GDT: Wings @ Hawks 5pm NBC sports chicago (Chelios jersey retirement night)

[clydesdale line]

If they are going to start with Bedard, than they need to get someone on there with him who has a better chance of winning the face-off.

I said it a game ago you live with your best player, you die with your best player. Bedard should always start OT. Now as far as winning a faceoff, I would start Dickinson and THEN you can bring Kurashev on the ice if that's the plan you want. Or Bedard can take the faceoff win or lose cause the kid still has to develop that aspect of his game by you know... taking faceoffs. This season doesn't matter anyways about winning or losing. You're suppose to develop these kids.

 

[Hawkaholic]

The screen grab is from the split second before the dman moves his stick into the lane. You can see he is already shaded towards Bedard and is giving Jones the lane to the net. Also, the back checker has got his stick coming into that lane too.

As for Krashev, yes he was open, but he also was also at a worse angle than Jones and is even more on top of the goalie than Jones is. I do agree that is a better option than Bedard, but I would argue that the player taking the lane to the net and shooting it himself is still the better option. Especially when you factor in shitty overtime ice and all that can happen with a pass in those conditions.

Again, I am by no means a Jones lover. His execution was terrible and I was yelling at the TV just like all of you were. I just think it's disingenuous to pretend after the fact that taking a clear path to the net when it is there is somehow a bonehead decision.

This is a screenshot of when Jones decided to shoot it into the goalies pads. No stick in the lane, the guy to Jones back left was behind him, wouldn't be able to intercept the pass, if he does a simple saucer pass to Bedard. Kurashev is at a worse angle, for the goalie, not for the shot. Not to mention, Kurashev was there the entire time, wide open, but Jones wanted to play hero, but he sucks so he can't do that.

 

[Chelios]

This is a screenshot of when Jones decided to shoot it into the goalies pads. No stick in the lane, the guy to Jones back left was behind him, wouldn't be able to intercept the pass, if he does a simple saucer pass to Bedard. Kurashev is at a worse angle, for the goalie, not for the shot. Not to mention, Kurashev was there the entire time, wide open, but Jones wanted to play hero, but he sucks so he can't do that.

View attachment 825551

Do you want me to use a red line to show you the direct path to the net Jones has?

 

[Hawkaholic]

Do you want me to use a red line to show you the direct path to the net Jones has?

lol, yes, and show me all the open space he has to score on the goalie while you are at it. And remember, he has 1 goal on the year. 1!!!!!!!! goal

But its funny how you aren't arguing about the lanes being closed now. If you would have just stuck to the argument of "I'm fine with him taking the shot on goal", I wouldn't be arguing with you, other than to say i'd rather he give the guy with near 20 Gs the shot rather than the guy who can't put a puck in the ocean.

 

[Chelios]

lol, yes, and show me all the open space he has to score on the goalie while you are at it. And remember, he has 1 goal on the year. 1!!!!!!!! goal

But its funny how you aren't arguing about the lanes being closed now. If you would have just stuck to the argument of "I'm fine with him taking the shot on goal", I wouldn't be arguing with you, other than to say i'd rather he give the guy with near 20 Gs the shot rather than the guy who can't put a puck in the ocean.

See attached. I was wrong on the timing, the D man had his stick in the lane prior to not after the screen grabs posted not after. Doesn't change the substance of my argument. Detroit was playing the pass to Bedard (for good reason). Even when the dman moves his stick out of that lane he shades his body positioning more towards Bedard, giving Jones more of a direct path to the net. The pass to Bedard would absolutely have been a high risk play. And I am willing to bet a large amount of money that had Jones tried to make that pass and it got intercepted you would be one of the first people lining up to ridicule him.

 

[ChiHawks10]

this game proved my point from the last game that there's no good reason to start Bedard in OT. The correct way to deploy Bedard is to have him on the bench to start, but as soon as we get possession the forwards need to get off the ice and let Bedard come over the boards. Even if we win the opening draw like we did the game before. The two stiffs on the ice should immediately change so Bedard/whoever else can get out there for the offensive possession.

It's a complete waste of resources to have Bedard out there for a minute and a half chasing the puck.

A change, even if you win the draw, isn't always possible. It makes zero sense to not have your best player on the ice for it from the first faceoff.

 

[ChiHawks10]

See attached. I was wrong on the timing, the D man had his stick in the lane prior to not after the screen grabs posted not after. Doesn't change the substance of my argument. Detroit was playing the pass to Bedard (for good reason). Even when the dman moves his stick out of that lane he shades his body positioning more towards Bedard, giving Jones more of a direct path to the net. The pass to Bedard would absolutely have been a high risk play. And I am willing to bet a large amount of money that had Jones tried to make that pass and it got intercepted you would be one of the first people lining up to ridicule him.

The truth of the situation is that Jones had hero goggles on that blinded him(as well as his head buried down in the ice staring at the puck), and either option of Kurashev or Bedard, at that moment, would have been a better option than taking the shot himself, with a goalie focused solely on him, and squared up, giving away no angles for a shot. It was a braindead play, because you can pass a puck way faster than a defender can move either his body, or his stick into the lane. Just like you can pass a puck way faster than a goalie can get side to side the vast majority of the time. Jones has zero IQ in the offensive zone, so I'm not shocked he chose what he chose, but that doesn't change the fact that either option was a better option than him taking the shot himself, with nobody back to defend if it didn't go in.

