Jump to content

NHL 2014-2015 Season Discussion


Dreakon13

Recommended Posts

On the other hand, I don't feel bad for Arizona or Buffalo or their fans.  Those two teams spent the entire season trying to lose and tanking should never be rewarded.

 

In our (Buffalo's) defense... we've been selling pieces for futures for years now.  We finished last in the league by a country mile last year.  Any other year, this is called "rebuilding".  Because McEichel draft, now it's called "tanking".

Edited by PleaseHoldOn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In our (Buffalo's) defense... we've been selling pieces for futures for years now.  We finished last in the league by a country mile last year.  Any other year, this is called "rebuilding".  Because McEichel draft, now it's called "tanking".

 

By virtually every statsitcal measure -- traditional and #fancystats both -- this year's Buffalo Sabres were the worst non-expansion team in decades, perhaps ever.  You don't get that way "by accident", you get that way because you deliberately built a team to suck as badly as possible.  Even so, the Sabres nearly didn't finish dead last because of North American Sports' Most Ridiculous Tiebreaker.

 

I admire how well the Sabres have done their teardown.  I even admire how they spent a bushel of money last July in a way that gave them "plausible deniability" when it came to tanking because they signed a bunch of parts that look nice but aren't anywhere near as good as their names suggest.  But it's still a deliberate tank job -- one reinforced by your General Manager having diarrhea of the mouth when it came to his very public but unrequited man-crush for Connor McDavid -- and it's still a disgrace to legitimate competition and the National Hockey League.

 

And it's not just this year and the NHL where it's called "tanking".  What the Philadelphia 76ers of the NBA -- ironically, a team who shares ownership with the Devils I root for -- are doing is also "tanking" in an attempt to play the Lottery system to rebuild.  And it's morally wrong in my book.

 

....

 

That all having been said, I still would have preferred Buffalo to win the Lottery ahead of Edmonton (and maybe Toronto).  The Sabres haven't hit "train wreck cross-bred with dumpster fire" levels of ineptitude.... yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By virtually every statsitcal measure -- traditional and #fancystats both -- this year's Buffalo Sabres were the worst non-expansion team in decades, perhaps ever.  You don't get that way "by accident", you get that way because you deliberately built a team to suck as badly as possible.

 

To be clear, the Sabres rebuild is a very real thing that started years ago, well before anyone had McDavid in the back of their heads.  Selling off talented free agents that made it clear they didn't intend to re-sign or that we couldn't afford to keep (Gaustad, Pominville, Vanek, Miller) and aging underachievers that fans really didn't want back anyways (Roy, Stafford, Stewart) and replacing them with AHL tweeners and draft picks won't make your team better very quickly.

 

Trading Myers for Kane, who wouldn't be playing this year, and Enroth/Neuvirth when they were playing lights out were very questionable moves... I'll admit.  Though there's an argument to be made for those as well (ie. the goalies being free agents at the end of the year and not letting them walk for nothing).

 

Were there signs Murray was trying to "tank" this year?  Pretty much.  It'd be a hell of an uphill battle to prove otherwise.  But I do think a fairer assessment... sans the negative spin... would be that he inherited the worst team in the NHL, smack dab in the middle of a complete teardown, and did what he needed to fast track it.  After spending the better half of a decade lingering in mediocrity... too good to draft elite talent, too bad to make the playoffs... there isn't a Sabres fan that wanted to see him sell our future away to plug the holes and "go for it" in a meaningless charge to 10th place... as "honorable" as that might've been. xD

Edited by PleaseHoldOn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So pissed right now about Detroit losing in game 7. I think that the Kronwall suspension was complete bullshit, what does everyone else think about it?

It was deserved. Dirry hit by a player notorious for dirty hits. It was dangerous so it was suspendable. Who cares that it was a game 7 suspension, the timing of the incident in relation to the series shouldn't have any impact on the ruling.

BYEBYE DETROIT :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was deserved. Dirry hit by a player notorious for dirty hits. It was dangerous so it was suspendable. Who cares that it was a game 7 suspension, the timing of the incident in relation to the series shouldn't have any impact on the ruling.

