Windsor Spitfires 2021-22 Season Thread (Part 2)

[OHL4Life]

Yes we will disagree a lot as we both approach things from a different perspective. I tend to use a larger body of work as well as expectations versus quality of competition while you'll stats that can be very selective. That's fine if you choose to perceive the possibility of future success lies in specific sample sizes where as I prefer the way trends are developing for the team over a larger sample size.

How has the team performed against teams of similar or greater talent? They have no wins. They have a couple of points from shootouts and that's it.

How have they performed against teams that are over achieving? You can include Flint and even OS since they've played teams that mostly considered better than them and have had mixed final outcomes but almost always extremely close losses. Windsor is 2 and 1.

How have they performed against the teams they should beat? Windsor has had mixed results in terms of final outcomes but also even when they have won it's usually been extremely close games.

That sounds like a team that is playing average hockey against lower quality opponents while struggling against teams they should be on par with.

So you can present stats that can show improvement and make them look good in certain areas if the game but it doesn't show how they've improved versus the quality of competition they've played.

The teams they need to beat to contend they haven't gotten it done once yet.

The teams they should have no issue beating they are struggling to get the wins they have.

The over achievers they've faced they have a winning record against.

The team isn't getting it done as of yet to be considered a real contender even though they have one of the better rosters on paper.

Windsor's D is average at the best of times. Has been for a number of years. They're not a stellar defensive team and they never contribute a lot offensively. Regardless of how many points they return that should be more of an indictment of just how average they've been for a few years now. Other teams are losing more to the pros while Winddor keeps them coming back for another year and as a group they always finish middle if the pack.

the same few guys have been saying everything is great for something like 10 years now. they certainly were right the first two, since then?

im cool with positive, there are always positives in a team or 22, but there are also negatives and theres also a thought that accepting mediocrity, accepting not winning playoff rounds and not really doing anything from a results standpoint for 5-6 years does nothing but breed the exact same results year after year.

i dont get whats so wrong with striving for more then just basic mediocrity.

 

[member 71782]

If you've lost a game or allowed a goal, it could be better. Does this team has flaws? Absolutely. Does this team need to improve in certain areas? Of course. Are they showing signs of improvement after a month? Yes. Are they entertaining? Very much so. Teams are going to have off nights or even off weekends. That happens, regardless of how good or bad you are. Is it their fault that the CHL put them in the spotlight before the season started? No. Most of us thought this was a season that could go either way and, so far, it has. That said, it's been a month...I'm not about to sweat a whole lot just yet. On Sat night, when I was heading into the arena, I overheard a couple of people talking about the team and one person put it perfectly - (paraphrase) - "we're barely a month into this. Talk to me after 20 games or at the start of December; that'll give a better idea of what they're about."

The CHL ranking them has nothing to do with anything. When have I ever brought that up?

The expectations that have been placed on them are from other posters who now look to misrepresent how they've done.

People can say give them 10 or 20 games or until the deadline, that's fine we can shut the board down until whatever time frame has been reached or we can see how they've played, see what trends are developing, see how they compare to the expectations people have placed on them and see what they're doing as a team and an organization to make adjustments.

The team has played short forwards all season. Bowler has not addressed this and coaching adjustments are usually dress 8 D even if there's only one forward injured requiring them to sit another healthy forward. Failure all around and after 11 games needs to be addressed.

Special teams have been brutal. What's been done after 11 games to address this? Nothing.

Do teams have off nights or even weekends? Yes they do. So far this team has had more off nights than on nights. See my reply to Legend if you want the fu breakdown.

When do the number of games matter or number of months, weeks days? This team, based on their schedule, expectations and quality of competition should have 16 or so points minimum. Had they pulled out a few more wins maybe you see Windsor with the 2nd most points in the conference and London or Kitchener or even OS with a couple less. Suddenly that changes the whole outlook on the season. To get those extra 4 or 6 points Windsor has to be playing much better hockey.

Why does a time frame affect Windsor but not other teams? Windsor is struggling while other teams are doing what's expected of them or even exceeding expectations. If a team doesn't meet expectations early people "don't sweat it" but if they get off to a hot start there's usually no one saying give it two months or wait until they've played 20 games. In other words one response is an excuse while the other needs no response.

If you think your team is a contender and your starter gives up 5 goals 3 times in his first 6 starts and you thought he was going to be part of that contender there is an issue.

