GDT: Game 11: Columbus Blue Jackets vs. Calgary Flames |2/7 7PM EST FSO|

[db2011]

Let me break this down for you. We have 7 points out of 10 games. THat would be on pace to get 57 out of 82 points.

Last season the top team had 111 points (Vancouver). The league Average (15-16th place teams) had 92 points. The last place CBJ had 65 points.

An average team that didn't make the playoffs (point totals of 14 teams that did not qualify for the playoffs divided by 14) was 81.6 points last season.

So yes 3-6-1 is horrible. It's worst than last season which was bad enough.

Getting to 82 points (.500) is bad hockey. We can't even get a whiff of that.

gee, thanks for doing that. Here I was enjoying this season a lot more than the Scott Arniel black hole that saw the most powerful people affiliated with the club get on a plane to convince a crybaby in Jersey to come play in Columbus, and the best player this team will see in a long, long time demand a trade.


thanks for breaking it down for me. when the season ends and the point totals match your projected numbers, I'll buy it. Until then, I'll enjoy watching a young team that didn't have the benefit of a training camp get to know each other and begin to play better hockey.

3-2 jackets in regulation

 

[jackets4life]

I think a good draft this year would really go a long way.

My favorite teams this year are whoever is playing the Jackets, Kings, and Rangers. I'll still root for my team of course, but have no problem losing if this draft pays off.

 

[1857 Howitzer]

gee, thanks for doing that. Here I was enjoying this season a lot more than the Scott Arniel black hole that saw the most powerful people affiliated with the club get on a plane to convince a crybaby in Jersey to come play in Columbus, and the best player this team will see in a long, long time demand a trade.


thanks for breaking it down for me. when the season ends and the point totals match your projected numbers, I'll buy it. Until then, I'll enjoy watching a young team that didn't have the benefit of a training camp get to know each other and begin to play better hockey.

3-2 jackets in regulation

Well put.

 

[Jorge]

This is a winnable game. If Bob is on, we win it.

Exactly. He had the flu last Thursday, and despite a habit of giving up the early goal he's looked pretty good to me so far. Now that I think about it, Mason hasn't been terrible in his own right.

Calgary is awful, but we get a solid performance from the CBJ. Jackets, 4-1.

 

[JacketsDavid]

What did you think us trading Nash for 2 depth players a prospect and a pick would suddenly cure our woe?

Nash didn't even want to be here last year (or the year before, maybe not for awhile?). If he was half as good as what many of you valued him at he would have gotten us to closer to 500.
Elite players don't lead their teams to last place years.

 

[JacketsDavid]

gee, thanks for doing that. Here I was enjoying this season a lot more than the Scott Arniel black hole that saw the most powerful people affiliated with the club get on a plane to convince a crybaby in Jersey to come play in Columbus, and the best player this team will see in a long, long time demand a trade.


thanks for breaking it down for me. when the season ends and the point totals match your projected numbers, I'll buy it. Until then, I'll enjoy watching a young team that didn't have the benefit of a training camp get to know each other and begin to play better hockey.

3-2 jackets in regulation

The "Scott Arniel Blackhole" was caused by ownership believing in the young players and their thoughts that they could simply outscore the opposition. Definetely shows how foolish Management was to look at that team and believe they could win a lot of 5-4 games.

As far as Carter, again it was Management's call to make that trade for a guy who didn't want to be a leader and just signed a contract to play in Philly. Their were tons of questions about him - yet ownership chose to trade for him. It does clearly show how much of a blackhole we have when a guy doesn't want to play here.

Management has screwed up this organization so badly (firing Hitch, trusting a bunch of young players) that even a guy like JD will take time to dig out.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Let me break this down for you. We have 7 points out of 10 games. THat would be on pace to get 57 out of 82 points.

Last season the top team had 111 points (Vancouver). The league Average (15-16th place teams) had 92 points. The last place CBJ had 65 points.

An average team that didn't make the playoffs (point totals of 14 teams that did not qualify for the playoffs divided by 14) was 81.6 points last season.

So yes 3-6-1 is horrible. It's worst than last season which was bad enough.

