GDT: Round 3 (Can You Believe It?!) Game 1: EDM @ COL aka Mc v. Mac (8PM ET)

[henchman21]

The tag up rule as called on the Makar goal was correct by the letter of the law... I do think that as it is being called is against the spirt of what offsides really is.

 

[Perratrooper]

I really think Bednar is looking at it like Murray hasn't played in a game in a long, long time and isn't in game shape and doesn't want to throw him out there in a WCF playoff game. However, whether that version of Murray is better than the current version of JJ is yet to be determined. But there's really nothing to lose when JJ has been this bad. It might take a couple of games for Murray to clean up his game, but it feels like a risk we should be taking right now.

You hit the nail on the head. I honestly just don’t know what JJ is bringing right now. He looks slow, is making bad decisions with the puck and is making Manson look significantly worse. I get your argument of “game shape”, but I think Murray can handle the 12:30 of ice time JJ is playing. Now is the time to get Murray in game shape while the Avs still have home ice advantage. Letting him get into a game where he’ll face a ton of McDavid and Drai won’t go well for him and Manson if he’s not ready.

 

[Vaslof]

The tag up rule as called on the Makar goal was correct by the letter of the law... I do think that as it is being called is against the spirt of what offsides really is.

Dunno about that. Avs gained zero advantage from our guy being in offside, which is what I assume the rule was created for.

 

[Mr Zappalanche]

Why do you guess that Murray is in next game? Literally nothing suggests that Bednar will take that chance, even If I, and many of you, agree.

I just assume because we played awful defence and soome adjustment is to be expected. Similar thing with LOC replacing Sturm.

 

[Ararana]

We got 6. Just like game 1 last series. Then Woody made some adjustments and we won the next four. We don't need to stop the Avs attack just slow it down a bit so they don't outscore us again which is quite doable. It is not going to be easy but we can win this. Because we got 6.

 

[Mr Zappalanche]

Btw 122 pages in GDT. Is that a record?

 

[NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS]

How the hell Draisaitl didn’t get interference penalty before Oilers sixth goal? He blatantly picks Avs player with his stick extended sideways.

They throw picks all the time. Especially on the PP. The ref even yelled watch the pick really loud on the first Edmonton PP.

But when the chips are down they won't call another penalty on Edmonton. The Avs know it the Oilers know it and the fans know it.

 

[Ceremony]

Btw 122 pages in GDT. Is that a record?

Colorado Avalanche

hfboards.mandatory.com

 

[henchman21]

Dunno about that. Avs gained zero advantage from our guy being in offside, which is what I assume the rule was created for.

The original intent of offsides was to force skating of the puck instead of passing the puck forwards (was actually against the rules in early hockey). It was the late 1920s before forward passing in all zones was allowed.

To me offsides is simply when an attacking player is in the zone prior to the puck, and that violates the spirit of the rule... even if technically legal. This was a very impactful call of the tag up rule, and certainly changed how the game went. It wasn't the most egregious one though... I remember a Blackhawks one against the Avs a few years ago that was worse in being technically correct, but rather stupid in practice.

 

[Nihiliste]

The tag up rule as called on the Makar goal was correct by the letter of the law... I do think that as it is being called is against the spirt of what offsides really is.

I totally disagree about the second half, I think this verbiage exists in the tule because it’s in keeping with the spirit of the rule. We didn’t benefit at all from Nuke being a couple inches from tagging up at the moment the puck crossed the line. The rule as called still prevents Nuke from staying in zone and cherry-picking down there when he sees we’re regaining possession in the neutral zone

 

[John Mandalorian]

Jack Johnson was horrendous and needs to be benched for Murray. I really don’t get why we don’t have JJ in instead of him. Towards the end of the season Murray and Manson were finding chemistry.

"Murray and Manson" sounds like an old vaudeville act.

 

[Avs2022]

Something tells me the Avs will use that quote from Woodcroft as a motivation tool for game 2.

Kadri - "I guess their coach has never heard of bulletin board material" after Avs win 6-2 in game 2. Kadri with 5 goals.

 

[Vaslof]

The original intent of offsides was to force skating of the puck instead of passing the puck forwards (was actually against the rules in early hockey). It was the late 1920s before forward passing in all zones was allowed.

To me offsides is simply when an attacking player is in the zone prior to the puck, and that violates the spirit of the rule... even if technically legal. This was a very impactful call of the tag up rule, and certainly changed how the game went. It wasn't the most egregious one though... I remember a Blackhawks one against the Avs a few years ago that was worse in being technically correct, but rather stupid in practice.

Interesting! Wouldn't the normal way to tag out also violate the spirit of the rule just as much? To me they both seem fine. That said, it needs to be enforced the same way in future cases, and I have very little faith in that.

 

[henchman21]

I totally disagree about the second half, I think this verbiage exists in the tule because it’s in keeping with the spirit of the rule. We didn’t benefit at all from Nuke being a couple inches from tagging up at the moment the puck crossed the line. The rule as called still prevents Nuke from staying in zone and cherry-picking down there when he sees we’re regaining possession in the neutral zone

I'd argue that 90% of offsides calls actually would have zero impact on the result of the play, yet we still have 15-20 a game.