If you think you have an offensive powerhouse but you can't score on the PP, let alone reliably there is an issue.

If you think you have a solid D but you have the worst PK in the conference then you have an issue.

If you can’t beat other likely contenders you have an issue.

If you have no depth to replace injured players you have an issue.

10 games, 20 games it doesn't really matter if issues are not addressed.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Yes we will disagree a lot as we both approach things from a different perspective. I tend to use a larger body of work as well as expectations versus quality of competition while you'll stats that can be very selective. That's fine if you choose to perceive the possibility of future success lies in specific sample sizes where as I prefer the way trends are developing for the team over a larger sample size.

How has the team performed against teams of similar or greater talent? They have no wins. They have a couple of points from shootouts and that's it.

How have they performed against teams that are over achieving? You can include Flint and even OS since they've played teams that mostly considered better than them and have had mixed final outcomes but almost always extremely close losses. Windsor is 2 and 1.

How have they performed against the teams they should beat? Windsor has had mixed results in terms of final outcomes but also even when they have won it's usually been extremely close games.

That sounds like a team that is playing average hockey against lower quality opponents while struggling against teams they should be on par with.

So you can present stats that can show improvement and make them look good in certain areas if the game but it doesn't show how they've improved versus the quality of competition they've played.

The teams they need to beat to contend they haven't gotten it done once yet.

The teams they should have no issue beating they are struggling to get the wins they have.

The over achievers they've faced they have a winning record against.

The team isn't getting it done as of yet to be considered a real contender even though they have one of the better rosters on paper.

Windsor's D is average at the best of times. Has been for a number of years. They're not a stellar defensive team and they never contribute a lot offensively. Regardless of how many points they return that should be more of an indictment of just how average they've been for a few years now. Other teams are losing more to the pros while Winddor keeps them coming back for another year and as a group they always finish middle if the pack.

I agree with all of this if you want to cherry pick stats for goals scored during a 4-5 game stretch, goaltending etc... I have a stat that would make Windsor seem like the best team in the west. Teams not named Kitchener and London the Spits have a winning % of .714 10 points out of a possible 14. Stats don't lie...................

 

[hockeylegend11]

I agree with all of this if you want to cherry pick stats for goals scored during a 4-5 game stretch, goaltending etc... I have a stat that would make Windsor seem like the best team in the west. Teams not named Kitchener and London the Spits have a winning % of .714 10 points out of a possible 14. Stats don't lie...................

What about London teams not named Windsor and Flint
London % of 1.000 -14 points out a possible 14 points
Stats don't lie.

 

[AttackBeacher]

What about London teams not named Windsor and Flint
London % of 1.000 -14 points out a possible 14 points
Stats don't lie.

London has 18 of 20 points this year, 10 games played. I'm not even sure what you are trying to say here?

 

[member 71782]

the same few guys have been saying everything is great for something like 10 years now. they certainly were right the first two, since then?

im cool with positive, there are always positives in a team or 22, but there are also negatives and theres also a thought that accepting mediocrity, accepting not winning playoff rounds and not really doing anything from a results standpoint for 5-6 years does nothing but breed the exact same results year after year.

i dont get whats so wrong with striving for more then just basic mediocrity.

This really says it all.

The same guys you mention are the same ones who create expectations and the same ones who try to change or manage the narrative when expectations are not met.

They're also the same ones who try to push how toxic things are or how negative some are for not falling in line behind their narrative.

Differing opinions should not be considered negative simply because they do not support wishful thinking by some. If people would approach their opinions in a non biased way they would see critical opinions aren't from those who are less of a fan they are just as die hard as most and are tired of being put down or attacked by those misrepresenting what's going on.

If I'm negative because I'm tired of this team losing and not willing to take the steps needed to get beyond being a mediocre team. If you need a couple of OT wins over teams you should beat on any given night without the need for OT to show this team can win while ignoring they can't beat a team at the level you claim this team is at then just ignore the critical posts, put your blinders back on and keep cheering until the season ends with no real success and then you have all summer to make your excuses whole those who were critical keep giving the exact same reasons they did all season without deviating from what went on.

 

[member 71782]

What about London teams not named Windsor and Flint
London % of 1.000 -14 points out a possible 14 points
Stats don't lie.

Windsor got the loser point in the shootout, London got 2 points for winning.

