HFBoards

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

Why do people care so much about the preseason?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-23-2010, 02:46 PM
  #1
CT*
WOLF GANG
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 1,054
vCash: 500
Why do people care so much about the preseason?

I realize yesterdays game was an absolute atrocity, but really.. It is the preseason.

I have a few friends who are already saying the whole season is going to be like this based on yesterdays game. I just don't understand it.. if the real season starts and they're playing games like yesterdays then we obviously have a large problem.. but we will just have to wait and see right?

I mean the Canucks are 0-3.. so that obviously means they're going to do terrible in the regular season.

CT* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 02:58 PM
  #2
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 21,721
vCash: 500
we're all worked up because of the long off-season.

at least that's me. Two years ago we beat the entire Blackhawks starting roster (minus one injured, i believe) with the minimum number of NHLrs; these things happen. However, when your starting goalie looks that rough it is cause for concern. The rest of it you can make excuses for--stoner hasn't played a lot, new defensive coach working out the kinks, new guys in the forward ranks, etc--but Backstrom was very not-good. I think everyone agrees that he'll have to put up great performances for the Wild to have a shot at the playoffs, and that wasn't even an average performance put up against a try-out team.

Scary.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 02:59 PM
  #3
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT View Post
I realize yesterdays game was an absolute atrocity, but really.. It is the preseason.

I have a few friends who are already saying the whole season is going to be like this based on yesterdays game. I just don't understand it.. if the real season starts and they're playing games like yesterdays then we obviously have a large problem.. but we will just have to wait and see right?

I mean the Canucks are 0-3.. so that obviously means they're going to do terrible in the regular season.
Well to play devils advocate here. We were playing our opening night roster for the most part. They looked terrible out there playing as if they were just considering this a scrimmage and didn't mean anything.

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 03:04 PM
  #4
Spawnisen
Believe.
 
Spawnisen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
anyhow, losing vs Blues 5-1 is bad.

Spawnisen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 03:08 PM
  #5
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,823
vCash: 500
1. As previously said, it's the first game after five months of hockey-withdrawl.

2. I'm super competitive and hate to lose. Doesn't matter the sport, doesn't matter the game, I just hate to lose.

3. A lot of the players who are being counted on to step up played as well as or worse than last season against a team which iced half of their AHL team.

4. It's a message board and the Wild are only as good as their last game or move.

__________________
Blog: First Round Bust: A Cast of Thousands celebrating a rather dodgy track record of Minnesota Wild Drafting.

"Will beats skill when skill doesn't have enough will."
-Doug Woog
1974 1976 1979 2002 2003 2014?
GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 03:13 PM
  #6
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,967
vCash: 500
I'm a little frustrated because the exact things we needed to improve upon (defense, special teams, clutch play) were the exact things that were terrible. And there was very little offense. The team collapsed as if there was no pride.

I won't hit a panic button if the team goes 0-6 or 0-8 or however many preseason games there are, but I also think if this team goes 0-fer in the preseason we're going to suck pretty bad in the regular season too.

I mean a 5-1 stomping at home with almost a gameday roster? That's terrible. That's the kind of weak ass effort they gave last year, and if that's what they're going to do on a regular basis, I hope there's a house cleaning.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 08:05 PM
  #7
MK9
Registered User
 
MK9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Andover, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,353
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CT View Post
I realize yesterdays game was an absolute atrocity, but really.. It is the preseason.

I have a few friends who are already saying the whole season is going to be like this based on yesterdays game. I just don't understand it.. if the real season starts and they're playing games like yesterdays then we obviously have a large problem.. but we will just have to wait and see right?

I mean the Canucks are 0-3.. so that obviously means they're going to do terrible in the regular season.
You've lived here for how long now? That's Minnesota fans for you. They'll turn a Vikes game off at half time. Turn on the Wild after one game. Bandwagon fans doesn't begin to describe most fans in this state.

