NHL 2012 - 2013

[WayAbvPar]

Thugging it up is directly counterproductive to the power play, so it suffers.

[Shannow]

Thugging it up is directly counterproductive to the power play, so it suffers.

Canucks fan?

[Speedy Cerviche]

I know very little about the Bruins. Is he subscribing to an 'effort trumps skill on the powerplay' newsletter?

Seems like that could be a reason. Five guys still have to outwork four. When they don't, it's pretty sad.

Really who the hell knows.  You Definately can't fault this bruins team for effort. There are no slackers on this team, even Seguin back checks, penalty kill is amongst leagues best. I  sometimes wonder if their commitment to team defense and the fact they are so good 5 on 5 means tyeh don't pay so much attention to the power play to not screw things up......or something cause it's not like they don't have the players to pull it off.

The problem is Chara he just is not that good on the PP and too much is run through him. He doesn't have the quick vision and creative playmaking to open up the ice. Also his shot is very heavy but not all that accurate. They should get a PP specialist or maybe put a guy like Krecje on the point.

[Shannow]

I know very little about the Bruins. Is he subscribing to an 'effort trumps skill on the powerplay' newsletter?

Seems like that could be a reason. Five guys still have to outwork four. When they don't, it's pretty sad.

Really who the hell knows.  You Definately can't fault this bruins team for effort. There are no slackers on this team, even Seguin back checks, penalty kill is amongst leagues best. I  sometimes wonder if their commitment to team defense and the fact they are so good 5 on 5 means tyeh don't pay so much attention to the power play to not screw things up......or something cause it's not like they don't have the players to pull it off.

The problem is Chara he just is not that good on the PP and too much is run through him. He doesn't have the quick vision and creative playmaking to open up the ice. Also his shot is very heavy but not all that accurate. They should get a PP specialist or maybe put a guy like Krecje on the point.

Heh, smart man. In the last two games they've had Krejci at the point and/or put Dougie "assists" Hamilton at Chara's spot. You're right, Chara is just not the right guy for PP, everything else yes but not power play work.

[murdoc]

[Shannow]

Teams who blow 3 goal leads in the 3rd period don't deserve 2 points because they can win a skills contest. I'm looking at you Rangers and Canadiens.

Also to show I'm not biased I don't think the Bruins should've got 2 points if they'd won the shootout, they played like shit at times in that game.

I used to not care about the shootout but I'm starting to realise why people despise it...what's wrong with a good tie?

[Paelos]

I used to not care about the shootout but I'm starting to realise why people despise it...what's wrong with a good tie?

Ties are terrible. Only the NFL still has them, and even that's rare. I think hockey should give up the shootout and just go with the playoff OT rules all the time. Basketball does it, baseball does it, you play until somebody wins.

[Shannow]

There's probably some logistical reasons that make that not a good idea plus look at the frequency of scoring in basketball or baseball vs hockey. By their nature an overtime/extra innings game won't last that long (typically) because scores happen more often in those games.

I don't think after an OT period and 60 minutes of fun hockey that anyone who watched the Rangers Bruins game would've been dissapointed that it ended in a tie.

 

[Paelos]

Baseball games routinely go deep into extras during the regular season, and there are twice as many games as hockey. We just had a college basketball game go 5 OTs this month. They play until it's decided. That's sport.

The reason people hate ties is because normal life is full of ties and compromises. Sport is supposed to be one of the places where you invest your time to get a definitive answer. A binary result. Win or loss, you proved something by playing the game. A tie proves nothing except that you got tired of playing and quit.

[HaemishM]

There's not a goddamn thing wrong with a tie.

[Shannow]

Hockey did just fine with ties for 80+ years. One of the problems is that most Hockey teams share their building with a basketball team, and so it simply may be impractical to allow an overtime game to go forever. I know we had a 5 OT game in basketball and sometimes we get 18 inning baseball games but those are very rare.

Actually I'm not all against the idea cause I'm really coming around to hating the shootout but I'm not sure if I like the idea of endless overtime in the regular season. Almost like it's special to playoff hockey and I don't want to dilute that by bringing it into the rest of the season.

