Post-Game Talk: Pens 6 Sabres 1 | Secondary Sid's Big Night

[billybudd]

Current snipers like Sharp, Stamkos, Kessel, and Perry work hard. I don't see those guys floating like Neal.

He's really the only lazy sniper I can think of and it's by choice, not because being a sniper requires you to float.

This is exactly the kind of silliness I keep referring to when people defend this guy.

Neal's not the only sniper from this era that floats. A lot of them do/did. Semin, Ryder, Gaborik, Heatley, Franzen. OV and Pacioretty, to a lesser degree. Some people might say Carter, but I wouldn't be one of them (Carter just looks lazy, he doesn't play lazy, imo).

The trait's what makes most of them (including Neal) worse than the players you listed (except, arguably, Sharp) and it's by no means a necessary byproduct of the job, but it's not completely uncommon among the player type.

It should go without saying that I'd rather have a player like Hornqvist who busts his ass in high value ice, though, which hasn't changed since 72 was 27 for the Preds.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Not at all, you just do not understand that being lazy and not playing optimally or not playing the hardest style are the same thing. One is a result and one is a possible motivation. Think of it as a ven diagram. One circle is lazy the other is passive. Sometimes the overlap and sometimes the do not.

No Sutter doesn't float but he often passes up opportunities separate a guy from the puck along the boards, instead he peels of and tries to deflect/intercept potential passes. Which is the same concept as floating to the slot just a different situation.

Scuds does the same thing defensively, instead of doing the thing that requires more effort he just stays between his man and the net and tries to break things up with his stick.

Not moving your legs constantly doesn't make you lazy, Neal obviously believes its in his best interest to try and float to soft spot and shoot. IMO (and most peoples I would guess) that is a mistake, I think its what separates him from being good to great. But the motivation isn't because he is scared/averse to putting in effort, he just isn't making the correct choice.

So when he would go to the boards and half ass it trying to get the puck off his man, that made him a better sniper? When he decided to back check hard one shift and take the next three off, that made him a better sniper?

You are misconstruing finding gaps when there is clear puck possession by your teammate, and when Neal had to work to retrieve pucks.

I watched Neal play in Dallas and he would hustle and win board battles, dog the puck, and went to the net.

When he started scoring goals with Malkin, he got lazy. You can try to use different adjectives to try and change the connotation to make it sound better, but Neal turned into a lazy hockey player.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Neal's not the only sniper from this era that floats. A lot of them do/did. Semin, Ryder, Gaborik, Heatley, Franzen. OV and Pacioretty, to a lesser degree. Some people might say Carter, but I wouldn't be one of them (Carter just looks lazy, he doesn't play lazy, imo).

The trait's what makes most of them (including Neal) worse than the players you listed (except, arguably, Sharp) and it's by no means a necessary byproduct of the job, but it's not completely uncommon among the player type.

It should go without saying that I'd rather have a player like Hornqvist who busts his ass in high value ice, though, which hasn't changed since 72 was 27 for the Preds.

Heatley was always driving the net in his younger days and was a force. People just have let his recent mash potato legs shorten their memories of him in his prime. He used to drink from the goalies water bottle in his prime.

Before Franzen ran into injury problems, he was a monster on the boards and in front of the net.

They both were more modern day power fwds than snipers. Comparing guys plagued with injury problems and old age to Neal isn't an apt comparison.

OV is a beast in the attacking zone. He and Neal are polar opposites. OV doesn't wait for someone to get him the puck, he goes and gets it himself. He is only lazy when he has to get back to his own zone.

Patches I have no clue why his name is even being brought up. He works hard and is fun to watch.

Semin and Ryder are the closest comparables to Neal. Ryder has been with six teams already in his career and Semin has been called out by both players and coaches from Was and Car.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

So when he would go to the boards and half ass it trying to get the puck off his man, that made him a better sniper? When he decided to back check hard one shift and take the next three off, that made him a better sniper?

You are misconstruing finding gaps when there is clear puck possession by your teammate, and when Neal had to work to retrieve pucks.

