Windsor Spitfires 2016-17 Season Thread (Part 8)

[hockeylegend11]

Surprised Owen Sound lost to Erie,not because Erie is a better team,but Owen Sound better structurally and in goal.
I know careful what you wish for would prefer to play Erie then Owen Sound because of what I said above that, providing they beat Missy.
Only other series surprised was Windsor losing to London,not because Windsor is better then London or vice versa,too bad London had the 7th man in a game 7 situation with 9 minutes left affect the outcome of a even series.It happened twice in that series game 2 and game 7, most neutral observers agree.That being said regardless with a 3-1 lead have to find a way to close.

 

[youngblood10]

Surprised Owen Sound lost to Erie,not because Erie is a better team,but Owen Sound better structurally and in goal.
I know careful what you wish for would prefer to play Erie then Owen Sound because of what I said above that, providing they beat Missy.
Only other series surprised was Windsor losing to London,not because Windsor is better then London or vice versa,too bad London had the 7th man in a game 7 situation with 9 minutes left affect the outcome of a even series.It happened twice in that series game 2 and game 7, most neutral observers agree.That being said regardless with a 3-1 lead have to find a way to close.

In hind sight and after watching the good portions of the Attack and Otters play off runs it wasn't that big of a surprise. Granted going in I thought the same that the Attacks solid foundation would defeat Erie's suspect goaltending. But in this series Erie didn't have a players riding on their back, hooking, holding, tackling, having interference run, etc.. The Otters had time and space vs the Attack and it allowed their skill to do it's thing. The Attack never faced a challenge that made them employ a no rules mentality with the Rangers or Hounds. Unlike what the Otters went through to get there.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Surprised Owen Sound lost to Erie,not because Erie is a better team,but Owen Sound better structurally and in goal.
I know careful what you wish for would prefer to play Erie then Owen Sound because of what I said above that, providing they beat Missy.
Only other series surprised was Windsor losing to London,not because Windsor is better then London or vice versa,too bad London had the 7th man in a game 7 situation with 9 minutes left affect the outcome of a even series.It happened twice in that series game 2 and game 7, most neutral observers agree.That being said regardless with a 3-1 lead have to find a way to close.

Being better in goal doesn't mean much in junior hockey when you have teenagers in front of you. Even teams that have "structure" are prone to breakdowns because like I said they're teenagers and not professionals. Did you not watch Erie/London and see Erie put 5 past "the best goalie in junior hockey" in game 7?? That's not because Parsons isn't good it's because he was peppered with shots and the dam eventually broke. Don't build your team with great D and great goaltending in junior hockey it's a fools bet. Quite often you need dynamic forwards up front to make the difference. You act surprised with Erie but they had the most points in the league. Best case for Windsor is if Mississauga and Seattle make it. Good chance Regina would run a train on Windsor and it would be ugly.

 

[OHLTG]

Being better in goal doesn't mean much in junior hockey when you have teenagers in front of you.

1. It certainly does. Put a lesser goaltender in the net for London or Owen Sound and tell me how they do. Having that stability in net, that guy that you know is going to stop the puck, is much better mentally for the team in front.

2. Wasn't "Windsor doesn't have an edge in net compared to London or Owen Sound" a pretty big topic all season?

 

[may know]

2016-17
Top offense - Erie - in final
Top defense - OS - conference final

2015-16
Champion - London, 1st in O, 1st in D
Top offense - London - won league
Top defense - London - won league

2014-15
Champion - Oshawa, 3rd in O, 1st in D
Top offense - Soo - lost conference final
Top defense - Oshawa - won league

2013-14
Champion - Guelph, 1st in O, 4th in D
Top offense - Guelph - won league
Top defense - Erie - lost conference final

2012-13
Champion - London, 2nd in O, 3rd in D
Top offense - Plymouth - conference final
Top defense - OS - lost in 2nd round

2011-12
Champion - London, 3rd in O, 2nd in D
Top offense - Niagara - lost final
Top defense - Niagara - lost final

2010-11
Champion - OS, 2nd in O, 6th in D
Top offense - Mississauga - lost final
Top defense - Mississauga - lost final