MK9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 08:20 PM
  #8
llamapalooza
Hockey State Expat
 
llamapalooza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,349
vCash: 500
It's not being a bandwagon fan if you've watched your team lose miserably enough times to be able to recognize a lost cause. A bandwagon fan would stop turning on the game at all.

llamapalooza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 08:42 PM
  #9
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 21,721
vCash: 500
yeah, like chicago fans.
lots of them now. simply because it's televised? yeah, believe that one.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 08:55 PM
  #10
pbunder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 430
vCash: 500
i watched all the way through, but still pretty bitter about being beaten by the Peoria Rivermen. I just hope this is first game shakes or somethinge.

pbunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 09:25 PM
  #11
melinko
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 3,898
vCash: 500
I don't think you can predict the season based on pre-season, but when your nhl roster gets blown out by AHL players there are problems.

Things may get better but last night was terrible.

melinko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 09:27 PM
  #12
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,933
vCash: 500
People are worried, as Backstrom has a crap load to prove this year. Is he or isn't he just a system goalie? I think he is, and last night does nothing to prove otherwise.

He's a system goalie and we no longer play that system.

TaLoN is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 10:45 PM
  #13
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
People are worried, as Backstrom has a crap load to prove this year. Is he or isn't he just a system goalie? I think he is, and last night does nothing to prove otherwise.

He's a system goalie and we no longer play that system.
Bro, as always we are in agreement and I was saying that even before this time last year. How do I know that?? Outside of Roloson's magical time for half a season in Edmonton basically, no goalie we've had has ever prospered on another team the way they did here in Minnesota under Lemaire. I foresee that most teams believe Backstrom is no different. Making his $6M a year just that much harder to swallow. I want this guy to prove me wrong

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2010, 11:26 PM
  #14
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
People are worried, as Backstrom has a crap load to prove this year. Is he or isn't he just a system goalie? I think he is, and last night does nothing to prove otherwise.

He's a system goalie and we no longer play that system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT2002 View Post
Bro, as always we are in agreement and I was saying that even before this time last year. How do I know that?? Outside of Roloson's magical time for half a season in Edmonton basically, no goalie we've had has ever prospered on another team the way they did here in Minnesota under Lemaire. I foresee that most teams believe Backstrom is no different. Making his $6M a year just that much harder to swallow. I want this guy to prove me wrong
And that argument is shallow at best. The only ex-Wild example that's worth mentioning, Roloson, is not a good one. That's because the post-lockout Roloson can never be definitively compared to the pre-lockout Roli. And the part we can compare is consistent pre and post-Wild. There's nothing in the ex-Wild pipeline to say that any goaltender we've had has been a "system" goalie.

Anyway at heart the notion is ridiculous. Backstrom's numbers last year weren't the way they were just because the defense changed. They also weren't the way they were because just he changed. Remember he changed "systems" when he got to Minnesota, and he thrived again. It's BS at this point to think that he's a "system" goalie. If he plays like he's played for the vast majority of his career, he's worth it. If he doesn't again, he's isn't. It's that simple.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 12:27 AM
  #15
Vashanesh
My best outfit
 
Vashanesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 2,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT2002 View Post
Bro, as always we are in agreement and I was saying that even before this time last year. How do I know that?? Outside of Roloson's magical time for half a season in Edmonton basically, no goalie we've had has ever prospered on another team the way they did here in Minnesota under Lemaire. I foresee that most teams believe Backstrom is no different. Making his $6M a year just that much harder to swallow. I want this guy to prove me wrong
I would not suggest holding your breath...

Though I'd love to be wrong, the phrase that comes to mind first and foremost is "product of the system".

Vashanesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 12:39 AM
  #16
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT2002 View Post
Bro, as always we are in agreement and I was saying that even before this time last year. How do I know that?? Outside of Roloson's magical time for half a season in Edmonton basically, no goalie we've had has ever prospered on another team the way they did here in Minnesota under Lemaire. I foresee that most teams believe Backstrom is no different. Making his $6M a year just that much harder to swallow. I want this guy to prove me wrong
Non-injured Manny wasn't bad in Boston although unfortunately that was rarer than a Derek Boogaard offensive play and the Bruins play a similar defensive system.

GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 01:29 AM
  #17
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT2002 View Post
Bro, as always we are in agreement and I was saying that even before this time last year. How do I know that?? Outside of Roloson's magical time for half a season in Edmonton basically, no goalie we've had has ever prospered on another team the way they did here in Minnesota under Lemaire. I foresee that most teams believe Backstrom is no different. Making his $6M a year just that much harder to swallow. I want this guy to prove me wrong
I wanted him traded prior to signing that $6mil/yr contract precisely because of that very opinion on his game.

I for one never looked at him as elite, only very consistant as long as the chances against were limited in terms of quality. His lateral movement is FAR too weak to be an elite goaltender IMO.

As you would love to be proven wrong, I've been waiting for that very thing... but I do not expect it to happen any time soon.

TaLoN is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 09:04 AM
  #18
mnwildgophers
Registered User
 
mnwildgophers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,497
vCash: 500
Backstrom didn't have a very good year last year, and sure didn't look good in the 1st pre-season game. Let's see how he does this year before we go out and declare him unable to be an "elite" goaltender. Come on, he got nominated for the Vezina, and that's just because of the system? I just find that hard to believe.

Either way, he has a lot to show this year. He's not off to a good start, but we need to play better defensively. I just hope Stoner and Barker pick it up.

mnwildgophers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 09:16 AM
  #19
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,967
vCash: 500
I am concerned about Backstrom. I wasn't last year, because the defense was horrendous, but he needs to be more consistent.

As for a "system" goalie, I've said on the old boards that Kiprusoff and Bryzgalov suffered the exact same drop in numbers going from a 1-2-2 to an "uptempo" system. But that said, I'm not sure there's a goalie in the world, except maybe a late-90's Hasek, who would suit a system that gives up odd man rushes like Halloween candy.

IMO the team NEEDS to play more defense. I like the aggressive forecheck, I like having two guys attacking the puck carrier, but that shouldn't also equate to defense pinching at the wrong time and the center caught that low in the zone. Too many times it looked like a 4-1 instead of a 2-1-2 or 2-2-1, which is how I'd rather see them play.

Now is that an indictment of Richards or our defensemen? Or both? I'm not sure but I lean towards Richards. He admitted his wrongs with Schultz, and maybe he can figure it out with some help from Wilson. Frankly he's got to, or else this season is history already. You don't win games with terrible defense. I don't necessarily think defense wins championships, but it can sure as hell lose them.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 10:08 AM
  #20
mnwildgophers
Registered User
 
mnwildgophers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I am concerned about Backstrom. I wasn't last year, because the defense was horrendous, but he needs to be more consistent.

As for a "system" goalie, I've said on the old boards that Kiprusoff and Bryzgalov suffered the exact same drop in numbers going from a 1-2-2 to an "uptempo" system. But that said, I'm not sure there's a goalie in the world, except maybe a late-90's Hasek, who would suit a system that gives up odd man rushes like Halloween candy.

IMO the team NEEDS to play more defense. I like the aggressive forecheck, I like having two guys attacking the puck carrier, but that shouldn't also equate to defense pinching at the wrong time and the center caught that low in the zone. Too many times it looked like a 4-1 instead of a 2-1-2 or 2-2-1, which is how I'd rather see them play.

Now is that an indictment of Richards or our defensemen? Or both? I'm not sure but I lean towards Richards. He admitted his wrongs with Schultz, and maybe he can figure it out with some help from Wilson. Frankly he's got to, or else this season is history already. You don't win games with terrible defense. I don't necessarily think defense wins championships, but it can sure as hell lose them.
In regards to your last paragraph, and more so the last sentence. You need a good balance of both to be successful. Good defensive play coupled with timely goals will lead you to the promised land. We don't have a go to scorer, but neither does Phoenix. Look at how they did when they all bought into the system (and kicked ass in the shootout).