BYEBYE DETROIT :D

 

Kronwall is notorious for hard hits but not dirty hits. He saw the other player with his head down, so the hit was much more punishing. I think that it does matter that it was a game 7, if it was truly dirty then the refs would've called something. But since they didn't it was clearly questionable and they shouldn't have suspended him when it wasn't clear to them whether it was clean or dirty. The result might've been the same, but I guess we'll never know. Either way it doesn't matter now since the series is over, but it was the wrong call on NHL's part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kronwall is notorious for hard hits but not dirty hits. He saw the other player with his head down, so the hit was much more punishing. I think that it does matter that it was a game 7, if it was truly dirty then the refs would've called something. But since they didn't it was clearly questionable and they shouldn't have suspended him when it wasn't clear to them whether it was clean or dirty. The result might've been the same, but I guess we'll never know. Either way it doesn't matter now since the series is over, but it was the wrong call on NHL's part.

 

On the contrary, Kronwall delivers those sorts of hits on a semi-regular basis.  That the referees either miss those hits or don't penalize them accordingly in-game should have nothing to do with any suspensions handed out, but the hits in question are illegal and dangerous and SHOULD be suspended.

 

I applaud the League Office for having the testicular fortitude to suspend Kronwall for Game 7 as they should have.  He needs to change his style and how he delivers hits or he ought to be suspended significantly more in the future.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary, Kronwall delivers those sorts of hits on a semi-regular basis.  That the referees either miss those hits or don't penalize them accordingly in-game should have nothing to do with any suspensions handed out, but the hits in question are illegal and dangerous and SHOULD be suspended.

 

I applaud the League Office for having the testicular fortitude to suspend Kronwall for Game 7 as they should have.  He needs to change his style and how he delivers hits or he ought to be suspended significantly more in the future.

 

Dangerous yes, illegal no. His hits are devastating because he catches the other players with their head down. He's not hitting from behind or aiming for the head or anything, so I don't see how his hits are considered illegal. Also what do you mean by semi-regular basis, I'm pretty sure that he only did that hit once this series. Tampa had some pretty huge hits on Abdelkater, but they were still legal, dangerous, but legal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dangerous yes, illegal no. His hits are devastating because he catches the other players with their head down. He's not hitting from behind or aiming for the head or anything, so I don't see how his hits are considered illegal. Also what do you mean by semi-regular basis, I'm pretty sure that he only did that hit once this series. Tampa had some pretty huge hits on Abdelkater, but they were still legal, dangerous, but legal

 

He routinely launches himself into players when inflicting hits, completely leaving the ice before making contact.  That's the baseline definition of "Charging" as stipulated under Rule 42 of the NHL Rulebook and should be penalized every single time.  That the referees are a bunch of inept idiots who can't call a game properly is irrelevant -- if they don't do their jobs, the League Office can certainly step in and hand down appropriate discipline for the good of the game and its players.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He routinely launches himself into players when inflicting hits, completely leaving the ice before making contact.  That's the baseline definition of "Charging" as stipulated under Rule 42 of the NHL Rulebook and should be penalized every single time.  That the referees are a bunch of inept idiots who can't call a game properly is irrelevant -- if they don't do their jobs, the League Office can certainly step in and hand down appropriate discipline for the good of the game and its players.

 

One skate was still on the ice at the point of contact, either way a 2 minute peanlty max doesn't deserve a suspension. But whatever, complaining about it won't do anything. I just have to accept the loss and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One skate was still on the ice at the point of contact, either way a 2 minute peanlty max doesn't deserve a suspension. But whatever, complaining about it won't do anything. I just have to accept the loss and move on.

 

That one skate was already off the ice is all you need to know -- he was launching himself into a hit and that's a penalty on its own.  I've watched the replay several times.... not only is he doing that, but he's twisting his body in a fashion to increase the torque and the forcefulness of the hit.  He's leading with his forearm/elbow, and that's a penalty.  He's playing the man and not the puck, and that's a penalty.  This is the rule that should have been invoked on the spot (Rule 42 referring to Charging):

 

42.4 Match Penalty  – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by charging.

 

This particular hit has been illegal for more than a decade and rightfully so.  It's not a hockey play, it's just this side of Simple Assault under the U.S. Legal Code.  He's hitting in a fashion to inflict maximum damage, and that's an acceptable NHL baseline for "intent to injure" which carries with it the Match Penalty and Supplemental Discipline.