2009-10
Champion - Windsor, 1st in O, 5th in D
Top offense - Windsor - won league
Top defense - Mississauga - lost conference final

2008-09
Champion - Windsor, 1st in O, 1st in D
Top offense - Windsor - won league
Top defense - Windsor - won league

2007-08
Champion - Kitchener, 2nd in O, 2nd in D
Top offense - Oshawa - lost in conference final
Top defense - Soo - lost in conference final

2006-07
Champion - Plymouth, 3rd in O, 1st in D
Top offense - Mississauga - lost first round
Top defense - Plymouth - won league

2005-06
Champion - Peterborough, 3rd in O, 3rd in D
Top offense - London - lost in final
Top defense - Kitchener - lost in 1st round

2004-05
Champion - London, 1st in O, 1st in D
Top offense - London - won league
Top defense - London - won league

2003-04
Champion - Guelph, 2nd in O, 3rd in D
Top offense - London - lost in conference final
Top defense - London - lost in conference final

What does this all mean?

Yes, a top defense is important but you still have to score. Every OHL champion for the last little while has been top 3 in offense. While you still need a top D, you can get away with an above average one if you can outscore your opponents.

2016-17
Erie - 1st in O, 2nd D
Mississauga - 7th in O, 8th in D
Windsor - 10th in O, 3rd in D

Top 6 teams in O in 2016-17 - Erie, OS, London, Soo, Sarnia, Kitchener
Top 6 teams in D in 2016-17 - OS, Erie, Windsor, London, Kingston, Soo

Essentially the lower your number is when you add the two rankings together the better.

Top teams in 2016-17
Erie 3
OS 3
London 7
Soo 10
Windsor 13
Mississauga 15
Peterborough 17
Kitchener 19
Hamilton 19
Oshawa 19
Flint 22
Sarnia 23
Kingston 25
Saginaw 28
Ottawa 29
Sudbury 29
Niagara 32
North Bay 32
Guelph 37
Barrie 38

 

[youngblood10]

Being better in goal doesn't mean much in junior hockey when you have teenagers in front of you. Even teams that have "structure" are prone to breakdowns because like I said they're teenagers and not professionals. Did you not watch Erie/London and see Erie put 5 past "the best goalie in junior hockey" in game 7?? That's not because Parsons isn't good it's because he was peppered with shots and the dam eventually broke. Don't build your team with great D and great goaltending in junior hockey it's a fools bet. Quite often you need dynamic forwards up front to make the difference. You act surprised with Erie but they had the most points in the league. Best case for Windsor is if Mississauga and Seattle make it. Good chance Regina would run a train on Windsor and it would be ugly.

I disagree about the goaltending. A great goalie can win games by themselves, make a lot of mistakes in front of them moot points and is a teams best penalty killer. I think you have to account for Erie having a collection of the best offensive forwards in the league. All that talent had to gang up on Parsons basically. No other team in the league can match Erie in that regard and Parsons still almost pulled it off.

I think the writing is on the wall that Regina, Saint John and Erie will be heading to Windsor. I could be wrong but those teams have shown no reason to doubt them wire to wire during the season. The Spits can't hold a candle to any of those three teams.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

I disagree about the goaltending. A great goalie can win games by themselves, make a lot of mistakes in front of them moot points and is a teams best penalty killer. I think you have to account for Erie having a collection of the best offensive forwards in the league. All that talent had to gang up on Parsons basically. No other team in the league can match Erie in that regard and Parsons still almost pulled it off.

I think the writing is on the wall that Regina, Saint John and Erie will be heading to Windsor. I could be wrong but those teams have shown no reason to doubt them wire to wire during the season. The Spits can't hold a candle to any of those three teams.

I think great goaltending can win you a game or two in a series in the CHL I am skeptical if he can win a series though. How quickly we forget the Spits facing Matt Hackett in back to back years at that time probably a top 5 goalie during his time in Plymouth. The Spits still took care of them both years and Plymouth did have a better goaltender in those years. Yes Parsons still almost pulled it off but he would have had to do it against Owen Sound the following series and it eventually catches up.