I was happy with the Richards hiring, but as most of us had said, he needs to show us what he can do this year with this team. We should be better than last year and we should make the playoffs. Anything else is unacceptable in my eyes.

mnwildgophers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 10:27 AM
  #21
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Talon’s consistent point about Backstrom is the weaker lateral movement that he brings to the position. There are goalies that are better lateral movers, like Harding, but weaker on other aspects. Harding, for example, is often not technically square to the puck, while Backstrom is always square. That was also a huge difference between Price and Halak in Montreal last year. Price has better lateral movement, but is often twisted oddly to the puck. Halak was always square to the puck.

Each goalie in the NHL has a weakness. Unfortunately, we had a defense last season which was out of position a lot, therefore, the weak lateral movement of Backstrom was more of a glaring fault. Harding was “better” because he could get over to block those rebounds that were not being cleared faster. Going back to Halak, if his defense hadn’t been playing nearly perfect positional hockey, quite a few more rebounds would have found their way into the back of his net.

Khudobin looks to be a deep playing goalie. He is also playing square to the puck, but he’s a lot deeper in his net most of the time than Backstrom plays. This is also why Khudobin sucked a bit with the Aeros on shootouts. Yes, the team in front of him couldn’t score, but remove the Constantine driven positional play of the Aeros defense, and Khudobin will be exposed to have weaker lateral movement as well. Fortunately for him, he’s a *wider* goalie than Backstrom, so he actually has less space to worry about.

I’m no goalie expert, but that’s how I see things.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 12:42 PM
  #22
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by State of Hockey View Post
And that argument is shallow at best. The only ex-Wild example that's worth mentioning, Roloson, is not a good one. That's because the post-lockout Roloson can never be definitively compared to the pre-lockout Roli. And the part we can compare is consistent pre and post-Wild. There's nothing in the ex-Wild pipeline to say that any goaltender we've had has been a "system" goalie.
Every goalie that has played for this team has not done nearly as good as they should of when they've left. And even with Roloson many would argue having Pronger holding down the defensive line helped considerably. Manny had his moments for Boston, but even he didn't do next to anything remarkable. And to my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong) none of the former Wild goalies are either playing in the NHL anymore, or they are backups at the very best. Hence why I believe many haven't wanted to jump on the Harding bandwagon yet either. His play along with Backstrom's dropped a lot during last years change in systems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by State of Hockey View Post
Anyway at heart the notion is ridiculous. Backstrom's numbers last year weren't the way they were just because the defense changed. They also weren't the way they were because just he changed. Remember he changed "systems" when he got to Minnesota, and he thrived again. It's BS at this point to think that he's a "system" goalie. If he plays like he's played for the vast majority of his career, he's worth it. If he doesn't again, he's isn't. It's that simple.
That's why he was drafted right? Oh wait....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vashanesh View Post
I would not suggest holding your breath...

Though I'd love to be wrong, the phrase that comes to mind first and foremost is "product of the system".
Most people were very skeptical about what his play would be. Now we also don't have massive defensive presence on the blueline either outside of Zanon and Schultz. Say what you want about Burns, but he's still a defensive liability at this moment because, IMO, he tries too damn hard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GopherState View Post
Non-injured Manny wasn't bad in Boston although unfortunately that was rarer than a Derek Boogaard offensive play and the Bruins play a similar defensive system.
Exactly. The whole reason we let Manny go was, he wanted too much $$ for what we could give him and his play wasn't that phenominal when you are only playing 25-40% of the season at the absolute best. Backstrom was the better player in that respects. And he's been relatively injury free.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
I wanted him traded prior to signing that $6mil/yr contract precisely because of that very opinion on his game.