I watched Neal play in Dallas and he would hustle and win board battles, dog the puck, and went to the net.

When he started scoring goals with Malkin, he got lazy. You can try to use different adjectives to try and change the connotation to make it sound better, but Neal turned into a lazy hockey player.

1. Your obviously over exaggerating. Neal won board battles and back checked fine. He wasn't overly aggressive in either area but far from lazy.

2. No he didn't get lazy his style changed, he got a taste of scoring goals and focused more on scoring goals instead of doing the little thing to help overall. Highlighting what he did in Dallas proves my point. He consciously changed his approach to try and be more of a sniper than a power forward not because he didn't want to put forth effort (lazy) but because he would rather look for opportunities to move into shooting position.

I don't know why you cannot separate motivation from result.

 

[MtlPenFan]

Let me end this right here.

When Neal wasn't scoring, did you notice him?

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

Let me end this right here.

When Neal wasn't scoring, did you notice him?

Completely besides the point, unless you saying he didn't try as hard when he wasn't scoring.

Not being effective and being a passive player isn't the same as laziness. Laziness is literally not doing things because it too hard and requires too much effort. Not because you play a selfish style to rack up stats.

 

[steveg]

I don't know why you cannot separate motivation from result.

Not sure how you would know what, in Neal's mind, his motivation was; all we can really do is look at what our eyes tell us (since we aren't in his head, and don't know him personally). My eyes tell me that he knows HOW to play tough/aggressive, but increasingly chose not to in his latter days with the Pens. WHY he made the choice not to, none of us really know.

Only other thing I'll add is, someone who WAS in the room and knew him (Geno), gave him the nickname "lazy..."

Just sayin...

 

[Shady Machine]

I really wish this discussion would die. I know some posters called out Neal for being lazy here and there during his time here, but there is a lot of additional 'hate' being thrown his way since he's been gone (some of it justified, some of it exaggerated). Can't we just appreciate what he did here and move on?

 

[TheSniper26]

Whenever people start getting into a player's motivation I cringe. This is as bad as some of the "Malkin's unhappy and doesn't trust anyone!" nonsense we have to endure.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

Not sure how you would know what, in Neal's mind, his motivation was; all we can really do is look at what our eyes tell us (since we aren't in his head, and don't know him personally). My eyes tell me that he knows HOW to play tough/aggressive, but increasingly chose not to in his latter days with the Pens. WHY he made the choice not to, none of us really know.

Only other thing I'll add is, someone who WAS in the room and knew him (Geno), gave him the nickname "lazy..."

Just sayin...

The first paragraph is exactly my point.

The nickname is what all nick names are jokes. Geno knows Neals a floater and busts his balls.

Was Neals style passive in the O zone? Yes
Was Neals style ineffective in the O Zone ? Yes
Was it selfish? Yes

But there is no reason to believe it was driven by laziness. Some one that goes out of there way to bust there *ss in the offseason with one of the premier hockey trainers doesn't come to the rink on game day and say ***** it im don't feel like tryin today. Or man I should really forcheck here, but it looks sooooo hard.

 

[billybudd]

Heatley was always driving the net in his younger days and was a force. People just have let his recent mash potato legs shorten their memories of him in his prime. He used to drink from the goalies water bottle in his prime.

Before Franzen ran into injury problems, he was a monster on the boards and in front of the net.

They both were more modern day power fwds than snipers. Comparing guys plagued with injury problems and old age to Neal isn't an apt comparison.

OV is a beast in the attacking zone. He and Neal are polar opposites. OV doesn't wait for someone to get him the puck, he goes and gets it himself. He is only lazy when he has to get back to his own zone.

Patches I have no clue why his name is even being brought up. He works hard and is fun to watch.

Heatley would drive the net when there was no resistance. But so would Neal. If anything, he works harder now that he's slow and awful than he did when he was in the cup finals. In addition, his depreciation has been most-frequently explained by unwillingness to do offseason training, not back problems or whatever.