I do agree you have to account for Erie and their offensive talent but this is what they have focused on for a long time.

2012-McDavid
2013-Strome
2014-Raddysh
2015-Lodnia
2016-McShane
2017-Sproule

All are forwards those first 3 are elite level OHL players with one a transcendent talent. Lodnia will be an NHL pick with room to grow. McShane was leveraged to get Cirelli one of the best playoff performers in the OHL. This is why unless you get to draft an Ekblad I am always in favor of drafting top tier forwards. Top tier forwards can get you out of so many jams in junior hockey.

Agreed on the likelihood of Regina/Erie/Saint John all 3 were on top of their respective standings all year. Windsor would be a large large underdog maybe the largest for a host in a long time.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

1. It certainly does. Put a lesser goaltender in the net for London or Owen Sound and tell me how they do. Having that stability in net, that guy that you know is going to stop the puck, is much better mentally for the team in front.

2. Wasn't "Windsor doesn't have an edge in net compared to London or Owen Sound" a pretty big topic all season?

In regards to #2 yes because...... their forwards didn't have a large enough edge to compensate for the Spits not being as good up front.

You and Legend consistently all year saying the forwards were fine, just wait, nothing to worry about. You even went out as far as saying those metrics which showed the Spits in the middle of the pack for shots attempted, shots on net were just trying to portray the Spits in a bad light. All of that caught up with the Spits down the stretch and in the playoffs. Now I see posts from you talking about offensive philosophy, systems. You ignored that stuff for 4+ months and just coming around now.

In regards to your first point a lesser goalie??? Who would you consider a lesser goalie? I heard all year Raaymakers was a lesser goalie in the west and he was lights out in the playoffs even better than DiPietro. Owen Sound still wins in round 1 with lesser goaltending, quite possible London does as well since Windsor didn't consistently bombard Parsons.7

The problem for the Spits is the first two years with DiPietro maybe the best stretch of Spitfire goaltending since Leighton has been squandered by lack of scoring punch and that isn't likely to change any time soon.

 

[rangersblues]

Surprised Owen Sound lost to Erie,not because Erie is a better team,but Owen Sound better structurally and in goal.
I know careful what you wish for would prefer to play Erie then Owen Sound because of what I said above that, providing they beat Missy.
Only other series surprised was Windsor losing to London,not because Windsor is better then London or vice versa,too bad London had the 7th man in a game 7 situation with 9 minutes left affect the outcome of a even series.It happened twice in that series game 2 and game 7, most neutral observers agree.That being said regardless with a 3-1 lead have to find a way to close.

I'm confused what you mean by "better structurally". When on their game , which is most of the time, Erie wins a high majority of puck battles, anywhere from 55-65 percent of faceoffs, and goes long stretches of time limiting the opposition to very few shots. Add to that, Foegel and Cirelli are 2 of the best two way players in the OHL, not to mention all the offensive weapons both up front and on the blueline - Not sure how a team that possesses the puck so much is inferior structurally?

 

[OHLTG]

You and Legend consistently all year saying the forwards were fine, just wait, nothing to worry about.

Given the quality of the forwards we had, I had complete faith in them. There was no reason not to.

All of that caught up with the Spits down the stretch and in the playoffs. Now I see posts from you talking about offensive philosophy, systems. You ignored that stuff for 4+ months and just coming around now.

1. The playoffs were a lack of experience and running into a team that knew how to win. Even Erie had issues with them.

2. I said off-and-on during the season that systems weren't working. At the beginning, yes, I believed it would help us, but there were times in the second half that I questioned the PP or the lack of creativity allowed.

In regards to your first point a lesser goalie??? Who would you consider a lesser goalie? I heard all year Raaymakers was a lesser goalie in the west and he was lights out in the playoffs even better than DiPietro. Owen Sound still wins in round 1 with lesser goaltending, quite possible London does as well since Windsor didn't consistently bombard Parsons.7

I've always been a fan of Raaymakers. Someone else might not like him as much but I've had confidence in him since last year. For me, a "lesser goaltender" would be someone like Culina, or Tyler Johnson in London, or Sarnia's goaltenders. Not "bad" but not in the elite category with the likes of Parsons, DiPietro, and McNiven. I don't buy that Windsor loses to London if they don't have Parsons. He was a rock for them. Parsons is a guy I could have seen stealing a series, let alone a game.