I for one never looked at him as elite, only very consistant as long as the chances against were limited in terms of quality. His lateral movement is FAR too weak to be an elite goaltender IMO.

As you would love to be proven wrong, I've been waiting for that very thing... but I do not expect it to happen any time soon.
Its not his lateral movement that concerns me. Its his inability to anticipate the shot from the perimeter when its coming in. Why I feel he is terrible at shootouts and breakaways compared to other goalies (like Quick) who appear to have a better handle on that type of play. 90% of the SHG's that were allowed last year were because he was facing the shooter solo with no defensive help. That makes me believe he can't do it without having at least someone to pinch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildgophers View Post
Backstrom didn't have a very good year last year, and sure didn't look good in the 1st pre-season game. Let's see how he does this year before we go out and declare him unable to be an "elite" goaltender. Come on, he got nominated for the Vezina, and that's just because of the system? I just find that hard to believe.

Either way, he has a lot to show this year. He's not off to a good start, but we need to play better defensively. I just hope Stoner and Barker pick it up.
Actually, yea I do think it was because of the system. The year he was nominated for it, we were also 1st for SHG allowed, amazing Penalty Kill % that year, and he played almost 90% of the games for the season with his averages in Save % and GAA. I also believe we ranked up there pretty high for fewest shots allowed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I am concerned about Backstrom. I wasn't last year, because the defense was horrendous, but he needs to be more consistent.

As for a "system" goalie, I've said on the old boards that Kiprusoff and Bryzgalov suffered the exact same drop in numbers going from a 1-2-2 to an "uptempo" system. But that said, I'm not sure there's a goalie in the world, except maybe a late-90's Hasek, who would suit a system that gives up odd man rushes like Halloween candy.

IMO the team NEEDS to play more defense. I like the aggressive forecheck, I like having two guys attacking the puck carrier, but that shouldn't also equate to defense pinching at the wrong time and the center caught that low in the zone. Too many times it looked like a 4-1 instead of a 2-1-2 or 2-2-1, which is how I'd rather see them play.

Now is that an indictment of Richards or our defensemen? Or both? I'm not sure but I lean towards Richards. He admitted his wrongs with Schultz, and maybe he can figure it out with some help from Wilson. Frankly he's got to, or else this season is history already. You don't win games with terrible defense. I don't necessarily think defense wins championships, but it can sure as hell lose them.
Defense can and will win you championships. But you need the offensive firepower to help keep you in a came when your defensive is lacking in any area. Having a goalie that coughs up 3-4 goals a game isn't helping them any. Philly and Chicago proved that one last year considering they were relying heavily on who could basically score more goals because their goalies were terrible (Neimi will fail this year) and their defenses pretty much equaled eachother out. It came down to who could score more goals in that series. I personally believe the reason we can't win more games consistently is we are basically "average" to "slighly above average" in those three categories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildgophers View Post
In regards to your last paragraph, and more so the last sentence. You need a good balance of both to be successful. Good defensive play coupled with timely goals will lead you to the promised land. We don't have a go to scorer, but neither does Phoenix. Look at how they did when they all bought into the system (and kicked ass in the shootout).

I was happy with the Richards hiring, but as most of us had said, he needs to show us what he can do this year with this team. We should be better than last year and we should make the playoffs. Anything else is unacceptable in my eyes.
Richards better realize this place is like Detroit. You get 2 "gimmie" years to get players and staff to buy into you. If you don't take them to the promise land by Junior Year, you better have your resume updated for an AHL affiliate. I'm not exactly sold on the guy quite yet, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt varying on what happens this year. He deserves that at least.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Talon’s consistent point about Backstrom is the weaker lateral movement that he brings to the position. There are goalies that are better lateral movers, like Harding, but weaker on other aspects. Harding, for example, is often not technically square to the puck, while Backstrom is always square. That was also a huge difference between Price and Halak in Montreal last year. Price has better lateral movement, but is often twisted oddly to the puck. Halak was always square to the puck.

