xstrike
-
Posts
1,418 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by xstrike
-
-
44 minutes ago, travel_dude said:
So, if NY wins the lotto he should be fired, but if they don't win the lotto he shouldn't be fired?
That makes no sense.
He might deserve to be fired either way but if it's a top 3 pick he's not going to be forgive due to the terrible results in caused. If it's not a top 3, he still put the team in a precarious position. But because the result wasn't as bad as it could be, he may be forgiven.
-
4 hours ago, travel_dude said:
How is a lotto win by another team a fireable offence?
He brought in a top D-man onto a strong defensive team.
We were 19th in goals against, but 26th in goals for.
Most penalties (toss up with ANA) in the league.
We are bottom 5 in home wins.
You can blame the signings, trades, FA signings, etc. on the GM, but I think the blame for a lotto picks falls elsewhere.
I see it differently. His failure to protect the pick was the mistake. You can argue if we were a playoff team then it wouldn't have mattered but that's the thing. No one is guaranteed to make the playoffs. Not lotto protecting the pick was a stupid mistake if the consequences of the mistake come to fruition then he's fired. If the consequences don't occur, then it will be brushed under the rug whether it should be or not.
It's the same as in a normal job, you do something stupid, you get fired if it hurts the company and forgiven if it does not. Sometimes you are fired either way.
-
55 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:
I am gonna give you an out. If NYI manage to swing the 1st pick overall, do you still support Treliving?
If NYI get a top 3 pick, I think that's a fireable offense. We are also making it more likely too with each passing game.
-
On 11/4/2017 at 10:53 PM, Thebrewcrew said:
KC
Parsons 4.69 GAA .870 SV%
McDonald 2.82 GAA .910 SV%
Parsons has started the majority of games so far which is good, obviously still adjusting to the pro game which at 20 years old is perfectly fine IMO. Good to see McDonald playing well to start the year,
I am thinking KC is not very good. I'm probably going to see a KC game sometime in December, so maybe I can give some insight.
New numbers
Tyler Parsons - Goaltender
2-4-0 with a 4.69 GAA and a .870 save percentage
Mason McDonald - Goaltender
2-2-0 with a 3.66 GAA and a .872 save percentage
-
34 minutes ago, cross16 said:
For a comparison sake, Brian Elliott was excellent in the pre season last year.
something to consider.
So... should we be concerned about Smith leaping off a lower cliff instead?
Got to watch some of the game tonight and Smith didn't really inspire confidence in me.
-
Sounds like something happened recently at the Ken King press conference.
-
4 hours ago, Squilliam89 said:
That's a very hairy man...
-
Smith is good at playing the puck but doesn't that burn him sometimes? That might stress me out.
-
16 hours ago, MAC331 said:
Crossbars, Life of a Goalie. He must of been in good position if all there was is a crossbar to it. This will become a pairing as time goes on, we will need both of these goalies to perform well and both are capable.
Yep, no point to covering the crossbars. A hit to it doesn't count as a goal. Only part that need any cover is inside of the post for bad ricochets. At least, being a soccer goalkeeper with so much net to cover, the crossbars aren't so important to cover. Same with posts.
-
Getting back to the defence topic, is Montoya that bad or is Le Habs D that bad? 10-0 to Columbus. I think I can hear the cursing in French all the way down here. I'm thinking good defence and good goaltending effect each other in a feedback loop. How will Le Habs D look in front of Price next game I wonder?
-
What's funny about all this is that we're carrying 8 defensemen.
I think brodie will have to play on the left side if he isn't playing on Giordano's right.
With no brodano, I'd go like this.
Gio Engelland
Brodie Hamilton
Kulak Jokipakka
OR if you really want Brodie on the right [assuming no Gioham]
Gio Engelland
Kulak Brodie
Jokipakka Hamilton
Okay, it's really hard to do unless you put Gio with Hamilton.
-
2 minutes ago, ABC923 said:
Our defense is just a couple grades above a garbage fire this year. We need to seriously retool it. When Engelland is your number 3 guy, there is a problem.
Is he the number 3 though?
Who do you put in for retooling anyway?
Tyspoon and kulak are the only two who spring to mind.
-
Wild one tonight against the San Diego Gulls
Stockton 7 - SDG 5
Klimchuck with 2G 4P +4
Prybil with 1G 4P +3
Anderson with 2A +2
-
One wonders if we should be going with an "offense is the best defence" strategy with the makeup of our D-core. I don't mean abandon defense, but defend as little as needed by managing the puck and keeping it out of our end. Problem with that is... our puck management hasn't been all that great either. Nevermind.
