Thursday, March 23, 2006

Better to be lucky than good?

Ever seen a team get 3 lucky goals like that in period? It's been a while for me, anyways.

(1) Torres whifs on a slapshot, but it finds a hole

(2) Torres Johnny on the spot after Carney runs into the linesman creating a break

(3) Carter flubs a pass, Pisani tucks her home.

Some other 2nd period thoughts...

I'd like to see another replay of the 2nd VAN goal, especially from overhead to see what went wrong there. On the one hand it was kind of a bad break, the way it went off Pronger, but he didn't react fast There was some sort of strange switch there as well, kind of a weird goal.

I also had a chuckle when Stoll went out for Spacek on the PP, who said it's hard to be an NHL coach? Won the faceoff and another nice Hemsky setup was squandered. that wasn't an easy play for Samsonov, but still, you'd have to think he should have cashed at least one of his 3 good chances tonight.

Peca had an neat sequence about 3 minutes into the 2nd, he made a bad telegraphed pass in the offensive zone but hustled back to make the defensive save at the other end. Kind of fun to watch.

With regards to the Spacek high stick, I didn't know that was the correct ruling. I know that you are allowed to follow through on a shot, I didn't know you could follow thru like that clearing the defensive zone. I'm not saying I have a problem with that rule (though I can understand the argument that any high stick should be called a high stick), but I wasn't aware it applied anywhere but after a shot. Learn something new every day.


Blogger Vic Ferrari said...

Nope, I haven't seen 3 lucky ones in a row like that, not in a long time anyways. Though the first one was more just a soft goal on a nice setup.

I'm sure Samsonov has had hat tricks in games where he's had fewer quality chances.

On the Sedin goal, bit of confusion there on the shift between Dmen I thought. I blame Bergeron, as soon as the Sedin crossed the imaginary line behind the net Bergy is the strong side D ... he obviously didn't think so. Having Torres as the 1F didn't help. But with the Oilers this year we see the wingers in that spot a helluva lot. And I can live with that, the natural consequence of the aggression going forward I think.

And Georges and Peca played a terrific period of hockey I thought.

3/23/2006 9:55 pm  
Blogger RiversQ said...

It's about time speeds. Welcome aboard.

The Oilers dominated the shots directed at net stat after two periods.

3/23/2006 10:14 pm  
Blogger speeds said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3/23/2006 10:27 pm  
Anonymous Julian said...

There was a period a few minutes into the 2nd, just after the canucks got their second, when Peca's 4th line just dominated. They didn't get many great chances, but they held on the puck for the entire shift, it was great to see. Gave me a little hope there...

3/23/2006 11:46 pm  
Blogger RiversQ said...

Really, the Oilers could pick three guys to replace Spacek on the first unit and all of them would probably be an upgrade:

Option A would be to replace him with Tarnstrom and hope Smyth can win the draws.

Option B would be to replace him with Stoll like MacT did last night.

Option C would be to replace him with Horcoff for the draws and have Hemsky move back to the point.

Given Horcoff's admittedly inexplicable career PP production, I'm beginning to like Option C. It will get the five best performers out there and I'd really like to see Hemsky and Pronger at the points. That would leave Torres, Stoll, Pisani, Tarnstrom and Spacek for the second unit.

3/24/2006 2:26 pm  
Blogger Dennis said...

yeah I like that idea and I don't really care about who's on the second line:) MacT did smarten up by the end of the night and put 16 out there to win the draws though. And Hemsky wasn't in love with passing to Spacek last night either.

I have the feeling this PP is gonna explode for a four or five game stretch. Samsonov blew three huge opps to score last night. He or whomever else Hemsky sets up, unless it's Spacek;) won't keep missing for much longer.

And yes welcome aboard Mike!!!

3/24/2006 2:47 pm  
Blogger speeds said...

rivers, what is Tarnstrom's career PPP per hour like in comparison to Pronger? Just out of curiousity.

I kinda like the idea of Tarnstrom on that opposite point, becaus he's very smart about when to cheat in, how to find seams to get in position for a pass. I really can't beleive that MacT has Spacek on the first unit ahead of Tarnstrom, because Tarnstrom's skill set is a much better fit with Samsonov and Hemsky on the opposite side.

We'll see what Schremp is like next season, it's pie in the sky but if he can own the RW half wall the same way Hemsky does there won't be any good way to defend against the Oilers PP - assuming both can play on the same unit without the puck on their stick all the time.

3/24/2006 2:58 pm  
Blogger RiversQ said...

speeds said...
rivers, what is Tarnstrom's career PPP per hour like in comparison to Pronger? Just out of curiousity.

Pronger's recent 3-yr average prior to this season is 4.4 PPP/hr.

Tarnstrom's is 4.7 PPP/hr.

Over 800min for each of them in this timespan. This period also contains seasons with different linemates on the PP. ie. For Tarnstrom: w/ and w/o Lemieux. For Pronger: w/ and w/o MacInnis. I'd say these are fairly reliable numbers. Still though it's probably just a slight edge to Tarnstrom.

My problem with Tarnstrom is that I think you have to play Smyth, Samsonov, Hemsky and Pronger out there, so it helps a lot if the fifth guy is a centre.

Just based on PPP/hr and overall skill, you could argue that Smyth could be the odd man out. However, I have a feeling his PPGD/hr number is top three on the club because his presence in front of the net is pretty significant to this PP.

3/24/2006 3:46 pm  
Blogger speeds said...

I think it would be interesting to see a PP of good puckmovers, something like:


I don't know if it would be any better or worse than it is now, but I'd like to see it anyways, lol.

3/24/2006 4:13 pm  
Blogger speeds said...

I should probably say that I'm not sure that PP would really be much better than it is now, obviously both Smyth and Pronger are good at moving the puck, this would be a PP unit where you'd be trying to move the puck around the outside to find and exploit a weakness in the box and, in thinking about it, is it really gonna get much better than what Hemsky and Pronger do already?

So all that to say that I think I'd in retrospect probably prefer to keep Pronger out there at Horcoff or Stoll's expense.

Still though, would like to see that PP unit just to see how they'd do, with more or less moving Smyth from in front of the net to another presence outside to zip the puck around.

3/24/2006 4:17 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home