Each goalie in the NHL has a weakness. Unfortunately, we had a defense last season which was out of position a lot, therefore, the weak lateral movement of Backstrom was more of a glaring fault. Harding was “better” because he could get over to block those rebounds that were not being cleared faster. Going back to Halak, if his defense hadn’t been playing nearly perfect positional hockey, quite a few more rebounds would have found their way into the back of his net.

Khudobin looks to be a deep playing goalie. He is also playing square to the puck, but he’s a lot deeper in his net most of the time than Backstrom plays. This is also why Khudobin sucked a bit with the Aeros on shootouts. Yes, the team in front of him couldn’t score, but remove the Constantine driven positional play of the Aeros defense, and Khudobin will be exposed to have weaker lateral movement as well. Fortunately for him, he’s a *wider* goalie than Backstrom, so he actually has less space to worry about.

I’m no goalie expert, but that’s how I see things.
Good assessment

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 03:05 PM
  #23
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,967
vCash: 500
I went back to scoring depth and team defense in an earlier post...

As for go-to goal scorers, here were the top 10 in the league:
Crosby (lost 2nd round)
Stamkos (missed playoffs)
Ovechkin (lost 1st round)
Marleau (lost 3rd round)
Gaborik (missed playoffs)
Kovalchuk (lost 1st round)
Semin (lost 1st round)
Heatley (lost 3rd round)
Parise (lost 1st round)
Burrows (lost 2nd round)

To find a goal scorer who made it to the Cup finals, Carter is 15th. To find a goal scorer who won the Cup, Kane is tied with 5 other players for 19th.

For my money, it's not about having one guy who can score goals for you...because that one guy can get on a cold streak or be shut down. It's about having lots of guys who can score goals and preventing the other team from scoring. The Wild have lots of guys who can score goals, it's the preventing goals that they need help with.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 03:18 PM
  #24
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I went back to scoring depth and team defense in an earlier post...

As for go-to goal scorers, here were the top 10 in the league:
Crosby (lost 2nd round)
Stamkos (missed playoffs)
Ovechkin (lost 1st round)
Marleau (lost 3rd round)
Gaborik (missed playoffs)
Kovalchuk (lost 1st round)
Semin (lost 1st round)
Heatley (lost 3rd round)
Parise (lost 1st round)
Burrows (lost 2nd round)

To find a goal scorer who made it to the Cup finals, Carter is 15th. To find a goal scorer who won the Cup, Kane is tied with 5 other players for 19th.

For my money, it's not about having one guy who can score goals for you...because that one guy can get on a cold streak or be shut down. It's about having lots of guys who can score goals and preventing the other team from scoring. The Wild have lots of guys who can score goals, it's the preventing goals that they need help with.
You mean like Ovechkin and Semin lol

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2010, 03:24 PM
  #25
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I went back to scoring depth and team defense in an earlier post...

As for go-to goal scorers, here were the top 10 in the league:
Crosby (lost 2nd round)
Stamkos (missed playoffs)
Ovechkin (lost 1st round)
Marleau (lost 3rd round)
Gaborik (missed playoffs)
Kovalchuk (lost 1st round)
Semin (lost 1st round)
Heatley (lost 3rd round)
Parise (lost 1st round)
Burrows (lost 2nd round)

To find a goal scorer who made it to the Cup finals, Carter is 15th. To find a goal scorer who won the Cup, Kane is tied with 5 other players for 19th.

For my money, it's not about having one guy who can score goals for you...because that one guy can get on a cold streak or be shut down. It's about having lots of guys who can score goals and preventing the other team from scoring. The Wild have lots of guys who can score goals, it's the preventing goals that they need help with.
Agreed. How much did all those years of Gaborik influence this?

GopherState 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 03:44 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.