Post-Game Talk: Penguins 3 @ Canucks 2 || It's isn't Fehr that we can't win games that Maatta.

Status
Not open for further replies.

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
Not sure about that.

He played 5 more shifts in the first. The goal happened on his second shift. He had 7 shifts in the period which is pretty normal.

He got benched because when Willie sees the team is struggling to get anything going he relies fully on the veterans. McCann got benched at the same time and he certainly didn't make a huge mistake that I could see.

And really, if you are going to bench a kid for failing to get the puck out and it leading to a goal, there isn't a kid in the league that would ever get icetime under Willie. And to me that typically hasn't been a huge issue with Virtanen...his coverage at times yes but not the getting the puck out.

Yeah, I'm not saying I agree with Willie's reasoning, but I think that play probably justified to him why he doesn't play the young guys a whole lot.

My points was that Higgins being back is immaterial. He would've played someone like Prust or Cracknell over Virtanen in a similar situation as well.
 

Jimson Hogarth*

Registered User
Nov 21, 2013
12,858
3
What? Past performance should absolutely play into it. If Tanev has a **** game you give him a pass because he's typically outstanding. You don't start calling his effort level or ability into question. You call it a poor game and that's the end of it.

I don't think "should have been dumped long ago" really falls under a PGT review..

If a player makes a retooling team more boring to watch that has to be a concern to fans, management and especially ownership.
 

banme*

Registered User
Jun 7, 2014
2,573
0
What? Past performance should absolutely play into it. If Tanev has a **** game you give him a pass because he's typically outstanding. You don't start calling his effort level or ability into question.

I don't think "should have been dumped long ago" really falls under a PGT review..

That makes no sense lol, if you get 100% on a test worth half your mark and then get 50% on another test worth half your mark, you don't get to ignore the 50% based on getting 100% on the first test. They are separate instances, review how someone performs based off of how they perform in that instance.

And I don't agree with what he said either, I just don't think it's "absolute ****ing garbage" lol.
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,197
8,534
Granduland
That makes no sense lol, if you get 100% on a test worth half your mark and then get 50% on another test worth half your mark, you don't get to ignore the 50% based on getting 100% on the first test. They are separate instances, review how someone performs based off of how they perform in that instance.

And I don't agree with what he said either, I just don't think it's "absolute ****ing garbage" lol.

No. It's like if someone who is consistently a good student does poorly on one test. Do you call their character and work ethic into question? Or do you consider it an one-off or look for other factors.

Most veterans take a few games to get up to speed. Just look at our vets in preseason.
 

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
If a player makes a retooling team more boring to watch that has to be a concern to fans, management and especially ownership.

Evidently not, given the contract they handed to a boring defensive 3rd line center.

Ownership wants its 2-3 games of playoff revenue and players like Higgins and Sutter help them achieve that.
 

Josepho

i want the bartkowski thread back
Jan 1, 2015
14,824
8,404
British Columbia
Really not understanding why Bo is getting ripped on at this point. Earlier in the season, I'd likely agree with you. But he is most definitely getting his chances. If anything needs to be criticised, it's his finish. Not his play overall.
 

The Jesus*

Guest
Hamhuis
Vrbata


Agree with those two. Vrbata is an absolutely useless and pathetic hockey player, and needs to be dumped asap. Hammer however, is declining fast, but is still useful. I wanna trade him now because we might still be able to get a great return before other people catch on just how quickly he's sinking. He's not the same player, you can see his legs going.

Add Baertschi to that list, and I'm a happy camper.
 

Jimson Hogarth*

Registered User
Nov 21, 2013
12,858
3
Evidently not, given the contract they handed to a boring defensive 3rd line center.

Ownership wants its 2-3 games of playoff revenue and players like Higgins and Sutter help them achieve that.
Boring 3rd line Center? They traded Slownino. Sutter helps makes our team one of the fastest in the league, according to Brendan Gallagher. That's exciting!
 

banme*

Registered User
Jun 7, 2014
2,573
0
No. It's like if someone who is consistently a good student does poorly on one test. Do you call their character and work ethic into question? Or do you consider it an one-off or look for other factors.

