I find myself to be rather over the shootouts, now. I was a fan at the start when I was getting back into hockey after the lockout 9 years ago, but now as I've gotten older and have begun to appreciate the game a lot more, I just don't like it a lot. It isn't "real" hockey so much as it is a crapshoot. Obviously I watch closely because I want the Blackhawks to win when they are in it, but I'd prefer it to end like the playoffs, where they keep going until they score. That's not exactly plausible in the NHL regular season, but maybe a 10 minute OT instead of 5? Then if no score, a 5 and then a shootout? I don't know. I'm just over the SO now. I get it for regular fans who find it exciting, but now I'm at the point I just want hockey, not a crapshoot.
2013 NHL Thread
- Thread starter It's Damn Real!
- Start date
The reason I don't like the shootout is because of the inconsistency between the rules in the regular season and the playoffs. Not that I'm suggesting they adopt the shootout during the playoffs- Could you imagine Game 7 of the Stanley Cup coming down to a shootout?- But that it burdens the goalies to win or lose a game for their team after teams roll 4 lines for an entire game. It essentially takes the team aspect out of who wins and loses the game. I am less bothered by it, I suppose, in that it's only an extra point, and that the loser isn't completely shutout on the scoreboard based on a 1 on 1 game. It's for the fans, and it's alot of fun to watch, but it diminishes the game for me somewhat.
It seems like most of what the Rangers did at the deadline was geared towards getting tougher. Along with Clowe, Derek Dorsett adds alot of grit while Derick Brassard adds some help down the middle and John Moore should help the defense corps out. Gaborik underachieved greatly this year and I know the Rangers have quite a few young players that his huge cap hit for next year off the books should help out.
I'm no Rangers fan-far from it- but I'll be rooting for them to win out during the regular season. Unless the Penguins fall apart, they're going to be the one seed, and I don't want any part of a Pens/Rangers 1st round matchup. They throttled us 6-1 in New York before outplaying the Pens two nights later in a 2-1 SO win for the Pens, and Lundqvist is good enough to steal a series.
For the Penguins, it's win now. Of all their big name acquisitions, Jussi Jokinen has made the most immediate impact on the scoreboard. Morrow will be invaluable in the playoffs on the third line with Sutter and Jokinen, and the top two lines-should Crosby be healthy-will be loaded with goal scoring. Assuming all are healthy, I imagine the Penguins lines for the playoffs will look like this:
Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis
Iginla-Malkin-Neal
Jokkinen-Sutter-Morrow
Cooke-Adams-Bennett
Orpik-Martin(when healthy)
Letang-Murray
Niskanen-Eaton
I've heard rumors of moving Dupuis down to the third, playing Jokkinen in between Malkin and Neal, and moving Iginla up to play with Crosby and Kunitz. While I don't think that would be a mistake, the Crosby line has shown so much cohesiveness together that I'd hate to see them split up. Tyler Kennedy and Dustin Jeffrey add depth, and Bennett could be swapped with Kennedy or sent down to open up a spot once Crosby and Neal return from injury. Deryk Engelland offers depth on defense, as does Rob Bortuzzo.
It's Cup Finals or bust here in Pittsburgh for the Penguins.
It seems like most of what the Rangers did at the deadline was geared towards getting tougher. Along with Clowe, Derek Dorsett adds alot of grit while Derick Brassard adds some help down the middle and John Moore should help the defense corps out. Gaborik underachieved greatly this year and I know the Rangers have quite a few young players that his huge cap hit for next year off the books should help out.
I'm no Rangers fan-far from it- but I'll be rooting for them to win out during the regular season. Unless the Penguins fall apart, they're going to be the one seed, and I don't want any part of a Pens/Rangers 1st round matchup. They throttled us 6-1 in New York before outplaying the Pens two nights later in a 2-1 SO win for the Pens, and Lundqvist is good enough to steal a series.
