SwampD Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 Of all the reasons that I have for the Sabres' early exit from the playoffs last year, Ryan Miller isn't one of them. He wasn't tired. He wasn't unfocused. He wasn't too light to do the job. He was fine. If our "#1" center could have managed to get just one goal, we probably go to seven games. If our "#1" and "#1A" centers could have managed to get just 1 goal each, we probably win the series.
Stoner Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 I'm not sure where you're going with the first line. If it's headed towards the net, it's a shot. Intent doesn't matter. I can see how there might be some subjectivity in crediting a player with a shot, but from the goalie's point of view, that doesn't matter. And now that you mention those official stats (if there are official scoring chance stats), I've seen all sorts of official stats sheets from college games and I definitely have never seen that one shared. The shot charts they keep are really cool, but there's nothing on it that could possibly designate a "scoring chance". I don't know where the scoring chance totals come from. I've always figured someone on the broadcast team kept them. But I know the team also keeps it. Here's something from nhl.com on SOG: Shot on Goal If a player shoots the puck with the intention of scoring and if that shot would have gone in the net had the goaltender not stopped it, the shot is recorded as a "shot on goal". http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/go_figure.html ---- So if a player fires the puck all the way down the ice on goal, it's usually not going to be recorded as a shot on goal.
R_Dudley Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 I'm just surprised no one has resurrected the uneven eyebrow theory. So allow me; Did you see that honey he was dating last year. Let me just say wow, raised an eyebrow with me. So given his pre-condition I think he raised one to many eyebrows, said another way he wasted his stamina a little too much at home instead of saving it for the rink. Get him a room at the Monastery between games and don't let him out on the road. Oh and yes goes w/o saying keep the SGM's away from him also. Problem solved play him as much as you like.. you can thank me later.
X. Benedict Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 I'm just surprised no one has resurrected the uneven eyebrow theory. So allow me; Did you see that honey he was dating last year. Let me just say wow, raised an eyebrow with me. So given his pre-condition I think he raised one to many eyebrows, said another way he wasted his stamina a little too much at home instead of saving it for the rink. Get him a room at the Monastery between games and don't let him out on the road. Oh and yes goes w/o saying keep the SGM's away from him also. Problem solved play him as much as you like.. you can thank me later. If he shaved them brows like Bob Geldof in the Wall..WE WIN THE CUP!
shrader Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 I don't know where the scoring chance totals come from. I've always figured someone on the broadcast team kept them. But I know the team also keeps it. Here's something from nhl.com on SOG: Shot on Goal If a player shoots the puck with the intention of scoring and if that shot would have gone in the net had the goaltender not stopped it, the shot is recorded as a "shot on goal". http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/go_figure.html ---- So if a player fires the puck all the way down the ice on goal, it's usually not going to be recorded as a shot on goal. I always thought it was written in that the shot had to come from inside the red line in order to be counted. The one obvious exception to that would be a shot from the other half of the rink that wound up in the net. There's something not right about that definition though. Any kind of fluke goal where a centering pass is deflected and winds up in the net doesn't qualify as a shot by that standard, but clearly there has to be a shot when a goal is scored. This is a fun thread hijack by the way.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 Of all the reasons that I have for the Sabres' early exit from the playoffs last year, Ryan Miller isn't one of them. He wasn't tired. He wasn't unfocused. He wasn't too light to do the job. He was fine. If our "#1" center could have managed to get just one goal, we probably go to seven games. If our "#1" and "#1A" centers could have managed to get just 1 goal each, we probably win the series. If they won the series.....there would be another 12-21 games in the next 4-6 weeks. See where we're going here?
Kristian Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 An NHL goalie needs power and endurance for his skillset. As competitions are piled on over time, the recovery rate for the bigger, as conditioned athlete, to his peak performance ability...comes much faster than for the smaller athlete. This is FACT. But that wasn't what I was argueing - I was argueing that people automatically think you have no endurance or staying power if you're skinny - It's quite the opposite, due to simple math. You carry less weight. THIS is fact. To reach your best level of performance though, it becomes a tradeoff between weight to power ratio, i.e. at what point does your body become effective enough to perform and recover the way you want it to vs. at what point does the increased muscle mass become a liability in terms of weight. Which again is why I'm saying, if Ryan starts out in great shape and deteriorates over a long season, IMHO it's due to one of two things : 1. He's just not cut out for playing all those games. This could just as easily be due to mental fatigue. 2. He's not following a strict enough diet that allows him remain in game shape throughout the season (the skinnier you are, the more important this becomes, and unless you're 110% committed to this diet, you'll be paying for it immediately. A guy like Brodeur probably doesn't have this problem due to his build, but in recent years his age has started to show late in the season and who knows if it's due to the extra weight he carries around?). As I ALSO stated, I won't presume to know if Ryan can't become better by bulking up a little, I don't know enough about the goaltending position to comment on this, so you're quite possibly right. But to say "the reason he can't play 70 games is because he's skinny" is only guesswork at best. For all we know his decline in performance might just as well be due to mental stress, which in turn translates into physical fatigue in no time. Personally, what I think hurts Ryan in the long haul, is when Ruff plays him 3 games in four nights and in back-to-backs in general.
