I read that article this morning too. I think they sat the last 10 or 12 minutes of the 3rd and never saw the ice again.
- stashu

I have them both on my HBSL roster.

They both better get hatties next game.

Bump for Panacea
- Der Kaiser

Nice opinion piece. Makes Garth seem credible and reasonable.

I stopped reading when he said myers was a #5 dman or a #4 at best. Apparently the coach who is giving by him more minutes than Buff the last three weeks disagrees. Is Buff a #5 dman too?

Bump for Panacea
- Der Kaiser

Nice opinion piece. Makes Garth seem credible and reasonable.

I stopped reading when he said myers was a #5 dman or a #4 at best. Apparently the coach who is giving by him more minutes than Buff the last three weeks disagrees. Is Buff a #5 dman too?

I'm not one of a fan of shaking lines every 5 games like Blysma is doing either. I have ot imagine that is detrimental.

I don't know how much of a comparison it is but when playing college football.. if one of my fellow offensive linemen was out or not playing.. we were a completely different machine.

You had to get a grasp on what their mind is going ot tell them to do in certain situations. Will they fan.. do they like to cut block.. do they leave a double team early to get to a LB.. do they typically have square shoulders or do I need to hook plant behind them more..

I'd have to imagine all of those things come into play in hockey as well... when ROR or Eichel or Skunk are in this area of the ice.. do they like to pass more.. do they like to center.. will they dangle and look for a cross ice.. when on the boards do they fight out or are they looking to pass.. when on the forecheck will they be aggressive or will they wait for their spot and stick lift or poke check.. where should I be for an outlet.

I can't imagine doing that with new people every stinking week. If the plan is to have everyone comfortable iwth everyone.. that is going to take even longer.
- JVince11

I agree. I've never really been a fan of it. I like him as a coach but things like that never really sat well with me. I don't like the other extreme either. Need a middle ground.

I think I have seen this before... did he cite his sources!!??

I'm calling Brainglueism because I know I have read that exact same thought somewhere else.
- JVince11

Might be a good descriptive word in that case.

Might be a good descriptive word in that case.
- cabin

*hits the button*

Might be a good descriptive word in that case.
- cabin

*hits the button*

Might be a good descriptive word in that case.
- cabin

*hits the button*

I did a quick goals scored projection for the remainder of the season earlier this morning, using how many games the players will likely play the remainder of the season, their career shooting % versus this seasons, whether that is higher or lower (adjusted for the aging veterans), and the amount of shots per game each has had so far this season.

The results are below, including the projected goals they will score the remainder of the season and what their total goals scored would be.

O'Reilly 11, 27
Ristolainen 6, 13
Eichel 11, 24
McGinn 7, 15
Reinhart 7, 16
Franson 4, 7
Kane 10, 18
Gionta 6, 10
Moulson 6, 10
Ennis 7, 10
Legwand 3, 5
Girgensons 6, 9
Foligno 3, 5
Deslauriers 2, 5
McCabe 2, 5
Gorges 1, 2
Bogosian 2, 3
Larsson 3, 4
Weber 1, 1
Pysyk 1, 1

That would be roughly 188-190 total goals, which is around 2.3 to 2.5 goals per game, and that total will only happy if a few who have lower than normal shooting percentages pick up the pace.

From my seats in Section 307, we outworked the Panthers and out-chanced them in the first period. Jack's great chance early might have been called a penalty, and a couple other good opportunities didn't go in.

The Panthers play a smothering system that clogs up the ice - they stepped into passing lanes ALL night long.

Eventually, after all the chances don't go in, Ullmark lets one in, and the air goes out of the team. The dominance stops, they start to grip their sticks a little tighter, the Panthers keep stepping into lanes, and the ice tilts.

It's like an python with a groundhog, slow gradual suffocation.
- Der Kaiser

m

Like the seats?

New Blog and stuff.

That would be roughly 188-190 total goals, which is around 2.3 to 2.5 goals per game, and that total will only happy if a few who have lower than normal shooting percentages pick up the pace.
- kingcong39

While goals for is obviously disturbing again this season, it's not like they're so horrible.

NJ has 1 more goal scored than Buffalo yet 11 more points in the standings (15 less allowed)

Pittsburgh has 1 goal more and is 9 points better in the standings (14 less allowed)

Philly has 9 less and has 5 more points than Buffalo

Columbus has 13 more goals scored yet is the worst team in the NHL (more goals than 14 other teams)

I did a quick goals scored projection for the remainder of the season earlier this morning, using how many games the players will likely play the remainder of the season, their career shooting % versus this seasons, whether that is higher or lower (adjusted for the aging veterans), and the amount of shots per game each has had so far this season.

The results are below, including the projected goals they will score the remainder of the season and what their total goals scored would be.

O'Reilly 11, 27
Ristolainen 6, 13
Eichel 11, 24
McGinn 7, 15
Reinhart 7, 16
Franson 4, 7
Kane 10, 18
Gionta 6, 10
Moulson 6, 10
Ennis 7, 10
Legwand 3, 5
Girgensons 6, 9
Foligno 3, 5
Deslauriers 2, 5
McCabe 2, 5
Gorges 1, 2
Bogosian 2, 3
Larsson 3, 4
Weber 1, 1
Pysyk 1, 1

That would be roughly 188-190 total goals, which is around 2.3 to 2.5 goals per game, and that total will only happy if a few who have lower than normal shooting percentages pick up the pace.
- kingcong39

Last year we scored 168. So if that was true we'd have 20 more goals than last year. Arizona, New Jersey, and Carolina had 188 or less.

Last year we were also 29th in Goals Against with 274 (Edmonton had 283). At this point we have 110. If we double that we're at 220. That'd be 54 less goals and 20 more goals so a net of 74 goals better than while we were tanking. Obviously these predictions mean little to nothing but looking at them is interesting.

Girgensons is the only one I'm not worried about, because even when he hasn't been getting on the scoresheet, he's been "producing" in other ways. But Ennis and Moulson have been cement blocks dragging us down for sure, and Kane has had some really good games, but he's also had some really awful ones.

I expected there to be a ton of inconsistency from one game to the next this year. To expect anything different would be crazy. But I was hoping that by now they'd be able to string more wins than losses together and it's trending the opposite at the moment.
- HonkFortheGoose

Looks like they'll keep Girgensons with Eichel for a bit. Hopeful that will continue to work & get Girgs on the scoresheet a bit more.
For Ennis & Moulson, why not try them back together. They seemed to have nice chemistry in the past, with multiple centers. Since Girgensons is playing with Eichel at the moment, maybe Larsson in between them will work out?
Kane with Reinhart can work nicely, but like I said before, I'm not too worried about him. His low shooting percentage looks like an anomaly to me.

This year is going how I thought it would for the most part
I did expect a bit more scoring, but I also thought it would take a bit for these guys to come together as a team.
I wouldn't be surprised if we finished the season on a high note.
Even in the games we lose, we've been playing well for stretches. I expect consistency to continue to improve as we move forward.