For the Penguins, it's win now. Of all their big name acquisitions, Jussi Jokinen has made the most immediate impact on the scoreboard. Morrow will be invaluable in the playoffs on the third line with Sutter and Jokinen, and the top two lines-should Crosby be healthy-will be loaded with goal scoring. Assuming all are healthy, I imagine the Penguins lines for the playoffs will look like this:
Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis
Iginla-Malkin-Neal
Jokkinen-Sutter-Morrow
Cooke-Adams-Bennett
Orpik-Martin(when healthy)
Letang-Murray
Niskanen-Eaton
I've heard rumors of moving Dupuis down to the third, playing Jokkinen in between Malkin and Neal, and moving Iginla up to play with Crosby and Kunitz. While I don't think that would be a mistake, the Crosby line has shown so much cohesiveness together that I'd hate to see them split up. Tyler Kennedy and Dustin Jeffrey add depth, and Bennett could be swapped with Kennedy or sent down to open up a spot once Crosby and Neal return from injury. Deryk Engelland offers depth on defense, as does Rob Bortuzzo.
It's Cup Finals or bust here in Pittsburgh for the Penguins.
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
I like the Shoot outs during the regular season, they add a bit of excitement & drama to the end of the game, that said I do think they should make the OT period longer in the regular season, 5 mins. rarely enough time to do shit, make it 10 mins. then go to the shoot out if things are still all tied up.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
The issue with the shootout isn't actually with the shootout itself. You'll hear fans clamor on about how it's a "skills competition" and how it defeats the purpose of "team play" and all that jazz, and in a sense they're correct, but their argument gets shot to shit when you realize that a penalty shot is the exact same thing, and a penalty shot can be awarded in OT, let's say, in the Stanley Cup Final, where it ultimately determines the winner of the game.
The problem with the shootout isn't the shootout itself. It's the "loser" point attached to it that is awarded to a team despite not actually winning the game. The answer here is simple. It's not to remove or retain the shootout. It's to move to a 3-2-1 point system (3 points regulation or OT win, 2 points SO win, 1 point OT/SO loss) or to a 2-0-0 system where regulation, OT or SO win is 2 points and a loss of any kind is 0, with the tie-breakers for ROW remaining place.
The problem with the shootout isn't the shootout itself. It's the "loser" point attached to it that is awarded to a team despite not actually winning the game. The answer here is simple. It's not to remove or retain the shootout. It's to move to a 3-2-1 point system (3 points regulation or OT win, 2 points SO win, 1 point OT/SO loss) or to a 2-0-0 system where regulation, OT or SO win is 2 points and a loss of any kind is 0, with the tie-breakers for ROW remaining place.
Thriller Ant
Beep Bop Boop
I like the 3-2-1 system, because it perfectly mirrors a team's look at a game. Taking the game to overtime is worth a point in my mind, but a team should get the bonus for winning in regulation. The 2-2-1 system theoretically increases parity by keeping the point totals closer, but they aren't the best way of rewarding victories.
In NHL history, this has only happened twice, to my knowledge, and never in a Stanley Cup Finals game. Teams, on the whole, are generally more likely to be aggressive in protection against breakaways in those situations, yet it's never happened(In the Finals), and has happened only twice in the history of the NHL playoffs(penalty shot in OT). Further, it hasn't happened since the 90's, I believe, and I recall one of them vividly because it was Alexei Morozov in a Pens playoff game. And a game has never ended as a result of a penalty shot in the playoffs, that I know for sure.
Theoretically, it could happen. Perhaps it's a poor argument, but I don't beieve the league wants to see it happen either, hence the lack of calls. Teams are plenty aggressive in protecting against plays that could lead to penalty shots, yet there hasn't been one in OT since the 90's. I think officials are hesitant as well to see games end that way.
Further, were it awarded, it would be due to a blatant penalty. In the context of a shootout, it's not the same thing. It's simply two teams playing to a tie, and then the shootout starts. But since it's not taking place in the playoffs or the SCF's, there's a difference there as well. As I stated earlier, I'm a fan of consistency. As a Penguins fan, you'ld think I'd be a fan of the shootout, after all, the Penguins have the third best record in shootouts since its inception. And I do find it enjoyable to watch, make no mistake. I just feel the consistency should be there between regular season and playoffs.
This is an idea I'm firmly behind. One of my biggest gripes in watching a hockey game is a team "playing for OT", knowing that they're going to get at least a point out of it. I realize hockey is different in its scoring then the other major sports, but OT or not, there are winners and losers. Taking away the point for teams that lose in OT or the shootout may not stop a team from "playing for OT" for the sake of extra rest, but it precludes them from doing so just to earn a point in the standings.
So the finalists for the Vezina were announced today, and I anticipate a collective huh?!? from all of our NHL enthusiasts on here. Lundqvist, Niemi, and Bobrovsky? Not sure if I really see the logic or reason in these choices.
