Jump to content


haroldsnepsts's Photo

haroldsnepsts

Member Since 11 Feb 2004
Offline Last Active Private
***--

#2366500 anyone else kinda happy about the injuries this year?

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 07 March 2013 - 10:07 PM

If Lashoff had ever gotten the chance to play before, Kenny might have realized he didn't need to sign guys like Cola and/or Huskins.

The overly ripe philosophy definitely has its drawbacks. It's unfortunate it requires injuries for them to even get a shot but it's nice to see the younger guys getting a chance.


#2366034 Holland says those dreaded words, "Our Deadline Addition"

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 07 March 2013 - 11:30 AM

Honestly if they do make a move It better be a big one with someone who has years on their contract.  Because unless something dramatic happens with this team over the remainder of the season, they are not one playoff rental away from a deep Cup run.  That should've happened the last two seasons.

 

 If Holland is going to give up assets it should be for a guy who'll be here for a while and help the rebuild.  




#2366029 Should Visors Be Mandatory In The NHL

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 07 March 2013 - 11:17 AM

His PREMISE that gives the NHL player the right to choose whether or not he wants to wear a visor is being a grown man playing a tough sport. That is true, correct?

The thread is "Should visors be mandatory in the NHL." 

 

His post was:

Grown men, playing a tough sport so it should be 100 % the players choice, if they want to wear one. Having said that, as with Kevlar socks I think after the first major injury if they still refuse to wear more protection like gear they should pay a bit of their insurance by themselves (based on their salary).
 
It's pretty clear he is saying in regards to visors he thinks it should  be 100% a players choice.  He made no claims about other sports or other protective equipment.  Your post claiming he's saying NFL players shouldn't have to wear helmets has nothing to do with his statement.
 
You either misinterpreted what he was saying or misrepresented it just to argue.  I'm not going to diagram it out for you any more than that so I suggest you drop it. 



#2364738 Babs on last night's D: "...best we've had all year."

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 04 March 2013 - 02:32 PM

Relax, Snepts!

+/- is a meaningful stat to rate a player at his position. You cant say Quincey is better than Kronwall because of the +/- gap. What you can say is that it appears Quincey is shutting down the 2nd and 3rd lines of the other teams, while it appears Kronwall is just breaking even about against the other teams' top line. What is more valuable? Kronwall breaking even against the top lines of other teams, in my opinion. Id love to see Kronwall a +2 with 31 points this year and Quincey a +19 with 11 points. That would mean our defense is holding its own across the top 3 lines of other teams. Especially with our piss poor offense this season.

The more you explain what Quincey's plus-minus shows, the more you make my case about it being mostly useless and widely misinterpreted.  

 

You're using the stat to demonstrate something it's absolutely not built for.  Here's a decent explanation of the weaknesses and common misuses of the stat. 

 

http://www.puckprosp...hp?articleid=20




#2364581 Babs on last night's D: "...best we've had all year."

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 10:03 PM

not a useless stat. All of you who say that are retarted. sure it does not define someone but its not useless

First, if you're going to call someone retarded, it carries more weight when you spell it correctly. 

 

Second, it's best not to call anyone that here, especially not a moderator.  Here's the forum rules for reference. I'd focus on the personal attack and respecting moderators stuff.

http://www.letsgowin...tion=boardrules

 

Third, it is a mostly useless stat.




#2364366 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 03:27 PM

I guess it depends on if you like the shootout or not.  I like them.  I am assuming you don't like them by your statement.

 

I would much rather have a game ending with a winner/loser in a shootout than a tie.  I thought the amount of ties in hockey before the shootout were absurd.

I'm  not just reacting to Kane and the shootout loss.  I've always hated the it. 

 

It's a terrible way to decide a game and by its artificial nature requires keeping the loser point.  I'd much rather have ten minutes of 4 on 4 OT, then just call it a tie if no one scores and both teams get a point.  

 

If someone does score then two points to the winner, no points for losing. Ever. 

 

I grew up watching hockey in the 80s so there were ties.  It really only got bad in the clutch and grab era.  Watching a slow boring hockey game ending in a tie.  




#2364338 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 03:17 PM

What?  Skate slowly toward the goalie and score?  No other player has the skill to do what Kane does thats for sure.

 

I'm not sure what your point is in regards to my post.  I wasn't questioning Kane's skill.  He takes the rules to the limit and uses his skill to score.  

 

When in a hockey game would you be able to come to an almost complete stop for that much time to make that many moves?  Never.  Someone would bury you.  

 

My point was using an artificially constructed event to decide a hockey game, and Kane's near stops highlights the absurdity of it. 




#2364310 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 03:11 PM

How is that slow down crap legal?

you technically only have to be making forward progress. He still is.  Barely. 

 

It highlights why the shootout is a joke. 




#2364279 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 03:07 PM

Hi.  This is the GDT.  Let's say we talk about the game and not judging who's a true fan or not. 

 

 

mmkay thanks.




#2364155 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 02:51 PM

you knew it was going to happen.




#2364056 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 02:34 PM

Wow.  Another huge save by Crawford.  

 

Nice little saucerpass on the backhand by Mule. 

 

 

ANd holy crap Smith. That's bananas blocking a shot like that. 




#2364037 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 02:30 PM

That sure didn't look offsides.  I thought everybody stayed over the line. 




#2364029 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 02:27 PM

Franzen is having a brutal game so far.  just got outmuscled on another puck. 




#2363901 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 02:00 PM

How many Hawks were on the ice there?  Seemed like there was 8 of them out there. 




#2363814 3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Posted by haroldsnepsts on 03 March 2013 - 01:43 PM

Another turnover by Mule.  

 

Great backchecking by Brunner though.