Getting to 82 points (.500) is bad hockey. We can't even get a whiff of that.

Let me go further.

Last year we averaged 2.46 goals/game and 3.195 goals against/game.

This year? We're averaging only 2 goals/game and 3.2 goals against/game.

This is what happens when you keep Steve Mason and the best you can do to improve goaltending is Sergei Bobrovsky. This is what happens when you fail to supplement an already anemic offense after trading away your best offensive weapon. We spend too much time in the defensive zone because we can't mount any sustained offensive pressure. We'd need a Vezina caliber goalie to hope to win consistently and we don't have that.

We'll beat the Flames though. Why? Because it will help guaranty we don't pick #1 overall.

 

[CBJx614]

Nash didn't even want to be here last year (or the year before, maybe not for awhile?). If he was half as good as what many of you valued him at he would have gotten us to closer to 500.
Elite players don't lead their teams to last place years.

Nash hasn't been a star in my eyes in awhile. Is he good? Yes. Elite? Yes. Good enough to be a franchise center piece? No, he's a lot like Kessel. Drives to the net, makes some **** happen when he has the puck, but that's about it. Players didn't play as hard when he was on the ice. I think the trade was exactly what this franchise needed. We got depth (something we've never had with Nash here) a prospect and a pick. All its going to take now is to acquire 2 elite offensive players(through draft or trade) to set this franchise straight. We need a duo that can make something happen(Toews Kane, Sedins, Datsyuk Zetterberg, etc.)

 

[NotWendell]

To bring this back around to relevance to tonight's tilt, Calgary is probably going to have to do something similar with Igilna.

 

[CBJ103]

Prediction- At some point in the 1st period before a defensive zone face-off I turn to my son and say, "This would be a good time to have Johansen out there." Without missing a beat, he responds, "Don't worry, the other R.J. is out there.". We both laugh. This is then repeated at least a dozen times during the game.

Bonus prediction - I catch myself singing the creepy Pizza Song out loud on my way out of the arena.

 

[bizzz*]

To bring this back around to relevance to tonight's tilt, Calgary is probably going to have to do something similar with Igilna.

They should have done it a years ago. Iginla is old now and not gonna bring anything close to what Nash was traded for.

 

[Fro]

Bonus prediction - I catch myself singing the creepy Pizza Song out loud on my way out of the arena.

WE LIKE PITZA~~~~!!!!!

what a catchy song

 

[db2011]

Well put.

why thanks

 

[Mayor Bee]

Let me go further.

Last year we averaged 2.46 goals/game and 3.195 goals against/game.

This year? We're averaging only 2 goals/game and 3.2 goals against/game.

This is what happens when you keep Steve Mason and the best you can do to improve goaltending is Sergei Bobrovsky. This is what happens when you fail to supplement an already anemic offense after trading away your best offensive weapon. We spend too much time in the defensive zone because we can't mount any sustained offensive pressure. We'd need a Vezina caliber goalie to hope to win consistently and we don't have that.

We'll beat the Flames though. Why? Because it will help guaranty we don't pick #1 overall.

With a small sample size (10 games) thus far, looking at the GF/GA is an example of the old statisticians' folly (if one leg is engulfed in flames and the other encased in ice, you're perfectly comfortable). The Phoenix and Colorado games, lost by a combined 9-1 score, heavily skew things at this point. Yes, the games count as much in the standings as anything else, but it helps present a less-than-clear picture of the season so far.

 

[blahblah]

Epic battle for the West basement. This is must see garbage hockey.

 

[NotWendell]

My favorite stat: PP%+PK%
If they exceed 100, we're doing well.

 

[blahblah]

With a small sample size (10 games) thus far, looking at the GF/GA is an example of the old statisticians' folly (if one leg is engulfed in flames and the other encased in ice, you're perfectly comfortable). The Phoenix and Colorado games, lost by a combined 9-1 score, heavily skew things at this point. Yes, the games count as much in the standings as anything else, but it helps present a less-than-clear picture of the season so far.

Hey now, our PK is the top 10. I'll take it. There is some part of our game that is, right now, above average in the league. Screw statisticins' folly. I am hanging my hat on that shiz.