Lundqvist is an awesome goalie, there's no debating that, but by his standards, this was an off season as his team were fortunate to even qualify for the playoffs. He may well be one of the top goalies in the league, but I simply cannot list him amongst the top three in the league this season.
Bobrovsky had a great season but at the end of the day, his team was unsuccessful in reaching the post season. Not sure if he is necessarily Vezina worthy either.
Niemi had a good season so I guess he belongs there, but I'm not convinced even he was one of the top three.
Rask, Crawford, Emery, Anderson, Fasth, hell even Price (can't believe I just said that), hard to imagine none of these guys being there after the seasons they had individually and from a team perspective.
Next thing you know, they'll be telling me that Crosby isn't the obvious choice for MVP this season.
Lundqvist is an awesome goalie, there's no debating that, but by his standards, this was an off season as his team were fortunate to even qualify for the playoffs. He may well be one of the top goalies in the league, but I simply cannot list him amongst the top three in the league this season.
Bobrovsky had a great season but at the end of the day, his team was unsuccessful in reaching the post season. Not sure if he is necessarily Vezina worthy either.
Niemi had a good season so I guess he belongs there, but I'm not convinced even he was one of the top three.
Rask, Crawford, Emery, Anderson, Fasth, hell even Price (can't believe I just said that), hard to imagine none of these guys being there after the seasons they had individually and from a team perspective.
Next thing you know, they'll be telling me that Crosby isn't the obvious choice for MVP this season.
Well I realize it is May 9th, but does it ever feel like December 25th!! The Canadiens out in five games, after their second 6-1 shit knocking. It's great to see them lose, and even better to see them get absolutely destroyed. Watch out Penguins, the Senators aren't going to be a pushover whatsoever.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
A collective huh? Not one bit. I could have told you these three would have been the Finalists two or three weeks ago.
Do you not get what the Vezina Trophy is for? It's awarded to the goaltender who is "adjudged to be the best at this position".
Wins? Henrik Lundqvist, Antti Niemi tied for first in the NHL with 24. Bob tied for 3rd with 21.
GA/A? Among goaltenders who played in at least 35 games, Bob's 2.00 is tied for first with Rask, Lundqvist's 2.05 is second and Niemi's 2.16 is fourth.
Save Percentage? Among goaltenders who played in at least 35 games, Bob's .932 is first, Lundqvist's .926 is third and Niemi's .924 is fourth.
I'm sure you're whining because ol' Two U's Two K's Two Points was "snubbed", but his 19 wins in 36 games played is exactly why he wasn't considered regardless of the number of shutouts he had or the fact his SV% was higher than Lundqvist's. Crawford only played in 30 games. Emery only played in 21. Fasth in 25, etc. The only two guys who stood an outside chance of beating out these three candidates were Rask and Anderson (Price's SV% and GA/A were pedestrian), and Rask's lack of wins and Anderson's lack of games played due to injury are why they were "snubbed".
And no, Crosby is not the obvious choice for MVP this year. Do you even watch games not called by Jack Edwards? Bobrovsky, Tavares, St. Louis, Ovechkin and Toews should all be considered, and I'd personally give it to Tavares just edging out Toews who edges out Crosby. If Sid remained healthy, he wins, but he missed a huge chunk of the year (25%) with a broken jaw.
Ain't it a fucking shame that Bobrovsky, St. Louis, and Toews were not voted as finalists for the Hart? I suppose if the Jackets made the playoffs, Bobrovsky should've been in it, since he would've been the whole reason they made it. I get it, Ovi led his team to the playoffs after an awful start to the season, Crosby is great at offense, and Tavares...well I have nothing I can say. People say he should be in, and leading the Islanders into the playoffs, and putting up a solid fight against the Pens, I'll listen on that one.
Crosby will probably win it because he is the sexy named poster boy of the NHL, regardless of the time he missed. Of the finalists, I think Tavares was more valuable to his team than Crosby. The real debate would be who meant more to their team, Tavares or Ovi? The Pens did well without Crosby. I also say Malkin is more valuable to the Pens overall, but that's just me.
