carpandean Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 How about our new #1 center, Matt Ellis?! His effect continues, though, as we have earned a point or more in every game that he has played this season (7-0-4).
tom webster Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I hate to do this, with my reputation as contrarian and all. But I call em like I em. That was too close to call. From the overhead angle, it's just not obvious enough. For those who say it was clearly this or that, it's just your emotions talking. Story of the night: Vanek has chance after chance and can't score, ends up -3. Crosby is invisible, gets one chance and wins the game. There's the difference between very good and great players. Fleury was outstanding. Miller was Miller. It's been almost one calendar year of this torture, going back to the Winter Classic. It's almost as worn out as my schtick. Crosby is 5'11", is standing on skates, is straining his body upward, his stick is parallel with his arm pits and somehow that all adds up to under 4 feet? As for Vanek/ Crosby, was Vanek great and Sid only good the last 9 games? You can't define greatness based on one game. All that being said, it has been one and a half years of this just under .500 team and its the same mistakes by the same players and the same selfish penalties.
SDS Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Crosby is 5'11", is standing on skates, is straining his body upward, his stick is parallel with his arm pits and somehow that all adds up to under 4 feet? 6'2" on skates.... Arm pits approximately 18" below the top of his head, puts his stick roughly 8" above the bar... QED
carpandean Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I'm starting to think that I have the Tallydman thing figured out or, at least, the Lydman part. Toni has played very well this year when paired with Rivet. Yes, some of it may have been Rivet covering for his mistakes, but I have another theory. When he plays with Rivet, he's plays on the left side. He's left-handed, so that's his natural position. When he plays with Tallinder, they are both left-handed, so he gets stuck on the right side. He made some very good plays today (one-on-one with Crosby, for example), but the pair still ended a -3. We have to do something to separate those two as soon as possible.
Stoner Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Crosby is 5'11", is standing on skates, is straining his body upward, his stick is parallel with his arm pits and somehow that all adds up to under 4 feet? As for Vanek/ Crosby, was Vanek great and Sid only good the last 9 games? You can't define greatness based on one game. All that being said, it has been one and a half years of this just under .500 team and its the same mistakes by the same players and the same selfish penalties. I think the vast majority of hockey fans would call Crosby a great player and Vanek a very good one. What's the difference between them? Skill? I doubt it. It's an intangible. It's scoring that goal on national TV in overtime in a fairly significant game on the road for your struggling team. If you can find a Vanek moment like that, let's hear it. As for the call, listen, they're not going to make it based on height calculations.
Stoner Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 6'2" on skates.... Arm pits approximately 18" below the top of his head, puts his stick roughly 8" above the bar... QED Was Crosby balancing a book on his head as a test of his posture? Hockey players crouch a little. Your eight inches just shrunk to one. Too close to call.
Guest Sloth Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Crosby never made a "swat" at the puck so the goal was legit? I always thought if a puck is put in w/ a high stick a goal will not be allowed no matter what the player is doing w/ his stick. Somebody pull out the NHL rule book and explain.
cilevel Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I think the vast majority of hockey fans would call Crosby a great player and Vanek a very good one. What's the difference between them? Skill? I doubt it. It's an intangible. It's scoring that goal on national TV in overtime in a fairly significant game on the road for your struggling team. If you can find a Vanek moment like that, let's hear it. As for the call, listen, they're not going to make it based on height calculations. I saw that and heard "grocery store carts..."
Foligno's Nose Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 After further review of the league standings...we are barely getting by. The home record really bothers me. There is no threat to the opposition to come in here and play. It will be unacceptable to miss the playoffs this year. Same mistakes, same talent... Vanek aside, there are no untouchables. Shuffle the deck Darcy. Plus Max should never see ice again. He did not necessarily hurt us tonight, but does not need to be a part of this team any longer. If our backs against the wall with injuries, like tonight, I'd rather see them dress Paetsch on the 4th line. We would get the same or more from a developing farm hand. Maxim's effort are almost entirely futile. I've been done with him for quite a while. Kotalik contributed tonight, but he is also on a short leash. Tallinder has been better than last year, but still not a significant force on the ice. We are not that deep in a hole, but now cannot afford to fall any further. This team is, again, barely getting by. Time for some adjustments.