Most veterans take a few games to get up to speed. Just look at our vets in preseason.

If you choose to look at the entire situation, no you're right. But my point is that you shouldn't be doing that for a single game review. I believe it'd be perfectly justified to question work ethic with respect to that single test, i.e. you didn't study enough for that test or whatever. Saying that you didn't study enough but that's ok because you study most of the time so this instance is devoid of consequences is wrong IMO.

Agree to disagree, we're not going to change each other's opinions.
 

Mr. Canucklehead

Kitimat Canuck
Dec 14, 2002
40,933
32,970
Kitimat, BC
What? Past performance should absolutely play into it. If Tanev has a **** game you give him a pass because he's typically outstanding. You don't start calling his effort level or ability into question. You call it a poor game and that's the end of it.

I don't think "should have been dumped long ago" really falls under a PGT review..

I'm on Linden's side on this one. Yes, Higgins had a very poor game last night, but taken in context with everything we know (his injury this year, and his years of being a solid soldier in our bottom six), it can be excused.

If he plays that way for fifty games, by all means, the discussion can begin in earnest about his place here.

But holding him to the fire after his first game in almost 2 months isn't entirely fair.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
23,520
7,635
If they lose they lose. All I care about is good effort and improvement among the young players. There wasn't high expectations going into the year so i'm not sure what the issue is. Lets see how they perform on this road trip before sounding the alarm bells.

Bingo.

I'd say this season is going pretty nicely. Some good showings from our young guys as they adjust and we're hopefully on track for a pretty good draft pick to continue the rebuild. We've also very much been in pretty much every game so far. I'm content with our young guys performing, no blowout losses, and a top-ten draft pick. I hope everyone is ready because it's only going to get worse as Miller wears down and the holes in our defense become more exploitable. The only slight negative in my eyes is Horvat, but I think he'll turn it around. I'd like to see us somewhat out of contention in time for the WJC so Virt and McCann can attend.
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,411
14,243
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Bingo.

I'd say this season is going pretty nicely. Some good showings from our young guys as they adjust and we're hopefully on track for a pretty good draft pick to continue the rebuild. We've also very much been in pretty much every game so far. I'm content with our young guys performing, no blowout losses, and a top-ten draft pick. I hope everyone is ready because it's only going to get worse as Miller wears down and the holes in our defense become more exploitable. The only slight negative in my eyes is Horvat, but I think he'll turn it around.

I don't think we'll end up that low in the standings; and I doubt Aquaman would be happy with that kind of finish either.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
23,520
7,635
I don't think we'll end up that low in the standings; and I doubt Aquaman would be happy with that kind of finish either.

Heh, you have a lot more faith in our relatively terrible blue line than I do. Outside of Tanev/Edler it's a mess. Hutton looks good in the long run, but he'll be mistake prone all season.

Also, Miller has been saving our bacon pretty consistently. He'll wear down as the season progresses so we won't have elite netminding all year. I also don't see the Sedins getting stronger later in the year. The Aquilini's really can't change what's going to happen this season.
 

mathonwy

Positively #toxic
Jan 21, 2008
19,223
10,203
NP. It was pretty nice seeing a great player show the twins some respect given what we've seen from some of them in the past. Good on Letang.

And the amount of disrespect being shown to a warrior like Higgins by this board is damn near sickening.
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,197
8,534
Granduland
NP. It was pretty nice seeing a great player show the twins some respect given what we've seen from some of them in the past. Good on Letang.

Agreed. It really bugs me how much the Sedins are disrespected. By opposing fans is one thing, but by other prominent players is really disgusting. I lost so much respect for Seguin and Benn last year.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Virtanen's play that caused the first goal against is why he lost minutes.