 

[blahblah]

My favorite stat: PP%+PK%
If they exceed 100, we're doing well.

I think that might be 105 or 110. Doing well in special teams maybe.

 

[NotWendell]

I think that might be 105 or 110. Doing well in special teams maybe.

There's only a handful of teams exceeding 110 - they're all at the top of the standings.

 

[bizzz*]

With a small sample size (10 games) thus far, looking at the GF/GA is an example of the old statisticians' folly (if one leg is engulfed in flames and the other encased in ice, you're perfectly comfortable). The Phoenix and Colorado games, lost by a combined 9-1 score, heavily skew things at this point. Yes, the games count as much in the standings as anything else, but it helps present a less-than-clear picture of the season so far.

Or you cn twist the stats another way.
Last year the Jackets had 3 points after 10 games, now they have 7.
Conclusion: this year team is twice better.

 

[CBJx614]

I just want to see John Moore back in the lineup

 

[Skraut]

There's only a handful of teams exceeding 110 - they're all at the top of the standings.

I wouldn't say they are all at the top, but they are currently in playoff contention.

Team| PP% | PK% | Combined | Standings
OTT | 27.3 | 90.9 | 118.2 | 5th East
TBL | 32.5 | 84.2 | 116.7 | 3rd East
EDM | 28.3 | 87.2 | 115.5 | 7th West
NYI | 23.7 | 90.3 | 114 | 8th East
SJS | 24.5 | 88.9 | 113.4 | 4th West
CHI | 18.4 | 94.9 | 113.3 | 1st West

 

[CapnCornelius]

With a small sample size (10 games) thus far, looking at the GF/GA is an example of the old statisticians' folly (if one leg is engulfed in flames and the other encased in ice, you're perfectly comfortable). The Phoenix and Colorado games, lost by a combined 9-1 score, heavily skew things at this point. Yes, the games count as much in the standings as anything else, but it helps present a less-than-clear picture of the season so far.

The only folly would be thinking things are going to get drastically better. I told you last season what the history of teams that finish dead last is and that history isn't being re-written by this team's performance.

3 goals has always been a pretty good indicator to me. You score 3 goals in a game, you've got a good chance to win. You let up 3 goals, your chances of winning are not good. This team has scored 3 or more goals in exactly 3 of 10 games. Two of those 3 were the first two games of the season. This team has let up 3 or more goals in 6 of 10 games (7 if you include the shootout loss to Detroit). We lost all of those 6 games.

This team is not good at scoring and isn't likely to dramatically improve in that department over the next 38 games of this season. But, I can already see that the obvious defense when it is all over is that 48 games wasn't a large enough sample size and if the team goes 6 and 4 in the last 10 games notwithstanding anything else that we should assume they would have made the playoffs if only we had played 82 games.

My favorite stat: PP%+PK%
If they exceed 100, we're doing well.

I think that might be 105 or 110. Doing well in special teams maybe.

97.8. So, just under "doing well". What is shocking is how bad the power play is considering our defensemen. Which is another indictment of this forward group.

 

[blahblah]

I wouldn't say they are all at the top, but they are currently in playoff contention.

Team| PP% | PK% | Combined | Standings
OTT | 27.3 | 90.9 | 118.2 | 5th East
TBL | 32.5 | 84.2 | 116.7 | 3rd East
EDM | 28.3 | 87.2 | 115.5 | 7th West
NYI | 23.7 | 90.3 | 114 | 8th East
SJS | 24.5 | 88.9 | 113.4 | 4th West
CHI | 18.4 | 94.9 | 113.3 | 1st West

Yeah, but at lot of those numbers are going to normalize. It's hard to run a 25%+ PP for an entire season, much like a 94.9% PK.

 

[blahblah]

97.8. So, just under "doing well". What is shocking is how bad the power play is considering our defensemen. Which is another indictment of this forward group.

There is no question that our PP looked a lot better games 1 and 2 as opposed to now. That isn't all on the forwards either. Our PP should be better than what it is. Having Brassard on the point the last game gave an interesting wrinkle that we should probably continue to utilize. He was making quicker decisions and was helping to force the defense to adjust.