Who do you guys have winning the Selke? Being biased, and seeing just how great of a defensive forward he is, I'm going with Toews. His game has just kept elevating season after season. I think Datsyuk and Kopitar are the other finalists this year.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
I don't buy too much into, nor care for who really wins the NHL awards. Most of them are poor consolation prizes for players on teams who lost out on the big one, but I'd be shocked if Bergeron didn't take another Selke this year.
tripolie atche
Pre-Show Stalwart
Interesting that the final four teams remaining also happen to be the last four Stanley Cup champions in Pittsburgh ('09), Chicago ('10), Boston ('11), & Los Angeles ('12).
Should be a fun, thrilling Conference Finals & Stanley Cup Final.
Should be a fun, thrilling Conference Finals & Stanley Cup Final.
I have to agree with the poster above. This playoff year has rejuvenated my love of hockey. I am a Pens fan from Pittsburgh, but I am enjoyed the play of the LA Kings a lot right now. I had taken a couple of years off of pro sports in general, but the hockey playoffs have reminded my why I am a sports fan. I am hoping for a Pens/Kings final, but I am totally enjoying all of the action right now.
The conference finals are going to be great I can see both finals going 7 I am really hoping for a Boston Chicago finals. Two original 6 teams battling it out for the greatest trophy in sports. They have never faced off against each other in the cup finals and it hasn't been since 1979 that two original 6 teams faced each other in the finals.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
...and the New York and Canadian media all breath a huge sigh of relief. John Tortorella has been dismissed as head coach of the New York Rangers as of yesterday. Can't say I'm shocked or surprised, and frankly I'm a bit happy as a fan of offense-is-the-best-defense style hockey (as in the polar opposite of what John Tortorella has adapted as his mantra since joining the Rangers — a far cry from the Safe is Death one he used to win a Cup with the Lightning in 2004), but the kicker for me here is his replacement. Who's named the replacement will determine whether this is the "next step" coach who history has shown us can often take teams on the brink and put them over the edge to winning a championship, or whether or not the Rangers are going to go back and reinvent the wheel... again.
Among the reported candidates — Lindy Ruff, Paul Maurice (close friends with Adam Graves), Marc Crawford, Dallas Eakins, Dave Tippett, Guy Boucher and my personal favorite option, and a man who nearly was the coach of the Rangers back in 2002 before Glen Sather opted for Bryan Trottier instead, Alain Vigneault.
Lindy Ruff is essentially a spitting image of John Tortorella. Based on the reports coming out of the NY Post this morning via Larry Brooks, a group of Rangers' players essentially threw Torts under the bus during their exit interviews expressing not just frustration, but a tipping point with an exceedingly more difficult Torts. His style and his demeanor apparently wore thin on them (again, not shocked) and as a result the change was made despite the fact that Tortorella had actually signed an extension mid-season to remain with the Rangers for a few more years. If you're changing head coaches, it's usually for a new approach, not the same one with a difference face. Hiring Ruff would be a lateral move. A total sideways step that would do nothing to ease the frustrations of a team that apparently quit on the last guy who couldn't stop barking.
Guy Boucher coached Derick Brassard, the Rangers' #1 center down the stretch, in the QMJHL. His 1-3-1 forecheck was the source of major scrutiny due to his refusal to actually attack the puck-possessing team (this was predominantly evident in this awesome footage from a Flyers/Lightning game where the Flyers countered his 1-3-1 by refusing to actually advance the puck — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWGbZPx_HPY). Lundqvist could probably make Boucher's system look great again, same as Dwayne Roloson did for him years ago, but he's still a very defensive-oriented coach. Not my particular cup of tea.
Tippet is still under contract with the Coyotes and is likely to be brought back by GM Don Maloney, who has been refusing to allow teams to contact his coach, so I'm not even going to discuss him (though he's a trap coach similar to Boucher).
To me the two most intriguing names are the Toronto Marlies' Dallas Eakins, who is probably the hottest AHL coach ready to advance to the NHL bench, and Alain Vigneault, who paid the price for Mike Gillis' mistakes in Vancouver (as coaches tend to do). Vigneault is a calculating players coach, something the Rangers could really use. He is actually quite infamous for his reliance and use of advanced statistics (a new wave of coaching style in the NHL) and tends to get the best out of his offensive players because he coaches offense first. Eakins, on the flip side, would probably be the best for a young group but may be more of a signal to reinventing the wheel rather than taking what the Rangers have, which many feel is a championship caliber core, and going with it. Niether man would have an issue with the NY media, as both survived two of the toughest media markets in Vancouver and Toronto without issue, but I'd still give a slight edge to Vigneault personally.
