GDT: Los Angeles @ Carolina: The King(s) and Eye(s)? edition

[RodTheBawd]

Or if a few bounces swing the other way in the first 8. Or if they had shootout shooters that could shoot.

Don't rain on my butterfly effect parade. I'm too busy raining on the <insert 2 game overreaction reason> parade.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

I guess you missed the point. If they had slotted Semin in today, who would they have to subtract or move and to where? How many others get shuffled in the depth of the roster...the very players that worked together well enough to generate the points for the first win. This is a team that had lost to every basement-dweller it had faced. There was nothing good going on as a team. They had briefly achieved a lead in any game, what...a total of 3 times only up to that point?, and held onto none, obviously.

I don't know what to say if you didn't see something different vs Arizona. Every goal they scored vs Arizona was generated through support near the net, and the goals did not represent the extent of the scoring chances they had on follow-up. From Cam out the performance was better than any time this season, and with no glaring deficiencies which was a first.

You're so focused on one guy and his skills talent you're missing the picture as it existed at decision time where the goal is to win the next game and the team worked well together, especially if what they saw was a dramatic improvement in the overall execution of what they are after.

And I know its so easy to assume here that coaches and GMs are stupid, but its ridiculous to think that before a short back-to-back they didn't foresee what the different outcomes could be and weigh the options of what to do with Semin after Game 1 depending on what it was. It's no different than choosing which goalie to go with depending on how he looks and weighing risk vs reward. If the quality of Ward's play and his elevated game on Saturday determined that he played on Sunday, why would it be any different when making a decision about the rest of the roster especially when one guy's return, that you found deficient enough to bench, would reshuffle the lot?

I agree with most of this, though I like to think that I am more of an apologist for the org/coach than the average poster on this board-as in, not assuming everyone is an idiot but me.

I simply think that the better choice would be to insert Semin, with his talent level, onto the top line. Move Skinner with Lindholm-Gerbe, put Nash with Terry and Boychuk, Dwyer/Rask/McClement to the 4th line, and scratch Malone.

Though I understand your point, and agree. The issue was not so much Malone (if it were Malone vs. Semin, no contest), but that Boychuk/Terry/Rask/Gerbe/Lindholm/Nash all played exceptionally well against Arizona. If you are trying to preach accountability, would you want to "reward" that great performance with a demotion of one of those players to the 4th line, which is being used as a checking line. Gerbe would make the most sense, tactically, but he played the best out of that bunch-and the excellent game against the Kings certainly did not help Semin's case for insertion against the BJ's.

On the other hand, the 1st line continues to get dominated, and putting in a guy who hasn't played in a week, and has skill/talent in spades would be a great way to augment that, provided Semin has "learned his lesson".

So....what do you do as Bill Peters? On the one hand, the 1st line is faltering, but on the other, the depth is playing well and picking up the slack (for once; this is what the elite teams of the League have on a consistent basis that the Hurricanes do not), and Semin could easily help him out. On the other hand, if you want an "accountable" team, who do you demote?

In that framework, given that they were playing the defending Cup champs not 24 hours after their last match, I would have inserted Semin, moved Rask to the 4th line and given him a bunch of PP time, then played it up as Semin being the key to get that 1st line going. And to be fair, they probably would have lost, as Rask scored a goal doing what Bill Peters is preaching.

I simply think that the above has the highest winning percentage. You and Bill Peters disagree, and the Hurricanes won. I hope they continue to do so, even if it means to keep proving me wrong.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Also, Bill Peters is even more aggressive than Muller. 3 men deep (in actuality this time, if anyone remembers that ), with d-men pinching all the time. The defensive schemes are radically different from the last regime, so I'm not too worried about Sekera-Faulk. Hainsey, a little, because he is slower and older. Can't teach an old dog new tricks.

If we're going to suck, at least we will play fun hockey. Also, I'm upset that I missed this game. Playing against the Cup Champs on a back to back? Not worth 10$.