Windsor has no affect on London's win %.

 

[OHL4Life]

This really says it all.

The same guys you mention are the same ones who create expectations and the same ones who try to change or manage the narrative when expectations are not met.

They're also the same ones who try to push how toxic things are or how negative some are for not falling in line behind their narrative.

Differing opinions should not be considered negative simply because they do not support wishful thinking by some. If people would approach their opinions in a non biased way they would see critical opinions aren't from those who are less of a fan they are just as die hard as most and are tired of being put down or attacked by those misrepresenting what's going on.

If I'm negative because I'm tired of this team losing and not willing to take the steps needed to get beyond being a mediocre team. If you need a couple of OT wins over teams you should beat on any given night without the need for OT to show this team can win while ignoring they can't beat a team at the level you claim this team is at then just ignore the critical posts, put your blinders back on and keep cheering until the season ends with no real success and then you have all summer to make your excuses whole those who were critical keep giving the exact same reasons they did all season without deviating from what went on.

i mean, we have an import who has zero points, doesn't really do alot, will bang a bit, but does the same thing that any 17 year old ontario kid does. and thats deemed fine. no different then when warren drafted that vladimir ionin guy. he kept doing nothing, we were told to keep waiting, give him time, etc. then, he finally got cut, and at that point it was ok to say things didnt work, but it was no ones fault., you cant offer objective and fair criticism, nope.

remember when ohltg and hl11 said that game winning goals are the best way to judge a rookie the one year that the spits guys were top 10 in it? the following year it wasnt game winning goals, it become plus minus. then, finally when we have a rookie who is producing, its back to points.

they do this over and over and are shocked that the are accused of not being critical enough. bizarre, i wish they would have graded my kid in high school, he would have gotten a's just for showing up, and maybe not even showing up.

 

[OHLTG]

The CHL ranking them has nothing to do with anything. When have I ever brought that up?

You have to mention it for me to bring it up? The rankings were discussed at length around the net before the season, how this team was supposed to start strong, had all kinds of talent, etc etc etc.

People can say give them 10 or 20 games or until the deadline, that's fine we can shut the board down until whatever time frame has been reached or we can see how they've played, see what trends are developing, see how they compare to the expectations people have placed on them and see what they're doing as a team and an organization to make adjustments.

I'm sensing mild sarcasm?! I make no apologies for stepping back and aiming for the 20-game mark before truly evaluating what they have. Yes, they have issues. Yes, there are things that should be fixed. But, I'm not going to really let it get to me until the 20-game mark (roughly end of the month). I think that's fair.
I've criticized them many times this season, wondering what they were doing in certain situations. I just try to find the positives when they're coming at me, too.

 

[OHL4Life]

You have to mention it for me to bring it up? The rankings were discussed at length around the net before the season, how this team was supposed to start strong, had all kinds of talent, etc etc etc.




I'm sensing mild sarcasm?! I make no apologies for stepping back and aiming for the 20-game mark before truly evaluating what they have. Yes, they have issues. Yes, there are things that should be fixed. But, I'm not going to really let it get to me until the 20-game mark (roughly end of the month). I think that's fair.
I've criticized them many times this season, wondering what they were doing in certain situations. I just try to find the positives when they're coming at me, too.

you realize that sacrasm is somewhat your main card to play when people call you out, right?

we wernt even allowed to critizise louis latta or joe mizzi when we were hitting rock bottom. remember how great you said will sirman was? we need better then will sirman and joe mizzi, that cant be what we deem acceptable, you can deem it acceptable, but thats even less that mediocre.

what are we judging the rookies on this year? is it gwg? or did we move it to +/1 again? i assume its points, but we never know

 

[OHLTG]

you realize that sacrasm is somewhat your main card to play when people call you out, right?

we wernt even allowed to critizise louis latta or joe mizzi when we were hitting rock bottom. remember how great you said will sirman was?

what are we judging the rookies on this year? is it gwg? or did we move it to +/1 again? i assume its points, but we never know

Can you show me a quote where I said "Will Sirman is great"? (though, he wasn't bad - 19 points and worked his tail off) Regarding Latta/Mizzi - when Rychel hits gold with previous FAs up to that point, yes, I'm going to give Latta/Mizzi the benefit. Again, no apologies for that. Did they turn out? Nope. But at the start, yes, I was fine with them.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

The CHL ranking them has nothing to do with anything. When have I ever brought that up?

