tom webster Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Game-winning shootout goals count as goals in a player's stats (and other shootout goals don't)? Has it been this way since the shootout was implemented? Seems like a horrible way to track stats. Game winning shootout goals do not count on the official game winning goals. They only count in shootout stats.
Eleven Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Game winning shootout goals do not count on the official game winning goals. They only count in shootout stats. Good, that's what I thought. So the answer to carp's question is zero.
Foligno's Nose Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Is it justified for us to let #12 walk after this season given the consistency of his shootout talent alone? A real valuable commodity for a team who blows third period leads like tonight. He has to be in the top percentage of all-time NHL shootout stats. Right? And did anybody mention that he is money in the shootouts?...for a fourth time? Two points for the good guys! On to TB to extend our productive January. Then the unfortunate mistake of shutting down the season when they should be showcasing the game - en masse - this weekend instead of of staging an unwatchable exhibition game. Showcase actual games on these weekends when viewers may be looking for something to watch the weekend before and the weekend of the big game. All teams should be playing either Friday & Saturday, Saturday and Sunday, or Friday & Sunday. A full slate with scheduled, significant match-ups. Rivalries. HNIC could do their all-Canadian match-ups (maybe home & homes). It just seems like such a waste with no real games this weekend. Oh well. I'll get over it. Just another bad Bettman-led move. Every year by the league. Hockey in HD is fantastic. Don't they see that HD broadcasts alone may sell this game on it's own. Every game needs to be in HD. They need to make it happen. If you are going to have the all-star game - have it after the season.
Bmwolf21 Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Anyone else have an issue with Kotalik getting the shootout-deciding goal? With his goal only, the Panthers get to shoot again (their third shooter), but with Roy's added on, they don't. Roy's goal ended it. Honestly, in this case, it should be split 50/50. How many of Kotalik's 10 did he get this way? FWIW, I look at like Al's goal is the "GWG" and Roy's is the insurance marker.
bob_sauve28 Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Best miss I ever saw by Roy there. Ya, he messed that up....good!
NowDoYouBelieve Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Good, that's what I thought. So the answer to carp's question is zero. No, carp was referring to a different 10 goals. He was referring to Kotalik's newly set NHL record of 10 shootout deciding goal. It's just a coincidence that he currently has 9 regular goals this season.
carpandean Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Good, that's what I thought. So the answer to carp's question is zero. Sorry, the 10 that I was referring to is Kotalik's NHL record 10 shootout deciding goals, not his goals scored this season (none of those were from shootouts.) Edit: NowDoYouBelieve's got my back. :thumbsup: FWIW, I look at like Al's goal is the "GWG" and Roy's is the insurance marker. My problem with that is that Al's goal didn't win it. What if Florida's third shooter were to make it? Roy's goal gave the team the win, whereas an insurance goal doesn't technically do anything other than make you breath a little easier. At the end of the game, you could take away that insurance goal and the result would be the same, whereas the same can't be said of Derek's goal.
billsrcursed Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 This is one of those teams that always seems to "step up their game" against us, especially in their house. Should be entertaining. I expect some stout goaltending in this one. They have some pretty good talent, and match up against us nicely. I sure hope Nate steps up to the challenge, although as posted elsewhere by Deluca, his ice time won't mirror Teppo's. Butler should get the real chance here, and I for one would love to see him included on our power play. His slapper HAS to be better than Teppo's, right?? 3-2 Sabres Dude, who the hell deleted my "S/O" prediction along with my score???? :thumbsup:
NowDoYouBelieve Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 More than anything, the way that Ryan Miller has stepped up his game leads me to believe that the Sabres stand a good chance of shocking everybody if we can wheedle our way into the playoffs. I know he can be streaky, but he's been on his A-game for quite a while now (save for the first period against Dallas), and even the NHL's best team can be beaten in a 7 game series by a dominant goaltender. We just have to make sure we can find the back of the net with greater consistency. After all, the game we just watched could have easily been a shutout for Vokoun.
... Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Dude, who the hell deleted my "S/O" prediction along with my score???? :thumbsup: Yeah good call. Now go play Lotto. ;) Butler got just over 23 minutes tonight. I think I caught one oopsy from him. His passing is really solid. A stark contrast to Lydman, whose passing results in turnovers. Also, I'm slightly encouraged that I did not once notice Paetsch.