 

I understand you're upset because it's your guy.  But that doesn't make it any better and you'd probably be screaming bloody murder if Brian Boyle or Ryan Callahan did that to Pavel Datsyuk or Henrik Zetterberg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That one skate was already off the ice is all you need to know -- he was launching himself into a hit and that's a penalty on its own.  I've watched the replay several times.... not only is he doing that, but he's twisting his body in a fashion to increase the torque and the forcefulness of the hit.  He's leading with his forearm/elbow, and that's a penalty.  He's playing the man and not the puck, and that's a penalty.  This is the rule that should have been invoked on the spot (Rule 42 referring to Charging):

 

42.4 Match Penalty  – The Referee, at his discretion, may assess a match penalty if, in his judgment, the player attempted to or deliberately injured his opponent by charging.

 

This particular hit has been illegal for more than a decade and rightfully so.  It's not a hockey play, it's just this side of Simple Assault under the U.S. Legal Code.  He's hitting in a fashion to inflict maximum damage, and that's an acceptable NHL baseline for "intent to injure" which carries with it the Match Penalty and Supplemental Discipline.

 

I understand you're upset because it's your guy.  But that doesn't make it any better and you'd probably be screaming bloody murder if Brian Boyle or Ryan Callahan did that to Pavel Datsyuk or Henrik Zetterberg.

 

Well one skate was off the ice because he was skating. Anyways, I respect your opinion and explanation, and you're right, I probably am a bit biased as most sports fans are. 

 

On a slighty different note, what do you think of this hit? There was a penalty on Stamkos for hooking but no further penalty. In many ways, this hit is similar to Kronwalls, skates off ice at impact, and force to the head. Now, yes Abdelkader was in bad position because of Stamkos hooking, but as was Kucherov looking for the puck put him in bad position. I'm not trying to start shit, but I it's good the league cares about players safety, but they need to be more consistent in their calls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a slighty different note, what do you think of this hit? There was a penalty on Stamkos for hooking but no further penalty. In many ways, this hit is similar to Kronwalls, skates off ice at impact, and force to the head. Now, yes Abdelkader was in bad position because of Stamkos hooking, but as was Kucherov looking for the puck put him in bad position. I'm not trying to start shit, but I it's good the league cares about players safety, but they need to be more consistent in their calls.

 

The two hits aren't remotely comparable except in the sense that both plays deserved a penalty.  Stamkos' penalty is very clear-cut and was called appropriately (in my opinion) and Stamkos was trying to make a hockey play in pursuing the puck.  Nicklas Kronwall never made any attempt at the puck -- if he had, it was right there for him to dump back into the corner or throw towards the net -- but was a headhunting hit with Intent to Injure out of the rock'em sock'em 1980s and 1990s (when those hits were legal, if not applauded).

 

A big difference in the two plays is premeditation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Montreal is out. Sad to see them go already, but it was an awesome season!

We need to fix our PP and start putting some goals in.

Overall an amazing season, and Gally is evolving with speed. I hope we can make it even better the next season!

Time for a new Coach? Mike Babcock for Montreal! :D

Putting my vote on Ducks this year now when my Habs is eliminated. Good luck to everyones team this playoff :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well who would have thought the Rangers would pull out a major comeback and a first in NHL history to come back from a 3-1 series deficit and win in back to back years.

 

I think the Rangers determined to head back to  the Finals, I predict a Rangers vs Ducks final. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well who would have thought the Rangers would pull out a major comeback and a first in NHL history to come back from a 3-1 series deficit and win in back to back years.

 

I think the Rangers determined to head back to  the Finals, I predict a Rangers vs Ducks final. B)

 

Lots of previous history pointed to Gotham winning last night.  Washington's inability to close out teams in a playoff series (now 4-13 in their last 17 attempts).  Washington's inability to win Game Seven (now 4-10 in franchise history).  Washington blowing a 3-1 series lead for the fifth time in franchise history -- the Caps have NEVER won a seven game series where they had a 3-1 lead and got pushed to a 7th game.  Gotham not getting eliminated on home ice (9 consecutive wins when facing elimination at MSG going back to 2007; 7-0 in Game Seven at home).

 

But the Rangers aren't going much further.  They're done getting to play the Little SIsters of the Poor now and they'll get mauled if they don't start playing better.  And the same goes for the Anaheim Ducks.

 

Tampa over Chicago in the Finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...