Franzen's had a lot of injuries, but he was jekyll and hyde before that when it came to work and hustle (I saw him in a SEL game years ago on the international channel and was floored that the same guy made the NHL years later). It's speculated in Detroit that this is due to psychological problems, not injuries. Whatever the cause, it leads to the sort of half-assing that you see from Neal, though it's not an every game thing. Babcock's on his case a lot. If Brainless had been on Neal like Babcock is with Franzen, would he have improved? It's at least possible.

OV and Pacioretty are smack in the middle of the players you mentioned and the players I mentioned. No, they're not as lazy as Neal (though OV's boardwork is every bit as poor...if he doesn't get to the puck first or free it up with a bodycheck, he all but quits on the play), but they're a far cry from the likes of Stamkos or Perry when it comes to battle-level.

Completely besides the point, unless you saying he didn't try as hard when he wasn't scoring.

Not being effective and being a passive player isn't the same as laziness. Laziness is literally not doing things because it too hard and requires too much effort. Not because you play a selfish style to rack up stats.

In hockey, "playing a selfish style to rack up the stats" is another way of saying "laziness" to me.

Glenn Murray played a lazy style of hockey. His motivation for playing that style doesn't particularly concern me, only the way he played.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

Whenever people start getting into a player's motivation I cringe. This is as bad as some of the "Malkin's unhappy and doesn't trust anyone!" nonsense we have to endure.

exactly, people project there opinions on players attitudes as facts. Neal is lazy, Malkins unhappy, player X is a head case.

 

[Night Shift]

I'd point to Therrien and Nolan having jobs as equally indicative that the square-peg-round-hole approach doesn't mean you won't have a job.

Bylsma may never work for a contender again, but coaches, like players do develop and change-- sometimes. And like Jiggy points out, warts-and-all Bylsma has done well in certain contexts. It just depends on whether or not Bylsma's going to take any thing away from the experience, and I don't think any of us know the man well enough to make a prediction about that right now.

good point.

 

[Asuna]

Let me end this right here.

When Neal wasn't scoring, did you notice him?

Yes. When he was taking penalties in the offensive zone

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

In hockey, "playing a selfish style to rack up the stats" is another way of saying "laziness" to me.

Glenn Murray played a lazy style of hockey. His motivation for playing that style doesn't particularly concern me, only the way he played.

You don't get to make up definitions of word because its a sport. It can be selfish, passive, ineffective or soft etc. without being lazy. The definition of lazy is "unwilling to do work or use energy" which doesn't fit this situation.

 

[TheSniper26]

exactly, people project there opinions on players attitudes as facts. Neal is lazy, Malkins unhappy, player X is a head case.

But you're essentially doing the same thing by going out of your way to declare that he wasn't lazy when you have no idea if that's the case. You admit that his play was selfish and then ignore the very real possibility that his selfishness was tied to laziness. Neal did what was easy and convenient for him. This idea that he simply chose another role is silly. There isn't a role in the game, including "sniper", that allows for not moving your feet and half-assing puck battles. Those things are part of his job description and he didn't do them. In any other profession, if you cut corners and avoid some of your responsibilities, you usually get called one thing.

 

[billybudd]

You don't get to make up definitions of word because its a sport. It can be selfish, passive, ineffective or soft etc. without being lazy. The definition of lazy is "unwilling to do work or use energy" which doesn't fit this situation.

"Lazy" has been synonymous with "plays a selfish game" in hockey for at least 30 years, probably longer. Lemieux was criticized for "laziness" frequently early in his career. "Lazy penalty (etc)"

I'm not defining words. I'm using them how they're used.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

I would have liked to see Neal play under MJ. IMO he was one of the guys who was hurt the worst by DB allowing him to do whatever he wanted.

 

[Night Shift]

I would have liked to see Neal play under MJ. IMO he was one of the guys who was hurt the worst by DB allowing him to do whatever he wanted.