 

[windsor7]

Unless the 6 week layoff changes this team drastically. Windsor does not have the fire power to contend with Erie, Regina or Saint John.
Going to be quite interesting to see.
Will c if the lazy players that have been on Windsor all season decide to show up or will Windsor be embarrassed in their own building.

 

[NOA]

1. The playoffs were a lack of experience and running into a team that knew how to win. Even Erie had issues with them.



.

actually i dont think erie struggled at all vs london, just vs parsons (aka best goalie in junior). in their 3 losses (gm 1,4,6), it took domination (3 ga in those 3 games) from parsons to get it done. but with the exception of game 4, erie was in control every game.

 

[OHLTG]

actually i dont think erie struggled at all vs london, just vs parsons (aka best goalie in junior). bet in their 3 losses (gm 1,4,6), it took domination from parsons to get it done. but with the exception of game 4, erie was in control every game.

I didn't say Erie struggled but they didn't defeat them as easily as I would have expected. London's experience was evident to me.

 

[EvenSteven]

I honestly can't believe they are charging $100 bucks a ticket, that's absurd. I've gone to several Tigers playoff games for less than 100 per ticket, how in the world do they expect to sell these games out? If the average person wants to take their family to a game thats 400 bucks, that's not happening. Whoever on the CHL is in charge of ticket pricing needs to be fired ASAP. Use some common sense when pricing these games out. I'm sorry but 100 bucks per ticket in any city would be hard pressed to sell out.

Sure, 100 bucks is a steep price to pay. But there's a different way to look at this. Of course you can see a Tigers game cheaper, but you can do that at any time. When are you going to get to see the Windsor Spitfires play host to the Memorial Cup again?

In 2008, the Memorial cup packages in Kitchener were the same price as an entire season ticket package. I think it was $500 at the time. Me and the Mrs. couldn't believe the prices. But then I said to her, I was at the 1990 Memorial cup in Hamilton. It was an incredible time and I always have that memory. That double overtime Memorial cup final game has to be the best games I have ever attended. That was 18 years earlier at the time.

We were in Quebec city in 2003 had a great time there. The last time Kitchener hosted the Memorial cup was in 1984. That was 24 years between '84 and '08. That's a long time. Once in a generation really. We decided to buy the packages, ticket prices be damned, because we might have to wait another couple decades before we see this sort of thing in Kitchener again. We aren't only paying for the games, we're paying for the whole experience and the rarity of it in your town. Of course the CHL realizes this and ups ticket prices accordingly.

I'm not gonna tell anybody what to do with their money. All I have to say though it's keep this in mind when you're making your decision as to whether or not to go to one or more of these games.

 

[EpicOtters]

I didn't say Erie struggled but they didn't defeat them as easily as I would have expected. London's experience was evident to me.

That was simply due to Parsons. As a whole, Erie outplayed London considerably the entirety of that series, sans 1 game. The deal breaker was London's goaltending vs Erie's. The Otters outshot them 289-181 (that's 108 more shots for Erie), and yet Erie's goal differential in that series was only +5 (22-17).

London was converting 9.39% of their shots. Erie only converted 7.61%.

 

[rangersblues]

I honestly believe that some empty seats wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Not as a black eye on Windsor, but to bring branch back down to earth. He's out of touch.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Sure, 100 bucks is a steep price to pay. But there's a different way to look at this. Of course you can see a Tigers game cheaper, but you can do that at any time. When are you going to get to see the Windsor Spitfires play host to the Memorial Cup again?

In 2008, the Memorial cup packages in Kitchener were the same price as an entire season ticket package. I think it was $500 at the time. Me and the Mrs. couldn't believe the prices. But then I said to her, I was at the 1990 Memorial cup in Hamilton. It was an incredible time and I always have that memory. That double overtime Memorial cup final game has to be the best games I have ever attended. That was 18 years earlier at the time.

