Jump to content
You are a guest user Click to join the site

Ducks Hockey Forum Coyotes Hockey Forum Bruins Hockey Forum Sabres Hockey Forum Flames Hockey Forum Hurricanes Hockey Forum Blackhawks Hockey Forum Avalanche Hockey Forum Blue Jackets Hockey Forum Stars Hockey Forum Red Wings Jackets Hockey Forum Oilers Hockey Forum Panthers Hockey Forum Kings Hockey Forum Wild Hockey Forum Canadiens Hockey Forum Predators Hockey Forum Devils Hockey Forum Islanders Hockey Forum Rangers Hockey Forum Senators Hockey Forum Flyers Hockey Forum Penguins Hockey Forum Sharks Hockey Forum Blues Hockey Forum Lightning Hockey Forum Maple Leafs Hockey Forum Canucks Hockey Forum Golden Knights Hockey Forum Capitals Hockey Forum Jets Hockey Forum

ScottM

Editor & Supporter
  • Content Count

    2,051
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by ScottM

  1. As far as that run to the Finals in 1999... There was this guy named Dominik Hasek that dragged that team kicking and screaming to the Finals. They were that bad, and he was that incredible. I give him WAY more credit for that trip than Ruff.
  2. Rask isn't the guy I'd want to depend on in the playoffs either. Personally, I think he's one of the biggest reasons the B's lost to Chicago in 2013. That meltdown in game six was the stuff of legends.
  3. I have to like the Sens' chances in this one. We took all four from Boston in the regular season, and the team actually managed to reverse a skid and win a couple of games down the stretch without Karlsson. He'll be back for the playoffs, and we should get Methot back soon as well. I certainly don't expect a sweep, but the pieces should fall into place for this one.
  4. I'm virtually positive it's a problem with the NHL site, because I got NGINX errors a couple of times while trying to fill mine out.
  5. Sorry for my late reply. I've been without Internet thanks to a dog chewing on the cable. This should work for me.
  6. I can't see how they couldn't award a goal. It's pretty clear that the intent for such a situation is an awarded goal. Since the officials know that, that would almost certainly be the ruling made. If it was then found that the rule book doesn't specifically cover that, I fell pretty confident that would be fixed in short order.
  7. I strongly suspect that you're right there, I've never seen a scenario like that play out, obviously, but that particular rule seems pretty clear. As for your last question, yes, that would be a goal. If a penalty shot is awarded with an empty net, the player is credited with a goal. 25.1 Awarded Goal – A goal will be awarded to the attacking team when the opposing team has taken their goalkeeper off the ice and an attacking player has possession and control of the puck in the neutral or attacking zone, without a defending player between himself and the opposing goal, and he is prevented from scoring as a result of an infraction committed by the defending team. 57.4 Awarded Goal – If, when the opposing goalkeeper has been removed from the ice, a player in control of the puck (or who could have obtained possession and control of the puck) in the neutral or attacking zone is tripped or otherwise fouled with no opposition between him and the opposing goal, thus preventing a reasonable scoring opportunity, the Referee shall immediately stop play and award a goal to the attacking team.
  8. Let's give this a bit more context. It looks like no one is going to get 50 this year. That hasn't happened in a non-shortened season since 2003-04. (Though in fairness, no one but Ovechkin has done it since 2011-12.) This also doesn't look like a good year for 40-goal seasons, as I'm guessing no more than 3-4 guys tops will reach that mark. Therefore, those 35 goals are good for a tie for fourth in the league right now. By a rookie. If you knew any rookie was going to come in and finish fourth in goals, you'd be thinking that he was going to be something very special. AND, let's not forget Laine. He's only one back. AND, let's not forget McDavid. He's probably already a top-3 player in his second season. I think we're looking at something huge right now, and Matthews is a big part of it. For all my tendency to make fun of the Leafs, have fun with this, guys. You've got a generational talent, and those are a blast to have.
  9. Ironic, is it not, that the longest active streak ended on the same night that the Oilers' record-tying streak for most seasons missing the playoffs ended?
  10. @WordsOfWisdom The positions in the standings weren't really what I was aiming at. I mentioned that one year, simply because it made the point that even if the Senators were a clear favorite, they just could not get past the Leafs back then. It didn't really matter how good either team was, the Leafs just seemed to have guys that thrived more in a playoff environment than Ottawa did, and it was most obvious when they played each other. In fact, I'd say that was the most important advantage Anaheim had in the 2007 Finals. Those just weren't good match ups, because outside of a couple of guys, we lacked the extra toughness
  11. @WordsOfWisdom @J0e Th0rnton With all the painful memories I have of those series, I can attest that it was more than just soft goaltending. It was softness in general. I remember one season that we were in the thick of the President's Trophy race, but I wanted to get the 2-seed in the East because Toronto was locked into the 7-seed and we were 5-0 against them that year. I got what I wanted, and we got swept. The Toronto "thugs" as I called them, like Tie Domi and Darcy Tucker and their physical play always seemed to be our kryptonite. The playoffs, as we all know, are a different game, and while we had the skill back then, sometimes, that's not enough.