The expectations that have been placed on them are from other posters who now look to misrepresent how they've done.

People can say give them 10 or 20 games or until the deadline, that's fine we can shut the board down until whatever time frame has been reached or we can see how they've played, see what trends are developing, see how they compare to the expectations people have placed on them and see what they're doing as a team and an organization to make adjustments.

The team has played short forwards all season. Bowler has not addressed this and coaching adjustments are usually dress 8 D even if there's only one forward injured requiring them to sit another healthy forward. Failure all around and after 11 games needs to be addressed.

Special teams have been brutal. What's been done after 11 games to address this? Nothing.

Do teams have off nights or even weekends? Yes they do. So far this team has had more off nights than on nights. See my reply to Legend if you want the fu breakdown.

When do the number of games matter or number of months, weeks days? This team, based on their schedule, expectations and quality of competition should have 16 or so points minimum. Had they pulled out a few more wins maybe you see Windsor with the 2nd most points in the conference and London or Kitchener or even OS with a couple less. Suddenly that changes the whole outlook on the season. To get those extra 4 or 6 points Windsor has to be playing much better hockey.

Why does a time frame affect Windsor but not other teams? Windsor is struggling while other teams are doing what's expected of them or even exceeding expectations. If a team doesn't meet expectations early people "don't sweat it" but if they get off to a hot start there's usually no one saying give it two months or wait until they've played 20 games. In other words one response is an excuse while the other needs no response.

If you think your team is a contender and your starter gives up 5 goals 3 times in his first 6 starts and you thought he was going to be part of that contender there is an issue.

If you think you have an offensive powerhouse but you can't score on the PP, let alone reliably there is an issue.

If you think you have a solid D but you have the worst PK in the conference then you have an issue.

If you can’t beat other likely contenders you have an issue.

If you have no depth to replace injured players you have an issue.

10 games, 20 games it doesn't really matter if issues are not addressed.

This is exactly it, this post should be pinned on this board for whenever we have discussions about the team struggling. Since OHLTG does enjoy his non-sequiter the point has never been 10 games etc... or 20 games etc... The team has played average hockey to begin the year and we all know that they only play 9 teams this year an average 10 game stretch or 20 game stretch won't cut it against 8 other teams (Soo gets to play NB/Sud/Barrie) this year. There isn't really a way to make up ground by playing a little above .500 hockey.

Take a look at London 18 out of 20 points this isn't a time to declare them champs but what it's done is give them a buffer for when maybe they only 5 of 9 etc.. Or when they lose players to the WJs.

As you mentioned with special teams the poor stretch of PK isn't just going to be made up from a few good games in a row. Put it in perspective Saginaw has the best PK in the league at 90%. For the Spits to get up close to 90% they would have to kill off their next 34 penalties to get up to 87%. The best PP in the west is at 31% the Spits would have to score on 13 straight PP's to reach that mark. The special teams have been a problem for a full month it probably will take a month or even more to start getting to the point of where it's a net positive for the team.

It was full steam ahead when people talked about championship aspirations but because they have been average it's now wait and see. It wouldn't be a wait and see if they started out hot. This average start is merely being used as a crutch not to criticize Bowler who's in charge of the roster and Savard who is still new to the gig. It's pretty simple.

 

[OHL4Life]

Can you show me a quote where I said "Will Sirman is great"? (though, he wasn't bad - 19 points and worked his tail off) Regarding Latta/Mizzi - when Rychel hits gold with previous FAs up to that point, yes, I'm going to give Latta/Mizzi the benefit. Again, no apologies for that. Did they turn out? Nope. But at the start, yes, I was fine with them.

the fact that we didnt draft better and didnt have better then that in the system was the problem, but again, accepting mediocrity. none of the fa's that rychel hit on were previously cut by other ohl teams. hell, he only really hit on 1 free agent. what a shocker that they didnt hit here. you can be optimistic, you you can be blind. blind optimism doesnt lead to objectivity, it leads to a lack of critical thinking.

what are we judging the rooking on this year, you never answered that. is it back to gwg?