Calvin Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 One question I had about Miller last season was whether he'd play like a man whose hair is on fire to start the season, then tail off. And that's basically what happened. Why it happened that way is open to debate, as always. I think the answer is pretty obvious. Now, Tuukka Rask, who had better numbers than Miller last season, sort of went in the other direction. He even outplayed Miller by a nose in the playoffs. That is blatantly inaccurate. Rask actually peaked towards the end of the season, stayed on that high in the Sabres series and then went downhill after that. Questions were asked of his lack of durability in the playoffs, considering he had the Olympics break, as well as his abilities playing in a defense-oriented system. Don't forget the momentous Game 4 against the Flyers, and the three games after that. That being said, if Enroth was as good as Rask, I would gladly put him on the squad, send Lalime to La-La-land, play Miller about 55-60 games and then ride both goalies all the way to the Cup!
Calvin Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 As I ALSO stated, I won't presume to know if Ryan can't become better by bulking up a little, I don't know enough about the goaltending position to comment on this, so you're quite possibly right. But to say "the reason he can't play 70 games is because he's skinny" is only guesswork at best. For all we know his decline in performance might just as well be due to mental stress, which in turn translates into physical fatigue in no time. Adding a bit of upper body bulk would definitely help cover some more surface area across the net for sure - where Brodeur really narrows the angles by just facing up to the shooter, Miller has to do more work by moving, leading to his propensity to concede goals on snap shots before he has set up.
R_Dudley Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 If he shaved them brows like Bob Geldof in the Wall..WE WIN THE CUP! :lol: , nice. OT but since you brought it up I saw Roger Waters a little over a week ago doing the Wall 3 here and it was an excellant show and he is is still in very good voice for an old guy. If you get a chance to see him on this tour it was well worth it.
Sabre Dance Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 If anyone thinks that Miller's performance alone will win/lose the Stanley Cup, they're barking up the wrong goalpost. TEAM! Hockey is a team sport! Last season, the Flyers had an up-and-down regular season but turned on the afterburners in the playoffs and darn near won the thing with mediocre goaltending. Miller can stand on his head for all 82 regular season games and every playoff game, but if the team in front of him plays like garbage, they're not going to win anything. (Well, Miller might get another Vezina).
Bmwolf21 Posted October 5, 2010 Report Posted October 5, 2010 Like I said, there are those employed in the highest offices of sports that don't understand this. I remember Wolfie (where have you been man?) and I breaking this down in detail in a previous thread showing how goalies that were sub 190lbs and had two hands full of Cup rings between them, had their worst playoff performances when worked at the 70+ game level. There are also plenty of examples of goalies with slighter builds that have won Cups, but they all played in the 40-65 game range. You rang?
nfreeman Posted October 6, 2010 Report Posted October 6, 2010 You rang? Hallelujah, and about time, too. Hockey season is here!
Bmwolf21 Posted October 6, 2010 Report Posted October 6, 2010 Hallelujah, and about time, too. Hockey season is here! Thanks, glad to be back (sort of back, anyway). Been a busy, crazy summer and ready for the puck to drop.
Kristian Posted October 6, 2010 Report Posted October 6, 2010 If anyone thinks that Miller's performance alone will win/lose the Stanley Cup, they're barking up the wrong goalpost. TEAM! Hockey is a team sport! Last season, the Flyers had an up-and-down regular season but turned on the afterburners in the playoffs and darn near won the thing with mediocre goaltending. Miller can stand on his head for all 82 regular season games and every playoff game, but if the team in front of him plays like garbage, they're not going to win anything. (Well, Miller might get another Vezina). In short, the 09-10 season?
That Aud Smell Posted October 6, 2010 Report Posted October 6, 2010 no time to read through the thread (sorry), but i did want to say: saw this ad, and thought it was cool as hell.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.