  12. Now that there have been some moves to at least somewhat shore up the defense, my main areas of concern are now left wing and center. We severely lack depth on the left side. It seems like every year MacArthur gets injured and there's then a scramble to figure out who to put over there. At center, it's not ability, as you point out, but I don't think we have much toughness there. I like the ability of Turris and Brassard, but we need to add some grit, which is missing, as evidenced by the whining you spoke of. Honestly though, while I've expressed frustration with the (lack of) moves made by the team, looking at it from where we are now, I'm starting to question if I'm frustrated that they're not making moves at all or that they're not making them as fast as I want. I say that because, while I can't pinpoint exactly where it happened, this team has gone from being an also-ran to being a real playoff team. Maybe I just need a bit more patience. As for the Leafs series possibility... BRING IT ON! I have a lot of years of revenge I want to get. Lol
  13. I had fun with this last year, and I'd like to do it again. That said, I'll have church that Sunday night, and I'll have a softball game to cover that Monday night, so I'll most likely need someone to draft for me, if someone is willing and able.
  14. This has definitely been a fun season. It feels like some things are finally falling into place. This is what I've been hoping for from this group. I think that sometimes it's hard for guys in a small market to get attention, and that has a lot to do with your point on Stone and Hoffman. Stone is one of the best defensive forwards in the game and gets no recognition. I mean, the guy walked away with the takeaways stat last year and finished 18th in Selke voting........ Still, much more important is that the chemistry is forming. I really want to see Anderson get the Masterton Trophy. He and his wife both deserve that honor. They and the team have done an outstanding job in a near-impossible balancing act. That's your feel-good story of the year, without a doubt. And then Karlsson. I know that most on this board likely think that I hype him so much only because he's a Senator, but that's not the case. As big of a Senators fan as I am, I'm a bigger hockey fan, and when I look at him, I see something special, but fate seems to work against him getting the recognition he deserves. He plays the wrong position (only Bobby Orr has truly gotten the recognition really deserved by defensemen in the last 60 or so years), he plays in the wrong market (see size, and thus media attention), and he's not Canadian (see the recent Melnyk quote -- I feel quite confident much of the hockey media feels the same). Last year, he had an absolutely historic season and didn't win the Norris because he wasn't a "real" defenseman. This year, he's having an incredible defensive season, and is in a close points race with Burns, but Burns has already been coronated, strictly because of offense. But again, while just like with Stone and Hoffman, I want to see him get the recognition he deserves, the important thing is, the production on the ice is there, and a guy that was already at the top of the sport is getting better, and the fruit is showing. You're dead on when you say that the Senators are toast without him. If the Hart Trophy were really based on what it should be, he'd be a lock as a finalist. I have a hard time thinking of anyone other than McDavid who has as big of an impact on his team's playoff chances. While some of that might seem like I'm complaining, I'm not. All of that shows why I'm so happy with this team right now. There's not a lot of depth, and there's not a lot of recognition, but this is a group that wants to win, and the talent that is there, is proving it. Boucher wasn't the guy I wanted behind the bench, but they made the right hire. I think he should get the Jack Adams this year. I'm not predicting a Cup (that would shock me), but this is a team that can make a run. If things fall in place, I don't think a trip to the conference finals is out of the question. Whether it happens this year or not though, this is a group heading in a direction I really like at this moment.
  15. It's supposed to be the hockey hall of fame. And Tretiak is in there despite never playing in the NHL. But, I think it's treated way too much as the NHL hall of fame. Of course, the female inductees haven't played in the NHL, but from what I've seen, they tend to be less celebrated upon entry, probably because they didn't play in the NHL. We just have too much of a case of tunnel vision in North America. Edit: Let me add that I think it's a crying shame that Tretiak is most remembered for a couple of losses.
  16. @yave1964 You made a lot of good points in that post. I knew it was a good idea to tag you in it. Lol The more I think about it, while I still think that my Oates comparison holds up in a lot of ways, I think it also failed to recognize how good of a goal scorer in the Soviet League. Oates had that 45 goal season, but other than that, he only had one 30-goal season, and I certainly think Larionov could have scored 30 pretty consistently in his prime, possibly more, considering the style of the NHL at the time. I certainly think that he would have been ready for prime time by the time he was 20. Looking at his Soviet stats, I suspect that he would have been at least a 400 goal guy in the NHL, maybe 500. Cutting to the simple point, he was an incredibly well-balanced player. @More Hockey Stats I won't be stopping at Larionov. I'm starting with centers, and I'm starting with guys in the Hall of Fame. He just happened to be the first guy that fits this bill that I came across because of that. But yes, I agree with you. I think there are a lot of guys that are deserving of spots in the Hall of Fame that will never get there, simply because of the fact that they're unfamiliar to North American audiences. Larionov caught a break in that respect when fans over here got to see enough of him to realize how intelligent of a player he was, even if they didn't see him at his best. I read something yesterday that both of you might find interesting. Quite frankly, the hockey history fan in me found it offensive. It was an article on the "most overrated" players in the HoF. I didn't agree with everything, but it had some good points, except where Larionov was concerned. The writer ragged on him for the fact that he only scored 169 goals in the NHL, and -- at least from my perspective -- seemed to suggest that his Soviet League accomplishments and his years on the KLM line were little more than an asterisk. I think that kind of attitude has robber NHL fans of a lot. Celebrate the Miracle on Ice and the 1972 Canada Cup all you want. Those were certainly nice Cold War victories for the West. But, why can't we give the guys who were on the ice their due credit? We weren't really fighting them, but the Soviet system. I think we should do ourselves and them the decency of recognizing them for what they were -- incredible hockey players.