 

[OHLTG]

the fact that we didnt draft better and didnt have better then that in the system was the problem, but again, accepting mediocrity. none of the fa's that rychel hit on were previously cut by other ohl teams. hell, he only really hit on 1 free agent. what a shocker that they didnt hit here. you can be optimistic, you you can be blind. blind optimism doesnt lead to objectivity, it leads to a lack of critical thinking.

what are we judging the rooking on this year, you never answered that. is it back to gwg?

He hit on DiGi, Culina, and Chatfield, all of whom succeeded with the Spits.

Judging the rookies this year - I don't think there's one category we'd focus on.

 

[OHL4Life]

He hit on DiGi, Culina, and Chatfield, all of whom succeeded with the Spits.

Judging the rookies this year - I don't think there's one category we'd focus on.

and none of those rookies had been cut by previous teams, again, what a shock that these guys didnt hit

so when you said that gwg was the only true way to judge rookies (i can probably find the quote you provided hl11) you were not being honest i take it. its amazing that gwg was only brought up the single year that they had guys in the top 10, i mean if its part of the package, it should always be referenced, not jsut when they are top 10.

blind optimism doesnt mean objective, it means blind optimism.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Can you show me a quote where I said "Will Sirman is great"? (though, he wasn't bad - 19 points and worked his tail off) Regarding Latta/Mizzi - when Rychel hits gold with previous FAs up to that point, yes, I'm going to give Latta/Mizzi the benefit. Again, no apologies for that. Did they turn out? Nope. But at the start, yes, I was fine with them.

Dude Latta never played a game for the Spits, Mizzi played 4 games. Geez Louise how can you still say you give those players the benefit of the doubt when they weren't really good enough to make the team to begin with? At the start you were fine with them?? The start was 4 games for one player.

 

[OHL4Life]

being fine with players like mizzi, latta is being fine with the same old same old, its being fine with no playoff series wins, its being fine with imports with no impact.

sue me and sue all of us if wed like to raise the bar a touch in windsor.

 

[member 71782]

You have to mention it for me to bring it up? The rankings were discussed at length around the net before the season, how this team was supposed to start strong, had all kinds of talent, etc etc etc.




I'm sensing mild sarcasm?! I make no apologies for stepping back and aiming for the 20-game mark before truly evaluating what they have. Yes, they have issues. Yes, there are things that should be fixed. But, I'm not going to really let it get to me until the 20-game mark (roughly end of the month). I think that's fair.
I've criticized them many times this season, wondering what they were doing in certain situations. I just try to find the positives when they're coming at me, too.

Since you were quoting my post and everything else seemed to be related to my post it seemed that might have been directed to what you thought were past comments of mine in terms of the CHL comment.

As for sarcasm, none.
Different people use different time frames, that's fine but a number of people usually say give them the first month which is usually the first 10 games or so then if there's players that have been away it becomes give them another 10 games etc. There's always a reason to wait and see what the team has even though the core is in place and systems have been established and players are still playing at the same level they were before and those who were supposed to be the main threats are playing well below expectations and the rookies who were going to contribute day one are contributing as most would expect a rookie to, etc.

If Foudy comes back at the end of the month it'll be wait until the Christmas break and wait until Jan 1st then hope he gets going before the deadline then he won't get dealt and no one else will because Bowler, likes the roster etc.

Then we'll hear on here that this team could surprise in the playoffs and they'll pull it all together since the stress of the deadline is gone. The familiarity and not having new faces will help them and then based on many recent examples they inevitably start getting beat and the contenders start running away we'll hear how Windsor was the only that didn't add and while the same issues from game one are still plaguing this team we'll start hearing about the refs blew a call or two every game.

Once the season is over we'll have all the "positives" regurgitated to ys while the getting knocked out in the first imagine is responded to with how many Memorial Cups they've won over however many number if years it's up to now and how that's all that counts even though you need to get out of the first round before you can start thinking about a trip to the tourney, unless Windsor's been made the permanent host for the OHL.

Then we'll spend the remainder of the summer, when we're not being called negative or toxic being told how Windsor has the most points returning on D, the top offense and 17 players who are going to make this team unstoppable, but will never report etc.

Sound familiar?

It's become the same story since 2011/12 except with the exception of 2017 the mediocrity has grown every single season.

But there's always a reason why we should wait another month, 5 or 10 more games or believe all the hype from the expectations put out by the same people who say I'm negative for pointing out the faults that never get addressed in 10/20/30/40 or even after 68 games and an entire iffseason or 9 or 10.

