I was simply pointing out that he was in fact a +28 this season when someone said that its hard to win when your best player is a minus. At that time he was not talking about the playoffs.

You right though, no need for the name calling...I apologize.

Juicy Couturier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:52 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.