Also your hatred of ties is a little overwrought and has the undertones of 'We americans love a winner , only European soccer weanies love ties!'. Again would anyone have been dissapointed with that game last night ending in a tie? Super exciting game, late heroics and at end of the day its regular season not playoffs.

[Paelos]

Americans do love a winner. The reason hockey got rid of ties is because the American audience hated them.

Don't drag soccer into this because it's a different ball of wax. I played it for 15 years at all levels except pro, and I still think ties are for pussy diving forwards who just want to get home faster.

[Shannow]

Americans do love a winner. The reason hockey got rid of ties is because the American audience hated them.

Don't drag soccer into this because it's a different ball of wax. I played it for 15 years at all levels except pro, and I still think ties are for pussy diving forwards who just want to get home faster.

The NHL has a fairly atrocious knowledge of what the American audience wants (I give you the Florida Panthers!). I don't think Hockey's somewhat resurgance had anything to do with getting rid of ties but more to do with slowly improving the television product and getting rid of a lot of the clutching and grabbing and some rules changes to open up the game. People want an exciting game, a tie can be just as meaningful as a win or loss especially towards the end of the season. I know as a Bruins fan I was super excited to get one point of that Raskbacle last night.


Oh and pussy diving forwards? Oxymoron.

[Fordel]

The NHL got rid of ties because the extra OT in the regular season became 10 mins of pass the puck back and forth, since neither team would risk losing their 1 point at that stage of the game.

[Paelos]

The NHL got rid of ties because the extra OT in the regular season became 10 mins of pass the puck back and forth, since neither team would risk losing their 1 point at that stage of the game.

Yep, they were playing for the tie. Which is ridiculous. And if you didn't have OT, you'd have them doing it 5m left in the 3rd period. Conservatism would rule the day, and the sport would look like total ass in the later stages of games.

Ties suck.

[Shannow]

The NHL got rid of ties because the extra OT in the regular season became 10 mins of pass the puck back and forth, since neither team would risk losing their 1 point at that stage of the game.

You are correct in that. Here is my half-baked proposal:

One over time period of say 10 or 20 minutes (instead of 5 we have right now). NO penalty shoot-out. If you lose in OT you still get 1 point , 2 if you win, and maybe to sweeten the pot OT wins could have some tie-breaking ability for playoff seedings/qualifications.

Teams would go balls out for that 10-20 minutes so even if you didn't get a result it still would be damn exciting hockey to watch leaving fans happy.

(I also think unlimited overtimes in the regular season would probably be nixed by the players. Hockey, unlike baseball and basketball (ever watched the end of a basketball game? what. a. fucking. joke.) is extremely taxing on its players fitness.

[Paelos]

Your analysis of basketball OT not being taxing is frankly laughable. Not to mention the fact that hockey lines get subbed out constantly. In a 48 minute NBA game, a star scorer like Kevin Durant is averaging 38 minutes up and down the court. Same with Kobe.

In hockey? What's Crosby putting out there? 20 minutes maybe of ice time in 60 total? Give me a break.

[Bunk]

Basketball is certainly an athletic game, but there is a reason hockey is played in constantly rotating shifts. Basketball is often played half court, has somewhat limited physical contact (nothing like hockey scrums), and isn't played in full pads. There's a reason Durant can play 30 minutes straight.

Also, end of a hockey game - maybe a single 30 second timeout. End of a basketball game - 6 timeouts called over the last 42 seconds on the clock? (I'm not hating on basketball here, I just find watching the end of a close NBA game very painful).

The issue quite simply is that you can't just play to a winner, because some hockey games will last 6 hours. Once you start hitting period five, the players are so bagged that there's almost no offence. At that point they just slog through until there's a bad bounce.

[Shannow]

Your analysis of basketball OT not being taxing is frankly laughable. Not to mention the fact that hockey lines get subbed out constantly. In a 48 minute NBA game, a star scorer like Kevin Durant is averaging 38 minutes up and down the court. Same with Kobe.

In hockey? What's Crosby putting out there? 20 minutes maybe of ice time in 60 total? Give me a break.