Interesting! Wouldn't the normal way to tag out also violate the spirit of the rule just as much? To me they both seem fine. That said, it needs to be enforced the same way in future cases, and I have very little faith in that.

I would say no... as the team either has an attacking player in the zone prior to the puck or it doesn't. Keeps is simple, clean, and easiest to understand all around. Plus takes some judgement away from linesman where we've seen this rule called a bit inconsistently.

 

[Nihiliste]

I'd argue that 90% of offsides calls actually would have zero impact on the result of the play, yet we still have 15-20 a game.

If you eliminated the rule and didn’t call the more typical offsides play, team offensive strategies would completely change to take advantage of passing into the zone. Allowing these borderline tag up plays like Nuke last night doesn’t cause this type of tactical death spiral because you can’t gameplan around gaining a 2 inch advantage on a tag up and there would be no benefit in doing so.

 

[henchman21]

If you eliminated the rule and didn’t call the more typical offsides play, team offensive strategies would completely change to take advantage of passing into the zone. Allowing these borderline tag up plays like Nuke last night doesn’t cause this type of tactical death spiral because you can’t gameplan around gaining a 2 inch advantage on a tag up and there would be no benefit in doing so.

Strategies would change with no offsides (and likely for the better), but I'm simply stating that because it has no impact on the play isn't a sufficient argument because most offsides really don't impact the play today.

 

[Nihiliste]

Strategies would change with no offsides (and likely for the better), but I'm simply stating that because it has no impact on the play isn't a sufficient argument because most offsides really don't impact the play today.

To me the spirit of offside rules in soccer and hockey are to discourage tactics based around cherry picking in the opponents zone and to make the defensive side of the game less of an impossible task. Regarding the latter proposition, scoring rates would blow up if you could remain in the zone for a pass after losing possession if you see your team is going to be able to interrupt the opponents breakout/transition in the neutral zones. Now you could argue that opening up the game like this would be preferable to your tastes but you can’t argue against it being a transformational change to the way the game is played.

Not only do these tag up plays not impact the play, it’s almost impossible for them to do so in a structural and predictable way and therefore despite being in place for years they have not and will not result in a change in the way the game is played tactically. Calling back yesterday’s goal based on those couple inches of daylight on Nuke’s skates would have been like calling back the Dallas cup winning goal over the foot in the crease rule. I would argue that calling the goal offsides would be a bigger violation of the spirit of the rule rather than what actually happened

 

[The Moops]

Woodcroft has an incredibly punchable face. If he wasn't so chubby I'd think he was rejected a role as a bully in a Disney movie.

That is all.

 

[Avsboy]

Woodcroft looks like a prison bitch in Mike Smith's jail cell

 

[nammerus]

You hit the nail on the head. I honestly just don’t know what JJ is bringing right now. He looks slow, is making bad decisions with the puck and is making Manson look significantly worse. I get your argument of “game shape”, but I think Murray can handle the 12:30 of ice time JJ is playing. Now is the time to get Murray in game shape while the Avs still have home ice advantage. Letting him get into a game where he’ll face a ton of McDavid and Drai won’t go well for him and Manson if he’s not ready.

Goals 1-3 were 100% Manson's fault (goal 3 moreso Kuemper, but Manson was the primary skater that guffed it). JJ might have been around/on ice for those, but those were all on Manson. Can't really play worse then he did last night.

 

[klozge]

The tag up rule as called on the Makar goal was correct by the letter of the law... I do think that as it is being called is against the spirt of what offsides really is.

I disagree. The spirit of modern offsides just differs from the spirit of the rule in earlier times.
The players who were offsides when the puck entered the zone were in the process of leaving said zone. They never impacted the play in any way as long as they were offsides. It's like the passiv offsides in football (soccer).

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

I would honestly play MacDonald over Murray and JJ in this series.

Much better skater then both, much better puck mover then both. And he was just playing playoff hockey a few days ago already.

 

[Metallo]

Goals 1-3 were 100% Manson's fault (goal 3 moreso Kuemper, but Manson was the primary skater that guffed it). JJ might have been around/on ice for those, but those were all on Manson. Can't really play worse then he did last night.

Manson is a combined -14 in 33 gms with the Avs. I know +/- is a very poor stat to judge an individual player but he's alone on his +/- island with the Avs. Bo and EJ should be the 2nd pair and Manson should be on the 3rd pair with someone that can move the puck. My pick is MacD.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Manson is a combined -14 in 33 gms with the Avs. I know +/- is a very poor stat to judge an individual player but he's alone on his +/- island with the Avs. Bo and EJ should be the 2nd pair and Manson should be on the 3rd pair with someone that can move the puck. My pick is MacD.

Last night + - told the story.

 

[shadow1]

I'm all for putting in Murray over JJ, but JJ wasn't the reason Manson was a -4 last night. The eye ball test told the entire story, but just to back it up with stats:

• Jack Johnson was a -1 with 50% CF (16-16)
• Manson was a -4 with a team-worst 38.2% CF (13-21)

If Manson hadn't been so good against St. Louis, we'd all be calling for his benching after his Game 1 performance. He had some truly horrendous games in the regular season, but redeemed himself with his play in Rounds 1 & 2. Last night, regular season Manson re-appeared.

Hopefully he has a short memory and can bounce back in Game 2.