Of course, never underestimate the Rangers' propensity to pull stupid publicity stunts like hiring the ill-experienced Mark Messier in place of all of them. From what I've been reading from local beat writers, his name is seriously being considered as well, and he was nearly made coach in 2002, and nearly hired by the Oilers a few years back as well.
Among the reported candidates — Lindy Ruff, Paul Maurice (close friends with Adam Graves), Marc Crawford, Dallas Eakins, Dave Tippett, Guy Boucher and my personal favorite option, and a man who nearly was the coach of the Rangers back in 2002 before Glen Sather opted for Bryan Trottier instead, Alain Vigneault.
Lindy Ruff is essentially a spitting image of John Tortorella. Based on the reports coming out of the NY Post this morning via Larry Brooks, a group of Rangers' players essentially threw Torts under the bus during their exit interviews expressing not just frustration, but a tipping point with an exceedingly more difficult Torts. His style and his demeanor apparently wore thin on them (again, not shocked) and as a result the change was made despite the fact that Tortorella had actually signed an extension mid-season to remain with the Rangers for a few more years. If you're changing head coaches, it's usually for a new approach, not the same one with a difference face. Hiring Ruff would be a lateral move. A total sideways step that would do nothing to ease the frustrations of a team that apparently quit on the last guy who couldn't stop barking.
Guy Boucher coached Derick Brassard, the Rangers' #1 center down the stretch, in the QMJHL. His 1-3-1 forecheck was the source of major scrutiny due to his refusal to actually attack the puck-possessing team (this was predominantly evident in this awesome footage from a Flyers/Lightning game where the Flyers countered his 1-3-1 by refusing to actually advance the puck — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWGbZPx_HPY). Lundqvist could probably make Boucher's system look great again, same as Dwayne Roloson did for him years ago, but he's still a very defensive-oriented coach. Not my particular cup of tea.
Tippet is still under contract with the Coyotes and is likely to be brought back by GM Don Maloney, who has been refusing to allow teams to contact his coach, so I'm not even going to discuss him (though he's a trap coach similar to Boucher).
To me the two most intriguing names are the Toronto Marlies' Dallas Eakins, who is probably the hottest AHL coach ready to advance to the NHL bench, and Alain Vigneault, who paid the price for Mike Gillis' mistakes in Vancouver (as coaches tend to do). Vigneault is a calculating players coach, something the Rangers could really use. He is actually quite infamous for his reliance and use of advanced statistics (a new wave of coaching style in the NHL) and tends to get the best out of his offensive players because he coaches offense first. Eakins, on the flip side, would probably be the best for a young group but may be more of a signal to reinventing the wheel rather than taking what the Rangers have, which many feel is a championship caliber core, and going with it. Niether man would have an issue with the NY media, as both survived two of the toughest media markets in Vancouver and Toronto without issue, but I'd still give a slight edge to Vigneault personally.
Of course, never underestimate the Rangers' propensity to pull stupid publicity stunts like hiring the ill-experienced Mark Messier in place of all of them. From what I've been reading from local beat writers, his name is seriously being considered as well, and he was nearly made coach in 2002, and nearly hired by the Oilers a few years back as well.
Stormtrooper
Championship Contender
I'm not upset with the decision, as it is apparent that Tortorella has worn out his welcome with the players (most likely Lundqvist in particular, whom has earned the right to get coaches fired). I still think he's an excellent coach, and should get a job right away, but it was time for a change.
I'm not a big fan of Lindy Ruff. He's a different voice, which would probably appease the players in the short term (they didn't like Tortorella, not aggressive coaching). However, I just don't think he'd be a good fit, as he was not overly successful in Buffalo, where he was forever. He won 2 division titles in 14 seasons, and has not been to the cup finals since 98-99 (his 2nd year on the job).
Mess is such a terrible idea as head coach. He's never been a coach before in the NHL, and New York isn't a good place to learn on the job. Plus he is a Ranger Legend, and the only thing he could do is harm his status by being a Head Coach.
I really like the Vancouver guy, who is a successful coach who is of the exact opposite personality type. He's won his division every year except for one.