  17. I'm finally getting around to getting some real progress on the top 100 players list that I've been wanting to do for a while, and to start, I'm ranking players by position. There are some tough ones to rank, largely because we missed their primes behind the Iron Curtain. A guy like Peter Stastny is fairly easy, because while we did miss some of his best years, he had enough left to show us what he was in the NHL, and really all you have to do is adjust to four or five extra years. Then, there's a guy like Igor Larionov. We missed virtually all of his prime. I certainly don't think it's fair to judge him solely by his NHL career, but it's hard to figure out how to evaluate the Soviet years. More or less, what I'm looking for are thoughts as to players that he's comparable to in caliber. My initial thought is that a comparison to Adam Oates seems fair. He was a great playmaker, very good defensively, and had good longevity. I'm interested in others' thoughts too. I'm guessing @yave1964 will definitely find some interest in this discussion.
  18. Here's my thing: I think most of these were generally lateral moves (though Burrows had a big impact in his debut). I don't really feel like we gave up a lot (and Lazar, as high as I was on him after last season, NEEDED to go), but what did we really gain? I've seen a couple of articles talking about a bit of depth in the bottom six or bottom half of the defense, but I don't really see it (again, save the possibility of Burrows). These aren't the moves you make if you feel like you have a shot at making a decent playoff run (which could have happened with the right moves). At least they shouldn't be. I can't help but think back to a thread I made in the offseason, in which I outlined some moves that would be the sort that could immensely help the team, while still working on a budget. Did they do anything of the sort? Absolutely not. This trade deadline shows me that even though there's a new GM, the lazy, "let's do nothing" mentality has remained. For a team that should be on the rise, it's very frustrating as a fan.
  19. With the new system that has the lottery, it's not impossible.
  20. I get the gripe with the current system, and yes, sometimes things like this are absolutely broken. I'll give you an extreme example of that. Here in Mississippi, the top four teams in each high school football district go to the playoffs. This past season, that meant that in one five-team district, the fourth place team won one district game -- the only game they won for the entire season. We had a 1-9 team make the playoffs... That said, in professional sports, there's enough parity that you'll never see anything that extreme. The traditionalist in me likes the current setup (one of the few changes made in recent years that I do like). The only change I'd make is to make it four teams from each division so that it would go back to the old system. The reason I like that is that, as stated previously, it helps encourage rivalries, including in the regular season. If you know that your division standing solely determines your playoff standing, how much harder are you going to play against those rivals, especially when we get toward the end of the year?
  21. Well, technically, yes, but I didn't feel it was fair to the other "most overrated" nominees to include him in the running.
  22. This. He's playing favorites, and there's no two ways around it. Let's assume for a moment that Quebec City (or Seattle, it doesn't really matter which) is eventually awarded a team. It seems almost certain that they'll have to do it at some point for balance's sake. Do you think they will get some of the same privileges? I highly doubt it. I know this is all speculation, but I agree that it looks fishy.
  23. Jonathon Quick is not the answer for the Kings. Quite frankly, in my opinion, he's the most overrated goalie in the game today. Last year, he was a Vezina finalist, but nothing about his play earned it. He rides on the reputation of the 2011-12 season, quite frankly. Outside of that, he's been average at best. Budaj did have a bit of a rough stretch recently, but every goalie has that. On balance, he's been every bit as good (if not slightly better) than what you can typically expect from Quick. The team is actually 5th best in the league in goals against. No, the problem the Kings have is that they can't score. They are 25th out of 30 in goals for. They're -1 in goal differential. Most of the time, that won't cut it, and they're showing that now.
  24. I've long been high on Weber. He's among the best to never win the Norris, imho. But, at this point, it's definitely not his year. As for Burns... You know how I've been complaining about Karlsson not winning the Norris last year? Well, if things don't change and Burns doesn't win it this year, expect the same thing. I have to disagree that Karlsson isn't having a Norris caliber year. He's third in assists, and not far off of a point per game clip, AND, it's widely acknowledged that with the new system he looks better in his own end. I definitely think he's having a Norris caliber year, though I don't think he's as good as he was last year, and Burns is putting on a show right now. Without a lot of digging, off the top of my head, I'd vote Burns, Karlsson, and I'm not quite sure on the third. That would take some thought.
  25. I think things have changed a lot since I originally started this thread anyway. Weber (and his team) seems to have fallen off quite a bit, and I really won't be surprised if he's not a finalist, unless things change.

Game Room 1

    You don't have permission to chat.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...