 

[windsor7]

I mean, this could all be worse - there could be another cancelled season.

always

 

[OHLTG]

so when you said that gwg was the only true way to judge rookies (i can probably find the quote you provided hl11)

I truly don't remember this so if you can find the quote, please, show me...

Dude Latta never played a game for the Spits, Mizzi played 4 games. Geez Louise how can you still say you give those players the benefit of the doubt when they weren't really good enough to make the team to begin with?

How do I give them the benefit of the doubt? Easy - when the previous FAs do well, I'm going to give the new FAs the benefit at the start. They don't always turn out great, but after a streak like that...

Again, I'm not going to apologize for being patient right now. If that's not liked, then so be it. I'll criticize, I'll roll my eyes, I'll get annoyed, but I'm still going to be patient and look at this as a marathon. That's how I am.

 

[windsor7]

London has 18 of 20 points this year, 10 games played. I'm not even sure what you are trying to say here?

True

 

[windsor7]

Can you show me a quote where I said "Will Sirman is great"? (though, he wasn't bad - 19 points and worked his tail off) Regarding Latta/Mizzi - when Rychel hits gold with previous FAs up to that point, yes, I'm going to give Latta/Mizzi the benefit. Again, no apologies for that. Did they turn out? Nope. But at the start, yes, I was fine with them.

Its how u finish...

 

[OHL4Life]

Since you were quoting my post and everything else seemed to be related to my post it seemed that might have been directed to what you thought were past comments of mine in terms of the CHL comment.

As for sarcasm, none.
Different people use different time frames, that's fine but a number of people usually say give them the first month which is usually the first 10 games or so then if there's players that have been away it becomes give them another 10 games etc. There's always a reason to wait and see what the team has even though the core is in place and systems have been established and players are still playing at the same level they were before and those who were supposed to be the main threats are playing well below expectations and the rookies who were going to contribute day one are contributing as most would expect a rookie to, etc.

If Foudy comes back at the end of the month it'll be wait until the Christmas break and wait until Jan 1st then hope he gets going before the deadline then he won't get dealt and no one else will because Bowler, likes the roster etc.

Then we'll hear on here that this team could surprise in the playoffs and they'll pull it all together since the stress of the deadline is gone. The familiarity and not having new faces will help them and then based on many recent examples they inevitably start getting beat and the contenders start running away we'll hear how Windsor was the only that didn't add and while the same issues from game one are still plaguing this team we'll start hearing about the refs blew a call or two every game.

Once the season is over we'll have all the "positives" regurgitated to ys while the getting knocked out in the first imagine is responded to with how many Memorial Cups they've won over however many number if years it's up to now and how that's all that counts even though you need to get out of the first round before you can start thinking about a trip to the tourney, unless Windsor's been made the permanent host for the OHL.

Then we'll spend the remainder of the summer, when we're not being called negative or toxic being told how Windsor has the most points returning on D, the top offense and 17 players who are going to make this team unstoppable, but will never report etc.

Sound familiar?

It's become the same story since 2011/12 except with the exception of 2017 the mediocrity has grown every single season.

But there's always a reason why we should wait another month, 5 or 10 more games or believe all the hype from the expectations put out by the same people who say I'm negative for pointing out the faults that never get addressed in 10/20/30/40 or even after 68 games and an entire iffseason or 9 or 10.

i can’t like this post enough. this is what the last 5-7 years have been.

the two of them will not touch this post of just brush it off, but this is what love as a spits fav has been for the past 10 yards on here, and probably will be the next 1/2 anyways.

please keep challenging them

 

[member 71782]

i can’t like this post enough. this is what the last 5-7 years have been.

the two of them will not touch this post of just brush it off, but this is what love as a spits fav has been for the past 10 yards on here, and probably will be the next 1/2 anyways.

please keep challenging them

You know I always do

 

[spits]

I am honest in my evaluations. Yes, it's unacceptable this team hasn't won a playoff series since 2011, no doubt.

I see no reason to be alarmed yet this season. The issues are easily solved, ie. the odd-man rushes they are allowing, the PP etc.

Saturday's game is a good measuring stick against the SOO. That's a game they need to win to show they can compete atop the division. All this complaining, yet if they win the 3 games on hand they have on the SOO, they are tied for 1st. The SOO will slow down, they are not going to average 5 goals per game all season.