We were in Quebec city in 2003 had a great time there. The last time Kitchener hosted the Memorial cup was in 1984. That was 24 years between '84 and '08. That's a long time. Once in a generation really. We decided to buy the packages, ticket prices be damned, because we might have to wait another couple decades before we see this sort of thing in Kitchener again. We aren't only paying for the games, we're paying for the whole experience and the rarity of it in your town. Of course the CHL realizes this and ups ticket prices accordingly.

I'm not gonna tell anybody what to do with their money. All I have to say though it's keep this in mind when you're making your decision as to whether or not to go to one or more of these games.

I have been to two it's nice Windsor is hosting but I don't really have a huge desire to see any games unless I get extreme discounted tickets. Like I mentioned earlier paid 50 in Brandon not interested in paying double in Windsor.

 

[OHLTG]

Sure, 100 bucks is a steep price to pay. But there's a different way to look at this. Of course you can see a Tigers game cheaper, but you can do that at any time. When are you going to get to see the Windsor Spitfires play host to the Memorial Cup again?

I've said this a few times. Windsor could get it again, or win the OHL again, but there are no guarantees we'll be able to see games. The chance is here now; take it and run. In 2015, I spent a lot to go to the World Juniors in Finland. People thought I was crazy to spend it on junior hockey. I may never have another chance and the memories I have are invaluable.

Like I mentioned earlier paid 50 in Brandon not interested in paying double in Windsor.

Let's be fair - tickets in Brandon were 50ish (I believe the semi-final was 55) but the overall cost was much more than that. Paying $100 for a game in Windsor is still a fraction of the cost and you're not traveling or using hotel.

 

[hockeylegend11]

Spits

Given the quality of the forwards we had, I had complete faith in them. There was no reason not to.



1. The playoffs were a lack of experience and running into a team that knew how to win. Even Erie had issues with them.

2. I said off-and-on during the season that systems weren't working. At the beginning, yes, I believed it would help us, but there were times in the second half that I questioned the PP or the lack of creativity allowed.



I've always been a fan of Raaymakers. Someone else might not like him as much but I've had confidence in him since last year. For me, a "lesser goaltender" would be someone like Culina, or Tyler Johnson in London, or Sarnia's goaltenders. Not "bad" but not in the elite category with the likes of Parsons, DiPietro, and McNiven. I don't buy that Windsor loses to London if they don't have Parsons. He was a rock for them. Parsons is a guy I could have seen stealing a series, let alone a game.

I would agree that it's very unlikely London would have beat Windsor without Parsons,he was outstanding and a major reason why London advanced.You can talk about lack of offence from Windsor,though it should be noted excluding empty netters Windsor and London finished tied with 18 goals,in fact Windsor outscored London 12-11 ,5 on 5,and that's including the phantom goal that impacted game 2 of the series, London outscored Windsor 7-6 on the PP,they started game 7;tied in this category, London went 2-5 in game 7 while Windsor went 1-3,the fact that London was gifted with the last 2
PP opps in the final 9 minutes allowed them to advance and less importantly the special teams category.
In the London/Windsor series, London who had the 3rd most goals for in the league with 289 and an average of 4.25,scored an average of 2.57 per game a reduction of almost 1.75 per game, while Windsor who finished 10th in the league with 232 goals for an average of 3.41, almost scored an average of 2.57 goals per game,a reduction of .84 per game.
6 games of the 7 were decided by 1 goal excluding empty netters,the closeness of the teams pretty much evident,the teams played 13 games,with London winning 7-6, though London had 1 more home game.
At the end of the day Windsor made sure London did not outscore them 5 on 5,and lost the special teams battle in game 7 because of a generous whistle in the last 9 minutes,with no opportunity to correct a wrong.
Too bad it was a great series impacted by the stripes in the end, and that should never happen in any playoff series regardless who is playing and especially in a game 7.