 

[What the Faulk]

I simply think that the above has the highest winning percentage. You and Bill Peters disagree, and the Hurricanes won. I hope they continue to do so, even if it means to keep proving me wrong.

If you're about to be late, and you decide to run a red and get there just in time, does that make running the red the right call? It was still dangerous and more often than not, you're going to get hit. It's possible to have a favorable outcome while not necessarily making the "right" call.

He's the coach and he's allowed to make those types of decisions (that's why he was hired of course), and I'm sure in his opinion he made the "right" call before and after. But no one is above criticism, least of all a coach who's just starting out his career. It's fair to question the decision then, and it's fair to still question it despite the win.

That said, I'm glad they won and there are way more interesting things to talk about.

 

[the halleJOKEL]

lets talk about bees

 

[Navin R Slavin]

If you're about to be late, and you decide to run a red and get there just in time, does that make running the red the right call? It was still dangerous and more often than not, you're going to get hit. It's possible to have a favorable outcome while not necessarily making the "right" call.

How do you know? How many red lights have you run? How can you quantify "more often than not?" Does someone have access to Running Red Light Advanced Stats?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I don't look at this like running red lights, because that example assumes up front that you are doing something wrong. I look at this more as you are consistently late for work because you keep getting stopped at red lights, so the next day, you decide to try a different route which, while longer, has less traffic lights.

 

[the halleJOKEL]

How do you know? How many red lights have you run? How can you quantify "more often than not?" Does someone have access to Running Red Light Advanced Stats?

all police departments have access to drivers red lights run vs red lights caught running stats so it is only natural that we can calculate corsi and fenwick and whatever other stats you would like

assuming you can file for and obtain a... police report

 

[rocky7]

If you're about to be late, and you decide to run a red and get there just in time, does that make running the red the right call? It was still dangerous and more often than not, you're going to get hit. It's possible to have a favorable outcome while not necessarily making the "right" call.

He's the coach and he's allowed to make those types of decisions (that's why he was hired of course), and I'm sure in his opinion he made the "right" call before and after. But no one is above criticism, least of all a coach who's just starting out his career. It's fair to question the decision then, and it's fair to still question it despite the win.

That said, I'm glad they won and there are way more interesting things to talk about.

when Muller was hired he was above any type of criticism for a long time. that's the way it goes I suppose. What if they would have hired Trotz or Bylsma, experienced NHL coaches? same thing I suspect. it's just too soon to say much especially with a lack of transparency and a biased media. have to wait and see is all but you're right, it's very fair to question.

lets talk about bees

and birds.....

 

[DaveG]

lets talk about bees

Save the bees, ban pesticides that are harmful to them, they're too vital for our food chain.

 

[nobuddy]

lets talk about bees

Beads?

 

[Novacane]

Save the bees, ban pesticides that are harmful to them, they're too vital for our food chain.

good man

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

good man

I think Dave is more concerned about having a supply of honey for his beer making adventures.

 

[RodTheBawd]

Hipsters

 

[DaveG]

I think Dave is more concerned about having a supply of honey for his beer making adventures.

That too.

 

[Quacktastic]

Beads?

Beans?

 

[AD Skinner]

Beans?

 

[Oogie Boogie]

The best Bean of all

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

The character Beans, from Even Stevens, the one that looked like this:

Grew up to look like this:

 

[rocky7]

just wondering that Goalie Coach D. Marcoux must have had a custom made mask........

 

[Bub]

Beads?

BEES.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Bees.

 

[Novacane]

Bees.

 

[Carolinas Identity*]

"The Wicker Man" is the second worst movie ever, of all time. Just a bit ahead of "Dream Catcher" and only slightly better than "Ginger Snaps", which is literally "Dawson's Creek" with a werewolf.

It does have one minor redeeming quality to it though. And I think you all know what it is, but in case you don't, here it is.

 

[bleedgreen]

It's true. That's the worst movie I ever saw in a movie theater. Close seconds are johnny mnemonic and the last pirates of the Caribbean. I walked out of both of those. My date insisted we stay for the wicker man. Her movie privileges were revoked.