Foligno's Nose Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Yeah good call. Now go play Lotto. ;) Butler got just over 23 minutes tonight. I think I caught one oopsy from him. His passing is really solid. A stark contrast to Lydman, whose passing results in turnovers. Also, I'm slightly encouraged that I did not once notice Paetsch. Only 11 shifts and 8:32 - all even strength. Understandable for someone who has not played in a month, but, he's a vet now. He could have easily gotten minutes commensurate with the rest of the D. On the plus side, Butler continues to solidify his place with the big boys. More incentive for Darcy to unload Tallinder at the deadline.
jwcolour Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Edit: NowDoYouBelieve's got my back. :thumbsup: My problem with that is that Al's goal didn't win it. What if Florida's third shooter were to make it? Roy's goal gave the team the win, whereas an insurance goal doesn't technically do anything other than make you breath a little easier. At the end of the game, you could take away that insurance goal and the result would be the same, whereas the same can't be said of Derek's goal. Its still the GWG. Its like if Ales had scored in the 1st period to go up 1-0 and then Roy scores after him to go up 2-0, if the other team doesn't put a goal up on the board in any period, Ales still has the GWG, you can't just give it Roy based on a "what if this happened", because it didn't happen. You can't argue "what ifs" only "what did happens". I know what you mean with Roy's goal "sealing the deal" but the game winning goal stat has always gone this way. Who cares anyway? Its like he bosses for us in every shootout and people still want to ride the guy. I'm just happy we got the points though it would've been nice to keep the panthers from getting anything.
jwcolour Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 I don't care who is on the point as long as they can hit the net with their shots instead of blasting it right into the PK'ers legs or completely missing the net. It doesn't need to be a blistering slapshot, hell Jason Woolley was extremely effective (offensively) by simply wristing it through the traffic in front. Quoting myself here but it still bothers me that we can't get the puck to the net from the point, today was a bit better I guess because 2 goals kind of came from this sort of. Vaneks after the puck got through and Timmy's pure luck goal after (im not sure who) walked it up (not really from the point but atleast a Dman jumping in) and blasted it. Powerplay looked crummy.
JohnRobertEichel Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Is it justified for us to let #12 walk after this season given the consistency of his shootout talent alone?A real valuable commodity for a team who blows third period leads like tonight. He has to be in the top percentage of all-time NHL shootout stats. Right? And did anybody mention that he is money in the shootouts?...for a fourth time? No it is not. Kotalik is a quality 2nd scoring line right winger and a regular season shootout stud. He should be an offseason priority. And I bet he is. The only people that hate Kotalik are the usual suspects on this message board who want any Sabre player with 2 consecutive bad games cut or traded.
JujuFish Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 My problem with that is that Al's goal didn't win it. What if Florida's third shooter were to make it? Roy's goal gave the team the win, whereas an insurance goal doesn't technically do anything other than make you breath a little easier. At the end of the game, you could take away that insurance goal and the result would be the same, whereas the same can't be said of Derek's goal. Except that Al's goal DID win it. What if Al didn't score? Then Florida would have shot a third time and what if he made it? At best, Roy would not have the GWG and at worst, Buffalo would not have even won. The fact of the matter is that Florida scored 0 goals in the shootout so the 0+1 goal is the game winner. That belongs to Ales.
Bmwolf21 Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 My problem with that is that Al's goal didn't win it. What if Florida's third shooter were to make it? Roy's goal gave the team the win, whereas an insurance goal doesn't technically do anything other than make you breath a little easier. At the end of the game, you could take away that insurance goal and the result would be the same, whereas the same can't be said of Derek's goal. I disagree. While Roy's goal sealed the win, much like an empty-netter, it was not the goal that was the deciding margin of victory. By that measure Ales' goal, by virtue of being the first goal scored by a Sabre versus none for the Panthers, is the game-deciding goal. Playing "what if" doesn't change anything. Besides- it's the NHL's version of a carnival game to decide who the winner is. The same rules don't apply.