SDS Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Was Crosby balancing a book on his head as a test of his posture? Hockey players crouch a little. Your eight inches just shrunk to one. Too close to call. Actually, he was nearly standing straight up (because the puck was soooo high in the air), his stick was angled upward, and he hit the puck probably at shoulder level... No it was clearly above the bar with a doubt in the world.
tom webster Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I think the vast majority of hockey fans would call Crosby a great player and Vanek a very good one. What's the difference between them? Skill? I doubt it. It's an intangible. It's scoring that goal on national TV in overtime in a fairly significant game on the road for your struggling team. If you can find a Vanek moment like that, let's hear it. As for the call, listen, they're not going to make it based on height calculations. Its called deductive logic, like when they called it a goal against the Islanders in the playoffs because they saw heading in to the net and saw it coming out but didn't see it in the net. As for Vanek, how about scoring a shootout goal against Ottawa when your team desparately needed to know they could beat them. Or how about scoring 4 of your team's 12 goals to turn a three game losing streak into a three game winning streak.
SDS Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I think the vast majority of hockey fans would call Crosby a great player and Vanek a very good one. What's the difference between them? Skill? I doubt it. It's an intangible. It's scoring that goal on national TV in overtime in a fairly significant game on the road for your struggling team. If you can find a Vanek moment like that, let's hear it. As for the call, listen, they're not going to make it based on height calculations. Not sure if it was home or away, but he he did have a hat trick in the final minutes of a game to pull out the win...
Crestwood Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I texted my buddy what happened at the end, and T9 thought "Crosby" should be "Armsaw." I can't decide if this has any hidden meaning.
Stoner Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Its called deductive logic, like when they called it a goal against the Islanders in the playoffs because they saw heading in to the net and saw it coming out but didn't see it in the net. As for Vanek, how about scoring a shootout goal against Ottawa when your team desparately needed to know they could beat them. Or how about scoring 4 of your team's 12 goals to turn a three game losing streak into a three game winning streak. OK, I'll give you Around the World. I'm not going to get baited into an argument where I'm taking sides against Vanek. The guy isn't Miro Satan. That's not what the question was. It was what makes a player great. The great ones score goals like Crosby did and Vanek did in college. He doesn't seem to have that knack in the pros. And Crosby does it all the time. He does nothing all night and it goes in. Vanek is out there rubbing two sticks together all night, getting nothing, and Crosby has a Zippo. It's something that's hard to analyze. Nothing against Thomas really. But he's goalless and in a bit of a funk since Lindy sat him in the third that night. I tried to record the game but ended up with nothing. Damn newfangled whatchamacallits! As soon as I get another look I'll reconsider the triangulation argument. The stick was back and to the left, back and to the left.
LabattBlue Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I know it's wishful thinking, but the Sabres could really use Connolly back in the lineup. :)
Stoner Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I saw that and heard "grocery store carts..." You lost me.
Crestwood Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 On another note, any news about Jochen? I missed Lindy's PC.
dietlbomb Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Why wasn't there a replay from ice level? Isn't there a goal line camera? This was driving me nuts. Their best shot was from center ice?
Stoner Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Actually, he was nearly standing straight up (because the puck was soooo high in the air), his stick was angled upward, and he hit the puck probably at shoulder level... No it was clearly above the bar with a doubt in the world. After seeing it again, I am starting to doubt your skills of perception. Crosby hits the puck about sternum high. It's way way too close to call. What's bugging me is -- what was the call on the ice?
inkman Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 I'm not going to bother reading back to the point of the OT goal but as PA said, it's too close to call. He made a great play, I have no problem losing like that.
inkman Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 hey another crosby circle jerk for the men in stripes, anybody else not surprised??? Didn't the Sabres have like 10 PP in a row? Lets look with a little objectivity please.
carpandean Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 Didn't the Sabres have like 10 PP in a row? Lets look with a little objectivity please. Yeah, it was Toronto's Crosby circle jerk. Get it straight! :nana:
SDS Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 After seeing it again, I am starting to doubt your skills of perception. Crosby hits the puck about sternum high. It's way way too close to call. What's bugging me is -- what was the call on the ice? well, I just made up the 8.6" part to be funny, but that puck was above the bar. :thumbsup:
Kevbeau Posted December 23, 2008 Report Posted December 23, 2008 The NHL rulebook states that the determination of whether it's over the crossbar is where the puck hits the stick. I agree with PA...the angles I saw are too close to call. What I don't know is what St. Pierre initially called on the ice. Best I can determine, he didn't cal lanything and decided to send it right upstairs and subsequently to Toronto.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.