Look, I get that Virtanen didn't get the puck out and that's on him. But it was a slap shot from the point 20 seconds after that play and Edler not taking Perron and actually screening Miller on the play. There are dozens of plays in a game where the point man keeps the puck in, so it's not like Jake made an absolutely _horrible_ mistake or directly led to the goal.

If WD thinks that sitting Jake for the rest of the game because he couldn't get a puck out on one play ... that's complete and utter bull****. There is holding a player accountable and then there is being a vindictive ***. I would hope that as a team in a rebuild mode we don't have a coach that is the latter.
 

orcatown

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 13, 2003
10,277
7,582
Visit site
Garbage. Absolute ****ing garbage.

Players like Higgins who have given their all night in and night out for years deserve the benefit of the doubt. He doesn't deserve for his effort level to get judged by you to the point of calling him pathetic. In fact, it was pretty pathetic of you to do so.

Foot injuries are very tough to come back from if you didn't know as it really limits your training. Also, some guys come back from injuries better than others. Doesn't mean that they care more, it's just the nature of the injury or their body."



Garbage. He's given it all, night in night out?? What planet are you living on. Do you even watch the playoffs???? I've rarely seen a softer effort in the playoffs.

Each year Higgins has stretch where he will make a few important plays (like a shoot out goal or get a late goal) but then goes into dormant periods of no offense and does little beyond get up and down his wing. Last year in the playoffs he was clearly AWOL and allowed Calgary to bounce him and his team mates around with zero response. I challenge you to go back and look at the playoffs and then come back and say he is giving it hard every night or that he somehow a comparable to Burrows or Hansen. He is no where near as good and never sticks his nose into any situation he doesn't have. Instead, he backs out and stays on the fringes. If you have any video of Higgins playing it tough I'd like to see it

I think this idea that Higgins is giving it up every night comes from the fact that he plays all the time. This somehow imparts the idea that he is this steady, hard working player that can somehow be moved up and down the line-up. But he isn't. He often can't be relied upon for a full effort since he has no physicality and he runs out of gas and disappears. And that is especially so when the going gets tough. Maybe people don't want to recognize that but the evidence to date is overwhelming that this true.

Moreover, it's a myth that somehow Higgins can move up and down the line up and can be used like in your top 6 or bottom 6 is the real myth. Higgins is a third line guy who has the skating and moxie to get by as a passable third liner most of the time. When he goes into one of his dead periods he becomes PB material. He brings very little grit and when you reach the hard sledding of the playoffs he's been a no-show.

Last night he was pathetic. If you don't like the word then find your own. Un-involved. Disinterested. Useless. Weak. But any honest assessment of his play would have to include such words.

Does he have an excuse. To an extent. But lots of those guys are playing hurt and they still give a go. They don't use the game as training session. They drop their heads down and get back on the back check. They get their bodies in a position to take a hit along the boards to get the puck out or keep it in. Dorsett seems clearly hurt and isn't playing well but he still fighting for every inch. I would challenge you to see any of this in Higgins play. Instead with Higgins I saw a very casual and un-sustained effort. In addition, you would have thought that he could have at least worked on his arm strength during his time off and not be so immediately dispossessed of the puck.

If this was the first time Higgins had played like this then you could just dismiss it. But it is far from that. He's is coming off a very weak playoff performance that was almost universally declared as such. You would have thought he would have made every attempt to put that behind him and show the determination to be a player rather than drift through the game. He could a fought for the puck. He could have tried to get to the net(rather than pivoting off to the corners). He could have got down in his end and fought to get the puck out. I saw none of this.

Lastly the idea that he should be given the benefit of the doubt is laughable. Why? What's he done lately that has shown much? Last year he was poor for long periods and only had few stretches where he was much good. And again he is coming of terrible playoff performance. Why so much so slack for Higgins? You thinking he has been this hard working, gritty night in night out player is trash. Only a person predisposed toward Higgins could see that as true. In reality, he is coming off a poor season, a miserable playoffs and last night was just an extension of this. You can sugar coat it any way you want but Higgins was bad.
 