In an ideal world, I would hire Vigneault, but strongly request he put Messier on his staff as an assistant coach. Or, I would let Messier get a coaching job elsewhere so he can try his hand at coaching without hurting his Rangers Legacy.
And IDR, here's another name I'd love to hear your thoughts about. Mike Keenan. Could they bring him back? I know it's a bit of a lateral move in terms of personality, but it could work.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
No, for two reasons:
1. He signed a multi-year deal with Metallurg Magnitogorsk of the KHL to come on as head coach just a few weeks ago, replacing Paul Maurice, who is expected to return to the NHL.
2. He is a 100% lateral move, same as Ruff. If the reports that the players quit on Tortorella due to the style of play and his exceedingly difficult personality — or otherwise known as being barked at all day. Why go out and get another dog? The purpose of changing a coach is to change direction, not retain the same direction with a brand new face.
Keenan, Ruff, etc. are all much of the same. They just bring new facial hair.
To me the guy you go with is either Dallas Eakins out of the Marlies/MLSE system and go with a fresh, young coach who is hungry for an NHL coaching gig, or you go with Vigneault — the savvy veteran/players coach option. I'm fine with either, but I lean to Vigneault.
Jesse Spector of the Sporting News, formerly a beat writer for the NY Daily News covered it well here:
http://www.sportingnews.com/nhl/sto...&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=jessespector
Stormtrooper
Championship Contender
There are reports that the Penguins may consider firing Dan Bylsma, and the Rangers would be immediately interested.
Thoughts? He's won a cup and a Jack Adams. He's coached elite scorers who have had success scoring under him. I'm not really up to date on his demeanor though.
And they've interviewed Ruff and Vigneault already, and ironically Messier is there in the interviews (in his current front office role).
Oh, and what's your thoughts on the possibility of Glen Sather stepping down?
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
Reported by Larry Brooks from the NY Post, yeah.
Very, very smart coach. Even-keeled, calm and collected demeanor. Polar opposite of Tortorella. Think Tom Renney. Just extremely detail oriented and calculated. He's an ex-player, and his age and conditioning are actually enough that he regularly has "fun" practices where they do team-wide shootout drills he often participates in. He's also known as "Disco Dan" to Pens players/fans because he's apparently a bit of a dancer in the room.
As to him coming in over the other guys? Sure, assuming the Pens are stupid enough to fire him in the first place. I'll give you that he was out-coached in the last two eliminating playoff series, but you show me a coach who's never been out-coached or made mistakes and I'll show you a pink elephant. John Tortorella is another extremely intelligent coach, and he was thoroughly out-coached by Claude Julien.
No he isn't. Messier is actually abstaining from the interviewing process (due to conflict of interest). He's among the candidates, though.
Vigneault is the guy I want most, though. More on that in my last post in this thread.
Sather himself already noted he's staying on as GM/President this season, but my guess is that the prostate cancer, his decreasing health and his increasing age will likely have this be the last year he pulls double-duty. I'd imagine he moves into a full-time Team President role next season with Jeff Gorton stepping in as the next Rangers' GM. Gorton, in case you were wondering, was a former assistant GM with the Bruins (and is responsible for the Chara contract with the Bruins), who actually maintained the day-to-day duties for large stretches of this season, including the weeks that Sather underwent surgery for prostate cancer and the weeks of recovery that followed. Jimmy Schoenfeld would likely field consideration as well, having been the active GM of the Hartford Wolfpack for the last six years, as well as Mark Messier, who has been studying as "special assistant to the GM" for years with the Rangers, assuming he's not named coach before then.
Oh, and for the record, I don't actually have quote notifications on, but I always look to see what is going on in this thread, so no worries.
Stormtrooper
Championship Contender
Yeah, comparing him to Tom Renney doesn't help me that much. Wasn't a big fan of his. I was happy when he was gone and Torts got hired.
But Bylsma is an excellent coach, and I have no clue why Pittsburgh would fire him, but if they're considering it then by all means do it. Not only would it help the Rangers but it would hurt the Penguins.
I could have sworn I read somewhere that he was there during Vigneault's interview. Must have been mistaken.
By the way part of me doesn't want Vigneault to get the job, only because trying to spell his name is a pain in the ass. I'm resorting to copy/paste right now.
