shrader Posted March 5, 2019 Report Posted March 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Doohickie said: In the old days we would have called that a beautiful hit, ref: Campbell on Umberger. They're only similar in that the head was the primary point of contact. The human missile aspect of that ASU hit takes it to a whole new level. Go back and watch the Campbell hit, he stays on the same exact plane throughout the whole hit. The results of Campbell/Umberger were unfortunate, but I have a hard time lumping that one in with something blatantly illegal like this one. I'm not so sure that, even today, that hit would get a penalty in the NHL. I may need to re-educate myself on the NHL definition of blindside, but Campbell comes in parallel to the direction Umberger is skating. It's used too often, but there are cases where the skater does need to be aware of his surroundings. And as for college, the Campbell hit would have been a penalty back then. They've had strict contact to the head rules for a long time now. I forget when they started up on it (you know, due to the haziness of being in my mid-20s when that hit happened), but I'm pretty sure those rules pre-date that hit. But anyway, anytime a the hitter goes flying like this kid did, it's a huge red flag. That is not in any way natural. 2
shrader Posted March 5, 2019 Report Posted March 5, 2019 I just saw this story on TSN where Columbus' GM proposed one minute penalties in OT. I'd sign up for that one. I've always felt like things should be scaled to the shortened length of time in OT. You'd probably see a few more calls made since the refs might not feel like they're deciding the game themselves by making a call. I'd pair it with extending the OT to 10 minutes. One other OT thing that I'd love to see and seems like a natural is that if you are in the penalty box at the end of OT, you should not be eligible for the shootout. Particularly in the final seconds of OT, you are pretty much free to mug someone in your own end with essentially no punishment. 2
Doohicksie Posted March 5, 2019 Report Posted March 5, 2019 I'm not sure about the 1 minute penalty but I wouldn't dismiss the idea out of hand. Once they went to 3-on-3 they jumped the shark anyway, so further modifying the rules doesn't necessarily "ruin the game." I like the thought that officials would be more inclined to call penalties.
shrader Posted March 5, 2019 Report Posted March 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Doohickie said: I'm not sure about the 1 minute penalty but I wouldn't dismiss the idea out of hand. Once they went to 3-on-3 they jumped the shark anyway, so further modifying the rules doesn't necessarily "ruin the game." I like the thought that officials would be more inclined to call penalties. I'd say the shark was jumped with the shootout. It's a plague against humanity that I would gladly be rid of. Is it obvious enough that i hate shootouts? 3 1
Doohicksie Posted March 5, 2019 Report Posted March 5, 2019 Bring back kissing your sister! (i.e., the game that ends in a tie) 1 1
nucci Posted March 5, 2019 Report Posted March 5, 2019 2 hours ago, shrader said: I'd say the shark was jumped with the shootout. It's a plague against humanity that I would gladly be rid of. Is it obvious enough that i hate shootouts? you're not alone 1 2
... Posted March 6, 2019 Report Posted March 6, 2019 The second of a home and home betwixt The Wild and The Predators and it's a doozy. These guys are playing play-off hockey now.
MakeSabresGrr8Again Posted March 6, 2019 Report Posted March 6, 2019 17 minutes ago, ... said: The second of a home and home betwixt The Wild and The Predators and it's a doozy. These guys are playing play-off hockey now. What's that??
SABRES 0311 Posted March 6, 2019 Report Posted March 6, 2019 All about 10 minute OT but keep the two minute penalty. Shootouts are fun to watch but they seem wrong at the same time.
Ducky Posted March 7, 2019 Report Posted March 7, 2019 the idea of 3 on 3 was to stay away from shootouts so I really don't think they are going to change the penalty to 1 minute.
IKnowPhysics Posted March 7, 2019 Report Posted March 7, 2019 LeBrun pontificates in the Athletic today that teams could try to trade with Las Vegas to circumnavigate the Seattle expansion draft rules. Bill Daly denied it as a possibility, saying teams "won't," but didn't specify how the league c/would stop them. LV is not participating in the Seattle expansion. As a result, LV does not get a share of the $650M Seattle expansion fee. This was unanimously agreed upon by teams, who stood to gain ~$700k each by allowing LV to skip the SEA expansion and splitting the $650M fee among 30 teams (not 31). Interesting economic trade.
Eleven Posted March 7, 2019 Report Posted March 7, 2019 11 hours ago, IKnowPhysics said: LeBrun pontificates in the Athletic today that teams could try to trade with Las Vegas to circumnavigate the Seattle expansion draft rules. Bill Daly denied it as a possibility, saying teams "won't," but didn't specify how the league c/would stop them. LV is not participating in the Seattle expansion. As a result, LV does not get a share of the $650M Seattle expansion fee. This was unanimously agreed upon by teams, who stood to gain ~$700k each by allowing LV to skip the SEA expansion and splitting the $650M fee among 30 teams (not 31). Interesting economic trade. ~$22M to not lose one player.