Let's try something different. So far I've been mostly happy with these defencemen: Brodie, Joki, Kulak
Gio's been a bit up a bit down. Engelland's been okay, at about a neutral.
Wideman (minus the PP goal), D. Hamilton, and Grossman... meh to bleh.
-
Early results of the experiment is favoring JJ's argument. Just initial results though.
-
Think Grossman is the plan for Anaheim?
-
5 minutes ago, rickross said:
We need a new arena. Period. Watching Friday's game really made me realize how outdated the Saddledome is. It's served its time but that thing looks archaic when compared to Rogers Place. Now I just want a new arena so we can run an absolutely, unneccesarily long opening ceremony prior to a game against the Oilers
I think it does seem like that when compared to a brand new one. It still has it's charm, and I'm a bit attached to it tbh. The Saddledome is just an iconic piece of the Calgary downtown view.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, jjgallow said:
The Flames have set up the closest we'll ever get to a controlled experiment in hockey.
- They finished last season worst in the league for goals against
- They changed VERY LITTLE of their team, and almost None of their Defense. (Controlled environment)
- They switched out 100% of their goaltending with proven goalies (an admitted upgrade)
If goaltending was truly the Main problem last year, then we should see a Dramatic improvement this year. That is your hypothesis.
I like it. I don't think it will need to be a dramatic improvement. Just a significant one. 30 to 29 isn't significant. 30 to ~20 is.
As for the current tests, I don't think preseason says much either way unless we filter the noise from non-regulars. Might do that at some point.
I look forward to evaluating how the experiment is progressing later though.
-
Just now, AlbertaBoy12 said:
Actually montreal doesnt really have that good of a D corp, ours is better. But I will agree that good defense can make a goaltender look good, but the inverse is true that a bad goaltender can make a good defense look bad. Our defense zone coverage last year was bad along with our goaltending being bad, it had nothing to do with the players on our defense being bad.
That was my point.
All failure isn't goaltending nor all defense; all success isn't all goaltending nor all defense.
positive goaltending + positive defense = positive results
negative goaltending + negative defense = negative results
negative goaltending + positive defense or positive goaltending + negative defense = results depend on the absolute value of goaltending and defense. So it's not provable that the defense is bad. I don't think anyone would argue goaltending was positive. Defense was either negative or not positive enough to outweigh the goaltending. Change the goaltending into a positive and then you can evaluate whether D is + or -. I think we'll find out this season.
(I just came out of geophysics class if you couldn't tell. Equations. Sorry to subject y'all to it.)
-
9 minutes ago, jjgallow said:
Well obviously I must be, because the notion that you might have been wrong to pin All of last season on goaltending, or the notion that you were ever wrong about anything, actually, would be absurd.
Was all the fault of last season the goaltending? No. Was a majority of it? Yep.
Let's reverse your argument, from all failure is not how bad the goaltending is but how bad the defense is to all success is not on how good is goaltending but on how good the defense is. Does the inverse of your argument make sense still? If it does, I guess Price isn't really that good and Montreal has a great defense. Similarly, Quick must not be all that great, but LA's defense is.
Since the inverse doesn't make sense, it follows that the original argument doesn't make sense. If argument A = result B, then argument 1/A must equal result 1/B. If 1/A <//> 1/B, then A = B cannot be true either.
-
1
-
-
Didn't see this posted anywhere, but I suppose this is the best thread I saw for this.
-
Yeah, I know. It's more of being incredulous. I suppose maybe they were worried if he could be a 1a or #1. I suppose the question to be answered is who the better GK is, Allen or Elliott.
-
I still can't believe STL traded away Elliott. In the playoffs this past season I thought he was the better GK and was a major reason STL managed to get the Sharks to game 7. That's my opinion, but he seemed better under pressure than Allen.
-
https://www.nhl.com/news/brian-elliott-ready-for-top-goalie-spot-with-calgary/c-281244182
Whole article and 2 videos here
That works even better.
I think BE and CJ are going to be a good team. BE has some questions as to how many games he can play but CJ played pretty well as the replacement starter for the Sabers. So if BE is injured or needs more rest, I'm pretty comfortable with CJ as a backup/relief option.
Stockton Heat Updates [2016-2017]
in Calgary Wranglers and Flames Prospects
Posted
Worse is that if we had won, we would have been in the playoffs.