If I were the Rangers I would scoop up Dan Bylsma if I could. Here is the thing though, and this is a quote from Wrestlezone's own Mark Madden. If Bylsma cannot win with this team, then who the heck is he going to win with. That was said in reference to the Pens firing him. Madden is extremely knowledgeable about Hockey by the way. Madden gets shit on a lot because he is a dick, but he actually knows his stuff. It's been said that Mario Lemiux thinks that coaches are interchangeable, and if Bylsma gets fired it will probably be Mario's call. Me being a fan would like to see him stick around for a bit longer to see what he can do with this team, but I just don't know. It took him until game three to change his game plan, and he doesn't seem to be willing to make adjustments as needed. You could see a drastic difference between game 1 and 2 and games 3 and 4. Had he adjusted earlier I am not saying the Pens would have won, but it would have been much more competitive. All that said, I have a gut feeling that Bylsma is going to be available, and I also have a gut feeling he is going to win with whatever team he goes to.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
Coaches are interchangeable. The only time they aren't as much is when you are talking about developmental leagues, or the NCAA, where a coach is experiencing constant turnover and is likely to be retained if he's capable of producing championship caliber teams year-after-year due to a specific system.
And I don't buy the "if you can't win with" argument, because (A) he already won with them, and (B) no coach is going to go undefeated, and every one of them will be out-coached or have their team beaten at some point following a championship.
Well it looks like after all of the discussion that the Pens have signed Bylsma to some sort of extension. I was listening to The mark madden show and it doesn't seem like the details are out yet, but it looks as though both Bylsma and Fleury are staying in Pittsburgh. I thought at least one of them would be gone after this year. I have to say I am glad they kept Bylsma, but I can't say the same for Fleury. He has just proven too many times that he can't win in the playoffs. I know he won a cup, and I know his defense was not stellar in the series with Boston, but he just seems to inconsistent to me. I guess we will see what happens next year.
It's Damn Real!
The undisputed, undefeated TNA &
http://triblive.com/sports/penguins/4210621-74/letang-shero-penguins#axzz2WfsLPPT6
--
It's said Letang wants north of $7M annually and a full no-movement clause as well.
Based on what they managed to get for Ryan Whitney (Kunitz, Tangradi) and Goligoski (James Neal), safe to say Shero's gonna be another GM of the year candidate when he fleeces some poor team for a budding star for Letang.
Pens have already noted that Simon Despres is going to end up being a blue line mainstay next season, and with Derrick Pouliot and Olli Maatta still in the system, they'll be just fine even if they end up losing Letang, IMO.
One of my users on my Rangers' forum mentioned the potential for a swap with defense-starved Edmonton for Eberle. While that's possible based on salary ($6M AAV on Eberle), which is reportedly what they want to pay Letang, my bet is they end up with a much more affordable, budding star, same as they did when they moved Whitney for Kunitz and Goligoski for Neal. Yakupov would be the guy I'd say they end up with, if he was indeed sent to EDM.
I can see it already... Neal/Malkin/Yakupov, the 250+ point line.
--
It's said Letang wants north of $7M annually and a full no-movement clause as well.
Based on what they managed to get for Ryan Whitney (Kunitz, Tangradi) and Goligoski (James Neal), safe to say Shero's gonna be another GM of the year candidate when he fleeces some poor team for a budding star for Letang.
Pens have already noted that Simon Despres is going to end up being a blue line mainstay next season, and with Derrick Pouliot and Olli Maatta still in the system, they'll be just fine even if they end up losing Letang, IMO.
One of my users on my Rangers' forum mentioned the potential for a swap with defense-starved Edmonton for Eberle. While that's possible based on salary ($6M AAV on Eberle), which is reportedly what they want to pay Letang, my bet is they end up with a much more affordable, budding star, same as they did when they moved Whitney for Kunitz and Goligoski for Neal. Yakupov would be the guy I'd say they end up with, if he was indeed sent to EDM.
I can see it already... Neal/Malkin/Yakupov, the 250+ point line.
Sorry to refer back to a post from four months ago, but wow! Corey Schneider gone from the Vancouver Canucks, on his way to the New Jersey Devils. Seems absurd to me to trade away a guy like Schneider for just a ninth overall draft pick, all due respect to Bo Horvat, especially when you consider some of the offers that the Canucks supposedly received. But as I said all along, it appears that the untradeable Roberto Luongo is the man in Vancouver, and the younger, more tradeable Schneider is gone.
How are those vital body parts doing now, Mr. Rask?