 

[Hawkaholic]

See attached. I was wrong on the timing, the D man had his stick in the lane prior to not after the screen grabs posted not after. Doesn't change the substance of my argument. Detroit was playing the pass to Bedard (for good reason). Even when the dman moves his stick out of that lane he shades his body positioning more towards Bedard, giving Jones more of a direct path to the net. The pass to Bedard would absolutely have been a high risk play. And I am willing to bet a large amount of money that had Jones tried to make that pass and it got intercepted you would be one of the first people lining up to ridicule him.

Yes, I would ridicule him if he doesn't execute that pass, because it's a pass a vet NHLer should be able to make at least 75% of the time. It really wasnt that high risk. Bedard is wide open, ready to take the shot, and the goalie is committed to Jones. It's a wide open shot, all Jones has to do is make the simple pass.

 

[Chelios]

I give up.

 

[statswatcher]

.Compared to....Seth jones? A top pairing guy who's contract won't matter in a couple years after the cap goes up? A guy who plays 25 minutes a night in the nhl now suddenly has less value then a guy who so far is just a guy on an elc?

Is this real life?

Is Connor Bedard> Connor McDavid because he's on an elc?

seth jones isn’t even a top four defenseman on a playoff team, and his cap hit will be more than 10% of the cap until it rises by 13 million dollars.

utterly delusional. it’s silly season folks!

 

[Pez68]

We are arguing that a defenseman in the NHL, making $9.5M a season, can't pass through lanes that most high level beer league players can pass through... This entire discussion is absurd. The trailing Detroit player was never really in a good position to defend the pass to Bedard. The defenseman was kind of in no-man's land.

Both Bedard and Kurashev were open as he carried the puck towards the net with his f***ing head down. He never even saw them. That's the biggest problem here. He went full head down tunnel vision as a guy who has scored a single goal all season. And he NEVER had a chance to score, because the goalie saw his head down and gave him zero net.

 

[shakes the clown]

A change, even if you win the draw, isn't always possible. It makes zero sense to not have your best player on the ice for it from the first faceoff.

disagree 100%. I can't think of a single scenario where you win a draw in OT and are unable to make a change of even just one player. it's not that complicated. You win the draw, take in back into your zone, play a little keep away and then quickly get the near forward off and replace him with Bedard.

 

[ChiHawks10]

disagree 100%. I can't think of a single scenario where you win a draw in OT and are unable to make a change of even just one player. it's not that complicated. You win the draw, take in back into your zone, play a little keep away and then quickly get the near forward off and replace him with Bedard.

So waste 30 seconds of time, and risk a mistake, or a good play by an opposing player defending, or getting caught 3 vs 2, for... what reason? Like, just out of curiosity, what is your whole reasoning for not bothering to have him on the ice at the draw? One, he needs to get better at faceoffs anyways, and this is already a lost season with the sole purpose of developing these young players. Why wouldn't you have him out there even for the purpose of getting better at taking draws? Two, you can put someone else out there with him, who is better at draws, and not take your best player off the ice for possibly a minute or more of OT.

I just don't quite understand your logic here. If I'm being completely honest... there really is no logic in the decision to not have him start OT.

 

[Paul Allen]

All Jones had to do on that play was pass to Kurashev, stop at the net, take Cat with him, leaving 98 with an empty net back door.

 

[shakes the clown]

So waste 30 seconds of time, and risk a mistake, or a good play by an opposing player defending, or getting caught 3 vs 2, for... what reason? Like, just out of curiosity, what is your whole reasoning for not bothering to have him on the ice at the draw? One, he needs to get better at faceoffs anyways, and this is already a lost season with the sole purpose of developing these young players. Why wouldn't you have him out there even for the purpose of getting better at taking draws? Two, you can put someone else out there with him, who is better at draws, and not take your best player off the ice for possibly a minute or more of OT.

I just don't quite understand your logic here. If I'm being completely honest... there really is no logic in the decision to not have him start OT.

I guess I should've explained it in this thread rather than just referencing my thoughts in the other thread. The logic is pretty simple...it's a waste of Bedard to have him out there chasing the other team for an entire OT shift. There are plenty of other times in a game where he can work on face offs.

Everyone on the Hawks is terrible at draws so odds are we are going to lose the opening faceoff. And the way OT works these days once you lose possession the chances of getting it back in the same shift are slim. Especially when the other team sees Bedard out there. Strategically it makes sense for them to play keep away till Bedard is tired and has to change.

So I think the obvious smart thing to do is to hold him back till we get possession and then throw him out there so he has a full shift with the puck.

That's how you take advantage rather than waste the valuable resource we have.

 

[ChiHawks10]

I guess I should've explained it in this thread rather than just referencing my thoughts in the other thread. The logic is pretty simple...it's a waste of Bedard to have him out there chasing the other team for an entire OT shift. There are plenty of other times in a game where he can work on face offs.