I totally agree with this.. I quickly glanced over the Nashville board and they started a player discussion thread on Neal: They seemed pretty pleased with him and the thing I took out of it was they feel his penalties are down and seems more disciplined compared to when he was with us

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

But you're essentially doing the same thing by going out of your way to declare that he wasn't lazy when you have no idea if that's the case. You admit that his play was selfish and then ignore the very real possibility that his selfishness was tied to laziness. Neal did what was easy and convenient for him. This idea that he simply chose another role is silly. There isn't a role in the game, including "sniper", that allows for not moving your feet and half-assing puck battles. Those things are part of his job description and he didn't do them. In any other profession, if you cut corners and avoid some of your responsibilities, you usually get called one thing.

Im not saying I know for a fact he wasn't lazy, im saying there is no reason to think he was. There is evidence (his offseason program) to suggest he is not a lazy person.

I think he adjusted his style to stay in position (to the highest extend possible) to be open for shot attempts. Sometimes that means drifting on to the circle after a zone entry. Sometimes that means staying higher on the walls instead of going into the corner etc. His priorities (conscious or not) were obviously getting into shooting position, which can be described in many ways as I have already said. Lazy is not one of the descriptive words that applies.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

1. Your obviously over exaggerating. Neal won board battles and back checked fine. He wasn't overly aggressive in either area but far from lazy.

I'm exaggerating that he didn't win a majority of 1-1 board battles? That he would skate hard on the back check one shift and dog it the next few?

No, I'm not.

2. No he didn't get lazy his style changed, he got a taste of scoring goals and focused more on scoring goals instead of doing the little thing to help overall. Highlighting what he did in Dallas proves my point. He consciously changed his approach to try and be more of a sniper than a power forward not because he didn't want to put forth effort (lazy) but because he would rather look for opportunities to move into shooting position.

I don't know why you cannot separate motivation from result.

I never said he didn't change his style. Who is debating that?

So basically you are arguing that it became more important to him to score goals and stat pad, than to work hard.

That's all you have really proven, seriously.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

"Lazy" has been synonymous with "plays a selfish game" in hockey for at least 30 years, probably longer. Lemieux was criticized for "laziness" frequently early in his career. "Lazy penalty (etc)"

I'm not defining words. I'm using them how they're used.

Which is completely incorrect. Also a penalty can be lazy, for example hooking a guy instead of skating with him. Selfish would be slashing a guy in retaliation. They are too different things.

 

[AjaxTelamon]

I would have liked to see Neal play under MJ. IMO he was one of the guys who was hurt the worst by DB allowing him to do whatever he wanted.

Even if you could stamp out the lazy play, you're not going to turn him into the legit net front presence or right handed shot that Hornqvist is, and that this team needed. Being willing to drive the net on occasion and having the cajones to camp out there and get guys to give up on cross-checking you because the only outcome is the occasional penalty are different things. The last comment is not directed at your Ragamuffin, but in general in terms of Neal and Hornqvist's games.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

I'm exaggerating that he didn't win a majority of 1-1 board battles? That he would skate hard on the back check one shift and dog it the next few?

No, I'm not.



I never said he didn't change his style. Who is debating that?

So basically you are arguing that it became more important to him to score goals and stat pad, than to work hard.

That's all you have really proven, seriously.

Which is all I needed to prove. Thank you, come again.

 

[TheSniper26]

Im not saying I know for a fact he wasn't lazy, im saying there is no reason to think he was. There is evidence (his offseason program) to suggest he is not a lazy person.

I think he adjusted his style to stay in position (to the highest extend possible) to be open for shot attempts. Sometimes that means drifting on to the circle after a zone entry. Sometimes that means staying higher on the walls instead of going into the corner etc. His priorities (conscious or not) were obviously getting into shooting position, which can be described in many ways as I have already said. Lazy is not one of the descriptive words that applies.

But his effort was questionable all over the ice, not just in the offensive zone. So the stuff about him looking for soft spots and getting into shooting positions really is kind of irrelevant. In the neutral and defensive zone his effort was, again, questionable at best. What is the explanation for that?