Ok now I think your just trolling me. Compare a hockey shift vs basketball time, where half to 3/4 of it is spent standing around in the half-court (and on a smaller playing surface btw). The other point I was making was look at the end of a basketball game and the ridicolous number of time-outs that are taken that slow the game to a crawl, giving players a break from all that 'running'.  Hockey, unless there is a whistle , is constant skating, there's a reason a shift only last a cpl of minutes...it's fucking exhausting.
I'd also like to see statistics on how many times a basketball or baseball game go into overtime/extra innings vs a hockey game. I'm betting hockey has a lot more overtime games than baseball or basketball due to less scoring frequency.

[Ingmar]

Watch any team on the 3rd night of a back to back to back and try and tell me that basketball isn't taxing. 

[Fordel]

Relative to hockey in that same situation?

/shrug

[WayAbvPar]

Hockey is so taxing that they don't allow 3 in 3, at least at the pro level. The poor kids in junior do it all the time though.

[Ginaz]

This makes me hope the Panthers score a lot of goals this year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS8z0QZzazw

[Paelos]

Holy crap I'm crying laughing at that.

[WayAbvPar]

This makes me hope the Panthers score a lot of goals this year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS8z0QZzazw

Haha that was awesome.

[Shannow]

Glorious!   

[Paelos]

There's like 3 more and they are all awesome. My favorite of them all is when he just yells out  MIKE BIBBY BE FLOPPIN!

[Speedy Cerviche]

The NHL should switch to 3 points awarded per regulation or OT win (0 for loser) , and 2 points for shootout win (1 for loser). 3 points would mean teams playing hard until last second of OT.

[WayAbvPar]

The NHL should switch to 3 points awarded per regulation or OT win (0 for loser) , and 2 points for shootout win (1 for loser). 3 points would mean teams playing hard until last second of OT.

Agreed. I have been saying this since they instituted the shutout.

[Ceryse]

The NHL should switch to 3 points awarded per regulation or OT win (0 for loser) , and 2 points for shootout win (1 for loser). 3 points would mean teams playing hard until last second of OT.

Won't happen. Not with the GMs/Owners of Detroit, Philly, Toronto, Rangers and Chicago all against it. Those are the big ones who have favoured the current system heavily. Hasn't helped that Detroit's coach (Babcock) came out heavily in favour of the current system when he was asked about it last year.

Current system does exactly what they want it to; it gives the illusion of teams being closer together in the middle than they actually are. Personally? I loathe the current system. Loser points are idiotic. I could live with it if all games added up to three points (having games result in different point totals is, imo, the definition of a retarded point system) but it just won't happen.

[Strazos]

I'm surprised you'd think PHL is in favor of shootouts, seeing as they're historically not good at them.

[Ceryse]

I'm surprised you'd think PHL is in favor of shootouts, seeing as they're historically not good at them.

Didn't say they were in favour of shootouts; said they were in favour of the three point system as it currently stands instead of moving to a system where all games are worth three points (such as having a regulation win net the winner three points, the loser none, winner in over-time or shootout getting two points and the loser one). The group I mentioned have publically stated they do not favour the latter system because it would cause too much confusion amongst fans (seriously?) and that it would stop the standings from being so close (I think several of the blog-stat guys have done work on this, including Dellow and King and showed that this is utter bullshit). All that changes is the system making sense (for once) and instead of the illusion of teams having a chance to play catch-up, they actually would -- although end of season checks show you'd only see one to two teams bumped from the playoffs under the new system and few rank changes of those in the playoffs.

[Speedy Cerviche]

Yeah every year on hfboards someone goes over the stats and posts what they would look like on that 3-2-1 system and it never changes much besides few outlier teams with absurdly good/bad shootout stats. What it would do is increase the compete level cuz more teams would play for the win up until last second of OT instead of playing to bank the point last 5 mins of 3rd (or worse through OT if they have better shootout stats).

[Azaroth]

HFBoards is one of those things I like to pretend doesn't exist.

[Ceryse]

I never go to hfboards. I usually only hit a few hockey blogs/sites. Main stat guys I follow are Vollman, King and Dellow. If its neat and nifty and not coming from one of them.. they'll usually mention it. Lets me avoid the various hockey forums out there that generally make me want to abolish the league and nuke every city or town with a hockey fan in it.

Also; nice to see Clutterbuck get his ass hit into oblivion. Dirty little shit.