shrader Posted March 7, 2019 Report Posted March 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Eleven said: ~$22M to not lose one player. Maybe the Pegulas can gain $110-132 million and lose 5 or 6 players. 2 3
Mustache of God Posted March 7, 2019 Report Posted March 7, 2019 4 hours ago, shrader said: Maybe the Pegulas can gain $110-132 million and lose 5 or 6 players. I'm just hoping Seattle will take Moulson off our hands. That's how the expansion draft works, right? /s
North Buffalo Posted March 8, 2019 Report Posted March 8, 2019 Buffalo is 20 in goals scored and 23 in goals allowed... Pretty much right where they are at in the standings...21st
Stoner Posted March 9, 2019 Report Posted March 9, 2019 (edited) On 3/8/2019 at 7:03 AM, North Buffalo said: Buffalo is 20 in goals scored and 23 in goals allowed... Pretty much right where they are at in the standings...21st GA-wise, it's been a tale of two seasons. Through 40 games, they had allowed 109 goals (I'm not counting the goal-against assigned for an overtime/shootout loss). Had that pace been maintained, they'd be sitting in about sixth place for best GAA. But right after the New Year, things went south. Bigly. They've allowed 108 goals in the last 27 games. Think about that. Almost the same number of goals they allowed in the first 40 games, but in 13 games fewer. The pace they've been on in those 27 games, over the course of a full season, would put them very near if not at the bottom of the GAA rankings. Edited March 9, 2019 by PASabreFan 1
Wyldnwoody44 Posted March 9, 2019 Report Posted March 9, 2019 33 minutes ago, PASabreFan said: GA-wise, it's been a tale of two seasons. Through 40 games, they had allowed 109 goals (I'm not counting the goal-against assigned for an overtime/shootout loss). Had that pace been maintained, they'd be sitting in about sixth place for best GAA. But right after the New Year, things went south. Bigly. They've allowed 108 goals in the last 27 games. Think about that. Almost the same number of goals they allowed in the first 40 games, but in 13 games fewer. The pace they've been on in those 27 games, over the course of a full season, would put them very near if not at the bottom of the GAA rankings. Do you think other teams starting figuring us out, started playing harder for playoff push...... Or we just started sucking more? The goaltending hasn't helped, but the defense has clearly fallen off, so I find it hard to blame the keepers completely 1
Stoner Posted March 9, 2019 Report Posted March 9, 2019 (edited) 59 minutes ago, Wyldnwoody44 said: Do you think other teams starting figuring us out, started playing harder for playoff push...... Or we just started sucking more? The goaltending hasn't helped, but the defense has clearly fallen off, so I find it hard to blame the keepers completely If I knew the answer, I wouldn't be here, I'd have a job in the NHL. One thing I keep thinking back to is how Phil, not long after the streak ended, started preaching about how tight the games were going to get, how tough it would be to score, how they'd start to see other teams' best, etc. It's almost like he wanted to say it during the streak, but couldn't, and then pretty much the first chance he got, when the team was starting to lose, he unleashed it. I've wondered if it talked the team into not believing in itself. Botterill has said basically the same thing about knowing that the streak was essentially an illusion. I don't think that answers the question of the defensive collapse. I've pointed out the cosmic issues that seemed to be released when Hutton gave up that squirrelly penalty shot goal at home against Florida in December. A succession of totally bizarre goals have been allowed since then, continuing on into the latest game in Chicago. In terms of when the goals really started piling up, it was a few weeks later, just before the road trip out west. They gave up six goals the first three games of 2019, then 16 the next three and they were down the rabbit hole from there. A flip was switched (I'll leave that, because it's hilarious, but, man, dementia is setting in HARD). Edited March 9, 2019 by PASabreFan
dudacek Posted March 9, 2019 Report Posted March 9, 2019 (edited) I think about the first Edmonton game that turned into a blowout, after we completely outplayed them in first only to allow three complety random goals in almost as many shots, and the game in Carolina, where every goal against came off a lucky bounce. I think we allowed 12 goals in those two games without the goalies or the defence completely sucking, or really being at fault. Thats just hockey, but it seems like it happened just enough over a short enough period of time that doubt crept in to what had been a pretty consistent bunch prior to Christmas. Both the defence and goalies seemed to start second guessing themselves and things just snowballed. Phil has them convinced early on that if they kept playing the same way, things would generally go their way. I don’t think they believe that any more. It’s not a good psychological place to be, when the talent level is mediocre to begin with. Edited March 9, 2019 by dudacek 2
Brawndo Posted March 10, 2019 Report Posted March 10, 2019 Quinn Hughes signs his 3 year ELC with the Canucks
TrueBlueGED Posted March 12, 2019 Report Posted March 12, 2019 12 hours ago, PASabreFan said: Brawndo's nickname: The Sentinel Approved.
Hoss Posted March 12, 2019 Report Posted March 12, 2019 Morgan Rielly yells homophonic slur at ref: https://streamable.com/degx4
apuszczalowski Posted March 12, 2019 Report Posted March 12, 2019 9 hours ago, Hoss said: Morgan Rielly yells homophonic slur at ref: https://streamable.com/degx4 The news just says that the NHL will be investigating the alleged use of a homophobic slur during the Leafs/Lightning game but wouldnt say who or even what team the player was on that used it. Makes sense that it would be a Leaf and they would be trying to deflect from that.
Recommended Posts