Everyone on the Hawks is terrible at draws so odds are we are going to lose the opening faceoff. And the way OT works these days once you lose possession the chances of getting it back in the same shift are slim. Especially when the other team sees Bedard out there. Strategically it makes sense for them to play keep away till Bedard is tired and has to change.

So I think the obvious smart thing to do is to hold him back till we get possession and then throw him out there so he has a full shift with the puck.

That's how you take advantage rather than waste the valuable resource we have.

How often do you see other teams in the NHL not start their best players at the beginning of OT?

You can literally put Bedard out with Foligno or Dickinson to start OT, and their FO%s are both around 50%. So why wouldn't you?

3 on 3 OT is almost exclusively a period of pure luck, so I just don't see the issue with him being on the ice. Especially if you put him with one of the guys who has a 50% FO%.

 

[shakes the clown]

How often do you see other teams in the NHL not start their best players at the beginning of OT?

You can literally put Bedard out with Foligno or Dickinson to start OT, and their FO%s are both around 50%. So why wouldn't you?

3 on 3 OT is almost exclusively a period of pure luck, so I just don't see the issue with him being on the ice. Especially if you put him with one of the guys who has a 50% FO%.

how many other teams are there in the league that have exactly one offensively skilled player?


Why take a risk on a 50% chance when you can just wait 10 seconds to make sure you have the puck? I like 100% chance better than 50% chance.

 

[ChiHawks10]

how many other teams are there in the league that have exactly one offensively skilled player?


Why take a risk on a 50% chance when you can just wait 10 seconds to make sure you have the puck? I like 100% chance better than 50% chance.

Because there's no guarantee it will be 10 seconds, and as was already said, you don't want your best offensive weapon to never even get a shot at touching the ice and puck in OT. We can agree to disagree if you want, but I just don't see any logical reasoning for not having him on the ice. This year is basically meaningless, too, so it's silly to me that Richardson wouldn't put him on the ice to start. If you have him on the ice, and you lose, who gives a shit? It's a tank season.

 

[Chuck Testa]

At the end of the day… 1 point > 2 points in a tank season

 

[shakes the clown]

Because there's no guarantee it will be 10 seconds, and as was already said, you don't want your best offensive weapon to never even get a shot at touching the ice and puck in OT. We can agree to disagree if you want, but I just don't see any logical reasoning for not having him on the ice. This year is basically meaningless, too, so it's silly to me that Richardson wouldn't put him on the ice to start. If you have him on the ice, and you lose, who gives a shit? It's a tank season.

you're right, it might be longer than 10 seconds. last night it was 1:30. There's zero point in having Bedard out there chasing the puck for an entire shift. The benefit if getting him out there when it's guaranteed we have the puck even if it's over a minute into OT far outweighs the benefit of getting him more shifts in OT if one of those shifts consists of him just chasing the puck.

I'd rather have him get 2 guaranteed shifts where we have possession vs however many shifts he would get if he was just thrown out there regardless of possession.

 

[ClydeLee]

How often do you see other teams in the NHL not start their best players at the beginning of OT?

You can literally put Bedard out with Foligno or Dickinson to start OT, and their FO%s are both around 50%. So why wouldn't you?

3 on 3 OT is almost exclusively a period of pure luck, so I just don't see the issue with him being on the ice. Especially if you put him with one of the guys who has a 50% FO%.

Plenty... I don't get this point, like this is a rare thing. You see teams do this plenty where a defensive couple guys take the draw. If you have elite 2way guys, you're set

But I dont get this from this fanbase. I guess you falsely recall Kane starting OT all the time? He didn't.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Plenty... I don't get this point, like this is a rare thing. You see teams do this plenty where a defensive couple guys take the draw. If you have elite 2way guys, you're set

But I dont get this from this fanbase. I guess you falsely recall Kane starting OT all the time? He didn't.

I mean, he was out there to start a large chunk of the time, unless he was coming off a shift actually finishing the game prior to OT starting. From my recollection it was Toews, Kane, Keith to start quite a bit. Difference being, they actually had a boatload of weapons who could play in OT. Not just one guy who was the only shot at winning. Haha.

 

[Hawkaholic]

I don't have a problem with starting Bedard in OT, and could see the argument for not starting him if we were fighting for a playoff position and needing wins.

I don't see why you don't start him and have him learn to defend and how to play 3 on 3 in the NHL.

That's most of this teams problems right now. A head coach that's focused on wins, the players want to win, but our GM wants to lose. Makes it difficult on the players and fans.

 

[MarotteMarauder]

Choices, choices, choices such is the game of hockey. I choose to have 98 one time it against a moving goalie instead of an offensively brain dead defenseman shooting at a squared up goalie.

That's just me though.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Choices, choices, choices such is the game of hockey. I choose to have 98 one time it against a moving goalie instead of an offensively brain dead defenseman shooting at a squared up goalie.

That's just me though.

You forgot the part where he never even looked up from the ice while he stared at the puck, so he had no real way of knowing where to even shoot.

He really is braindead out there at this point.