 

[windsor7]

I would agree that it's very unlikely London would have beat Windsor without Parsons,he was outstanding and a major reason why London advanced.You can talk about lack of offence from Windsor,though it should be noted excluding empty netters Windsor and London finished tied with 18 goals,in fact Windsor outscored London 12-11 ,5 on 5,and that's including the phantom goal that impacted game 2 of the series, London outscored Windsor 7-6 on the PP,they started game 7;tied in this category, London went 2-5 in game 7 while Windsor went 1-3,the fact that London was gifted with the last 2
PP opps in the final 9 minutes allowed them to advance and less importantly the special teams category.
In the London/Windsor series, London who had the 3rd most goals for in the league with 289 and an average of 4.25,scored an average of 2.57 per game a reduction of almost 1.75 per game, while Windsor who finished 10th in the league with 232 goals for an average of 3.41, almost scored an average of 2.57 goals per game,a reduction of .84 per game.
6 games of the 7 were decided by 1 goal excluding empty netters,the closeness of the teams pretty much evident,the teams played 13 games,with London winning 7-6, though London had 1 more home game.
At the end of the day Windsor made sure London did not outscore them 5 on 5,and lost the special teams battle in game 7 because of a generous whistle in the last 9 minutes,with no opportunity to correct a wrong.
Too bad it was a great series impacted by the stripes in the end, and that should never happen in any playoff series regardless who is playing and especially in a game 7.

Honest question.
When Windsor losses do u think it is the refs fault every time?

 

[hockeylegend11]

Spits

Honest question.
When Windsor losses do u think it is the refs fault every time?

Honest answer and you can look it up I never said a peep about the officials when Windsor lost game 5 and game 6,made comments in this series when those who had no skin in the series did from game 2,the league admitted they ff'ed up and game 7

 

[windsor7]

Honest answer and you can look it up I never said a peep about the officials when Windsor lost game 5 and game 6,made comments in this series when those who had no skin in the series did from game 2,the league admitted they ff'ed up and game 7

I will give u the game that the ref messed up.
However stating generous calls or lack of penalties is stated a lot.

 

[hockeylegend11]

Only 1 Spitfire prospect drafted tonight re the USHL Futures Draft
Dman Cade Webber, drafted in the 1st round 5th o/a by Madison.
Had he committed to OHL,he would have gone in the 1st round as well,instead of the 11th round when Windsor chose him.

 

[aresknights]

1. It certainly does. Put a lesser goaltender in the net for London or Owen Sound and tell me how they do. Having that stability in net, that guy that you know is going to stop the puck, is much better mentally for the team in front.

2. Wasn't "Windsor doesn't have an edge in net compared to London or Owen Sound" a pretty big topic all season?

#1

They still lose to Erie?
Not sure how that helps you.

 

[aresknights]

I would agree that it's very unlikely London would have beat Windsor without Parsons,he was outstanding and a major reason why London advanced.You can talk about lack of offence from Windsor,though it should be noted excluding empty netters Windsor and London finished tied with 18 goals,in fact Windsor outscored London 12-11 ,5 on 5,and that's including the phantom goal that impacted game 2 of the series, London outscored Windsor 7-6 on the PP,they started game 7;tied in this category, London went 2-5 in game 7 while Windsor went 1-3,the fact that London was gifted with the last 2
PP opps in the final 9 minutes allowed them to advance and less importantly the special teams category.
In the London/Windsor series, London who had the 3rd most goals for in the league with 289 and an average of 4.25,scored an average of 2.57 per game a reduction of almost 1.75 per game, while Windsor who finished 10th in the league with 232 goals for an average of 3.41, almost scored an average of 2.57 goals per game,a reduction of .84 per game.
6 games of the 7 were decided by 1 goal excluding empty netters,the closeness of the teams pretty much evident,the teams played 13 games,with London winning 7-6, though London had 1 more home game.
At the end of the day Windsor made sure London did not outscore them 5 on 5,and lost the special teams battle in game 7 because of a generous whistle in the last 9 minutes,with no opportunity to correct a wrong.
Too bad it was a great series impacted by the stripes in the end, and that should never happen in any playoff series regardless who is playing and especially in a game 7.

At least your consistent

Would you ever have your team look in the mirror and suggest they didnt get it done when up 3-1.
Or will every scenario as W7 mentioned be the refs, or a goalie, or the wind blowing east..
They had 3 chances to close it out and came up short. Not the leagues fault, the refs, or one player.....