Two or less Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 No it is not. Kotalik is a quality 2nd scoring line right winger and a regular season shootout stud. He should be an offseason priority. And I bet he is. The only people that hate Kotalik are the usual suspects on this message board who want any Sabre player with 2 consecutive bad games cut or traded. It depends on how much money he will be demanding. I have no problem of letting him walk and get another player for this offense. Signing a player because he leads the league in career shootout goals is pointless IMO. Kotalik does play lazy at times. He only has 9 goals this season. He makes $2.5 million which is what he is worth IMO, but he'll be asking for $3.5-4 million. If that's the case, see you later. Bring in a guy for the same pay who will net 20-25 goals. And in the shootout, Stafford is pretty good too. Thomas Vanek, Tim Connolly, Derek Roy and Nate Gerbe could all be solid shooters. Besides, we have the edge on almost all teams in the shootouts and it's not because of the guys who shoot, it's Ryan Miller. When he's on his game, he's unbelievable.
shrader Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 I disagree. While Roy's goal sealed the win, much like an empty-netter, it was not the goal that was the deciding margin of victory. By that measure Ales' goal, by virtue of being the first goal scored by a Sabre versus none for the Panthers, is the game-deciding goal. Playing "what if" doesn't change anything. Besides- it's the NHL's version of a carnival game to decide who the winner is. The same rules don't apply. But fans like the shootout. :rolleyes: Maybe someday everyone won't have to pander to the American Idol watching public.
Bmwolf21 Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 But fans like the shootout. :rolleyes: Maybe someday everyone won't have to pander to the American Idol watching public. Yep. The shootout belongs in the Skills Competition at the All-Star game, not at the end of regular-season games impacting playoff races. (Don't get me started on the PC "everybody wins" crap of awarding the losers a point just for playing hard and not losing in regulation.)
NowDoYouBelieve Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Yep. The shootout belongs in the Skills Competition at the All-Star game, not at the end of regular-season games impacting playoff races. (Don't get me started on the PC "everybody wins" crap of awarding the losers a point just for playing hard and not losing in regulation.) My biggest problem with the whole "overtime loss" thing is the most obvious one. 3 points are awarded instead of 2 just because the teams couldnt decide the game in 60 minutes. If the NHL insists on having overtime losses, it has to work the other way too. Overtime wins should be worth 2 points and regulation wins worth 3. Clearly, the league has judged an overtime loss to be superior to a regulation loss, so an overtime win must be inferior to a regulation win. Theoretically, a team could lose all of its games and finish .500. It's simply not right.
Doohicksie Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 What the hell corp. I came on here this am and saw no GDT. I come back about 9 pm tonight and I see a game is on. I missed the 1st and 2nd and part of the third. This is unacceptable. Learn how to follow your team. KNOW WHEN THEY PLAY. Reading a schedule isn't that hard, you know.
Doohicksie Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Anyone else have an issue with Kotalik getting the shootout-deciding goal? With his goal only, the Panthers get to shoot again (their third shooter), but with Roy's added on, they don't. Roy's goal ended it. Honestly, in this case, it should be split 50/50. How many of Kotalik's 10 did he get this way? Not at all. JUST WIN BABY. The rest is just stats.
Doohicksie Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 I'm really glad I'm listening to this on the radio and didn't have to watch Miller make saves without a stick. When I watched it live I didn't realize he had no stick. He was moving around in the crease and making saves like nothing. Then they pointed out he had no stick and I was all OMGWTFBBQMILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLER!!!!!!
Doohicksie Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 My biggest problem with the whole "overtime loss" thing is the most obvious one. 3 points are awarded instead of 2 just because the teams couldnt decide the game in 60 minutes. If the NHL insists on having overtime losses, it has to work the other way too. Overtime wins should be worth 2 points and regulation wins worth 3. Clearly, the league has judged an overtime loss to be superior to a regulation loss, so an overtime win must be inferior to a regulation win. There is no Law of Conservation of Game Points in hockey. Silly rabbit.
NowDoYouBelieve Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 When I watched it live I didn't realize he had no stick. He was moving around in the crease and making saves like nothing. Then they pointed out he had no stick and I was all OMGWTFBBQMILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLER!!!!!! oh my god, what the f*ck barbeque...i like that :thumbsup:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.