Captain Bowie

Registered User
Jan 18, 2012
27,139
4,414
Garbage. Absolute ****ing garbage.

Players like Higgins who have given their all night in and night out for years deserve the benefit of the doubt. He doesn't deserve for his effort level to get judged by you to the point of calling him pathetic. In fact, it was pretty pathetic of you to do so.

Foot injuries are very tough to come back from if you didn't know as it really limits your training. Also, some guys come back from injuries better than others. Doesn't mean that they care more, it's just the nature of the injury or their body."



Garbage. He's given it all, night in night out?? What planet are you living on. Do you even watch the playoffs???? I've rarely seen a softer effort in the playoffs.

Each year Higgins has stretch where he will make a few important plays (like a shoot out goal or get a late goal) but then goes into dormant periods of no offense and does little beyond get up and down his wing. Last year in the playoffs he was clearly AWOL and allowed Calgary to bounce him and his team mates around with zero response. I challenge you to go back and look at the playoffs and then come back and say he is giving it hard every night or that he somehow a comparable to Burrows or Hansen. He is no where near as good and never sticks his nose into any situation he doesn't have. Instead, he backs out and stays on the fringes. If you have any video of Higgins playing it tough I'd like to see it

I think this idea that Higgins is giving it up every night comes from the fact that he plays all the time. This somehow imparts the idea that he is this steady, hard working player that can somehow be moved up and down the line-up. But he isn't. He often can't be relied upon for a full effort since he has no physicality and he runs out of gas and disappears. And that is especially so when the going gets tough. Maybe people don't want to recognize that but the evidence to date is overwhelming that this true.

Moreover, it's a myth that somehow Higgins can move up and down the line up and can be used like in your top 6 or bottom 6 is the real myth. Higgins is a third line guy who has the skating and moxie to get by as a passable third liner most of the time. When he goes into one of his dead periods he becomes PB material. He brings very little grit and when you reach the hard sledding of the playoffs he's been a no-show.

Last night he was pathetic. If you don't like the word then find your own. Un-involved. Disinterested. Useless. Weak. But any honest assessment of his play would have to include such words.

Does he have an excuse. To an extent. But lots of those guys are playing hurt and they still give a go. They don't use the game as training session. They drop their heads down and get back on the back check. They get their bodies in a position to take a hit along the boards to get the puck out or keep it in. Dorsett seems clearly hurt and isn't playing well but he still fighting for every inch. I would challenge you to see any of this in Higgins play. Instead with Higgins I saw a very casual and un-sustained effort. In addition, you would have thought that he could have at least worked on his arm strength during his time off and not be so immediately dispossessed of the puck.

If this was the first time Higgins had played like this then you could just dismiss it. But it is far from that. He's is coming off a very weak playoff performance that was almost universally declared as such. You would have thought he would have made every attempt to put that behind him and show the determination to be a player rather than drift through the game. He could a fought for the puck. He could have tried to get to the net(rather than pivoting off to the corners). He could have got down in his end and fought to get the puck out. I saw none of this.

Lastly the idea that he should be given the benefit of the doubt is laughable. Why? What's he done lately that has shown much? Last year he was poor for long periods and only had few stretches where he was much good. And again he is coming of terrible playoff performance. Why so much so slack for Higgins? You thinking he has been this hard working, gritty night in night out player is trash. Only a person predisposed toward Higgins could see that as true. In reality, he is coming off a poor season, a miserable playoffs and last night was just an extension of this. You can sugar coat it any way you want but Higgins was bad.

Haha what a waste of time to type so many words to say you don't like Higgins, and be so wrong doing it.
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,197
8,534
Granduland
Oh I get it now.

Because Higgins is a streaky scorer and doesn't skate like Hansen or rattle the boards like Dorsett means he isn't trying. He's a dependable 2nd/3rd liner with streaky scoring and has been for years. He gets the benefit of the doubt.

The fact that you aren't willing to give him any leeway in his first game coming back from a foot injury says a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad