[PGT] Vancouver @ Buffalo

[-dlc-]

Remember to vote for our guys in the Skills comp.

 

10 votes/day.

 

I voted JT and Quinn (sorry Brock, could only pick 2)

[kilgore]

24 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Do you remember when linesmen used to fake drop pucls on faceoffs?

 

Yeah.  It was last game.  They still do that all the time.  And I hate it.

 

Someone has to address the wasting of time by linesmen for the puck drop.  Its a game to some of these linesmen. Fun to set them up, pretend to drop the puck, and then if someone moves the wrong way he's out. Its almost routine for some. Fake drop.....send out one player.....then drop for real.  What is wrong is that it only takes the slightest stick movement in the air to eliminate a player.

 

Variation:  Double fake drop.  Sometimes triple.  Uh oh....no infraction, the sting didn't work.  So fake drop again.  Keep faking until you find a tiny stick movement to justify sending out a player. Then drop the puck.  If anyone cheats after that and one team gets an advantage he doesn't care.  The whole intent was the 2 minutes of fame for the linesman.  As many times the first player to make contact with the puck doesn't determine which team ultimately wins the draw anyways. Its not crucially important part of the game.  Just drop the damn puck!

 

I realize that some players will try and cheat, its inevitable. And once in awhile might be okay to pull that.  But they do the entrapment exercise way too much. Almost every puck drop. Has Blueger even been able to take one faceoff yet?

[John.Tallhouse]

I had high hopes for this kid at one point. But no.

 

 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, kilgore said:

 

Yeah.  It was last game.  They still do that all the time.  And I hate it.

 

Someone has to address the wasting of time by linesmen for the puck drop.  Its a game to some of these linesmen. Fun to set them up, pretend to drop the puck, and then if someone moves the wrong way he's out. Its almost routine for some. Fake drop.....send out one player.....then drop for real.  What is wrong is that it only takes the slightest stick movement in the air to eliminate a player.

 

Variation:  Double fake drop.  Sometimes triple.  Uh oh....no infraction, the sting didn't work.  So fake drop again.  Keep faking until you find a tiny stick movement to justify sending out a player. Then drop the puck.  If anyone cheats after that and one team gets an advantage he doesn't care.  The whole intent was the 2 minutes of fame for the linesman.  As many times the first player to make contact with the puck doesn't determine which team ultimately wins the draw anyways. Its not crucially important part of the game.  Just drop the damn puck!

 

I realize that some players will try and cheat, its inevitable. And once in awhile might be okay to pull that.  But they do the entrapment exercise way too much. Almost every puck drop. Has Blueger even been able to take one faceoff yet?

 

No one fake drops anymore, but they do hold the puck longer.  What you don't see is they are talking to the C's the whole time, telling them what they need to fix or stop doing.

 

It's not some weird conspiracy

[Tusk]

13 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

 

 

Old news.  That's exactly what happened.  They've probably already landed in Columbus now.

 

As for the stress --> injuries argument... come on.  These guys are hockey players.  They are not soft.  They have seen snow.  They have seen buses.  Player safety and fan safety is a legit argument.  But the stress causing devastating injuries?  Come on.

for the flight it looks like its booked to leave toronto 6pm est.    So they must have took bus or a boat! https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ac7037

[Strawbone]

I’m taking the Tocchet approach and not stressing about the reffing too much. Most games, both fan bases complain about the officiating which tells me there are usually missed or bad calls both ways, and I’m not going down a conspiracy theory rabbit hole of thinking the league is out to screw the Canucks in particular. 
 

The refs could have been better in the Buffalo game, but they also could have been much worse. I enjoyed overcoming some adversity and getting a win!

[stawns]

7 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

The consistent standard in the playoff and regular season is a must.  If they differs in the playoffs, the habit will continue with cycle repeating, taking it easy during regular season and ramping it up in the playoffs and ref shallowing their whistle is not what the league needs.   If you call it by the book, the habit will die.  I remember a good old day where obstruction were the king and ref had to call everything for the habit to die and it has been a success and now the only standard is to make standard from regular season and the playoffs be the same.   I think that the ref is afraid to make a call even more in the playoffs making it worse. Tbh, the ref should not have a fear making calls if it is same and we will accept as it is.  If they do differently in the playoffs, we will continue to complain, not a good look for ref since hockey was invented.  

 

The numbers don't back that up.  More penalties are called in the post season than during the reg season.

[coolboarder]

48 minutes ago, Kragar said:

I'm with ya for the most part. The inconsistency is hard to deal with, for sure.

 

I don't think the difference in calling it roughing or elbowing is going to impact JT's reputation within the league. He's a known quantity, and opposing players will see the hit for what it is when they watch it.

The inconsistent ref can be solved by having a huge pool of ref.  If the ref are consistent to the calls, then keep them, if they are inconsistent then assign them to a fewer games in regular season.  Right now, I think that the ref pool is so small and it is a lot easier to keep his job with smaller pool of ref to work with.  If the pool is larger, it becomes easier to monitor them and evaluate them and make decision, even the ref can be let go even if he worked in the playoffs.  Consistent is what we all strive for but

the biggest issue is the union that preventing them from actually terminate the ref that is not consistent.  

 

57 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Were they chippy throughout?

 

I'm not claiming our guys were angels, as there were a few calls that were let go that surprised me earlier on. But the refs had opportunities to settle things down when things heated up after Samuelsson and Dahlin got hurt, and they didn't. They looked hard at giving Miller 5 and a game, which is fine, but they made the right call (which I saw you agree with, too).

 

When the Sabres start taking shots at Huggy, that's when calls should have been made, and they weren't.

As far as targeting Hughes, I think that they could have called it charging if they are targeting someone.   Charging can be called by taking steps or taking longer time to make a hit even if passes is long gone, not jumping but to make hit even without strides could be easily be identified.  All the ref has to do is to watch that even long after puck has been gone, not following the puck all the time but making sure that they are skating away from each other then begin to track the puck again and let the back official track the puck from other side.

[stawns]

Just now, coolboarder said:

The inconsistent ref can be solved by having a huge pool of ref.  If the ref are consistent to the calls, then keep them, if they are inconsistent then assign them to a fewer games in regular season.  Right now, I think that the ref pool is so small and it is a lot easier to keep his job with smaller pool of ref to work with.  If the pool is larger, it becomes easier to monitor them and evaluate them and make decision, even the ref can be let go even if he worked in the playoffs.  Consistent is what we all strive for but

the biggest issue is the union that preventing them from actually terminate the ref that is not consistent.  

 

As far as targeting Hughes, I think that they could have called it charging if they are targeting someone.   Charging can be called by taking steps or taking longer time to make a hit even if passes is long gone, not jumping but to make hit even without strides could be easily be identified.  All the ref has to do is to watch that even long after puck has been gone, not following the puck all the time but making sure that they are skating away from each other then begin to track the puck again and let the back official track the puck from other side.

 

None of those hits on Hughes were dirty, imo

[Sargon]

20 hours ago, Alflives said:

Guys are learning how they need to play to win games when they’re tired. Very professional win. And we have Demko, of course. 

You think Casey plays Columbus?

[coolboarder]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

The numbers don't back that up.  More penalties are called in the post season than during the reg season.

I haven't seen playoffs games for years because the Canucks was not in the playoffs.  So I wouldn't know.  Let me watch them closely then make my judgment.  It is a reputational thing due to the past and how they worked.   They would have to shed that reputation for me to change my mind.  

[kilgore]

Just now, stawns said:

 

No one fake drops anymore, but they do hold the puck longer.  What you don't see is they are talking to the C's the whole time, telling them what they need to fix or stop doing.

 

It's not some weird conspiracy

No one said its a "weird conspiracy"

Fake drops have become just an acceptable way that some linesmen do their jobs.  If you think they don't do that anymore, You don't watch hockey.  I just think they should reign in that tactic a bit.

 

Another scenerio;  I've watched centers get warned, after a fake drop,  then they've dropped the puck and the same center does the exact same cheat, and wins the face off. (it may be our guy or theirs)  What was the point? Drop the damn puck.  If its an egregiously unfair result they can always blow the whistle and do it over. But most times they don't need to play their silly games and waste time.

[coolboarder]

Just now, stawns said:

 

None of those hits on Hughes were dirty, imo

They were targeting, even long after the puck was gone, and yes, that is dirty, in a SH situation by Sabres to make a hit even it is not necessary because the puck were long gone and they still do that is not making any sense, he could have turned and try to backcheck.  That is over 2 seconds after the puck was gone.  Anything less than a sec is fine but it was 2 seconds, and that is dirty in my book.

[SilentSam]

9 minutes ago, Strawbone said:

I’m taking the Tocchet approach and not stressing about the reffing too much. Most games, both fan bases complain about the officiating which tells me there are usually missed or bad calls both ways, and I’m not going down a conspiracy theory rabbit hole of thinking the league is out to screw the Canucks in particular. 
 

The refs could have been better in the Buffalo game, but they also could have been much worse. I enjoyed overcoming some adversity and getting a win!

 

He’ll be more vocal the next season,.

and by “next season”,.    I mean the playoffs.

 

 

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

I haven't seen playoffs games for years because the Canucks was not in the playoffs.  So I wouldn't know.  Let me watch them closely then make my judgment.  It is a reputational thing due to the past and how they worked.   They would have to shed that reputation for me to change my mind.  

 

You don't need to observe, the numbers are clear

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.tsn.ca/let-s-talk-about-penalties-in-the-nhl-playoffs-1.1962128%3ftsn-amp

 

"What I think is noticeable is that for the eighth year in a row, the playoffs are seeing a higher rate of penalties called than the regular season – contrary to some of the narratives you hear or read during playoff hockey"

[Jaimito]

 

 

 

[coolboarder]

1 minute ago, kilgore said:

No one said its a "weird conspiracy"

Fake drops have become just an acceptable way that some linesmen do their jobs.  If you think they don't do that anymore, You don't watch hockey.  I just think they should reign in that tactic a bit.

 

Another scenerio;  I've watched centers get warned, after a fake drop,  then they've dropped the puck and the same center does the exact same cheat, and wins the face off. (it may be our guy or theirs)  What was the point? Drop the damn puck.  If its an egregiously unfair result they can always blow the whistle and do it over. But most times they don't need to play their silly games and waste time.

I agree.  They were following linesman's instruction on faceoff procedure and they still do fake drop.  That is a bad linesman.  A good linesman would do the procedure then if they do what he said, then just drop the puck.  If he attempt to fake drop just to get him out, that's bad.  If a player moved early before the count to drop, then yes, kick him out of the faceoff. 

[Jaimito]

 

 

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

They were targeting, even long after the puck was gone, and yes, that is dirty, in a SH situation by Sabres to make a hit even it is not necessary because the puck were long gone and they still do that is not making any sense, he could have turned and try to backcheck.  That is over 2 seconds after the puck was gone.  Anything less than a sec is fine but it was 2 seconds, and that is dirty in my book.

 

That's just your bias talking imo.  Hughes is a top player, he has to get used to being a target.  They targeted Petey too, but he loves that style and it just fuels him.  

[Kragar]

1 minute ago, coolboarder said:

The inconsistent ref can be solved by having a huge pool of ref.  If the ref are consistent to the calls, then keep them, if they are inconsistent then assign them to a fewer games in regular season.  Right now, I think that the ref pool is so small and it is a lot easier to keep his job with smaller pool of ref to work with.  If the pool is larger, it becomes easier to monitor them and evaluate them and make decision, even the ref can be let go even if he worked in the playoffs.  Consistent is what we all strive for but

the biggest issue is the union that preventing them from actually terminate the ref that is not consistent.  

 

As far as targeting Hughes, I think that they could have called it charging if they are targeting someone.   Charging can be called by taking steps or taking longer time to make a hit even if passes is long gone, not jumping but to make hit even without strides could be easily be identified.  All the ref has to do is to watch that even long after puck has been gone, not following the puck all the time but making sure that they are skating away from each other then begin to track the puck again and let the back official track the puck from other side.

Bigger ref pool is interesting, although it would obviously impact costs. Good idea, though.

 

Charging doesn't seem to get called much anymore. Whether that's the players not doing it much, or the refs not calling it, or calling a different infraction, I'm not sure. I'm leaning more towards it not happening as much, though.

[Strawbone]

Sounds like the Canucks have a pretty brutal travel day to end off this long road trip, and then a very early game. They’ve got every excuse to come out a bit flat and lose the game, and I won’t be at all concerned if they do. Here’s hoping that the fact they are simply a much better team is enough to pull out a W. 

 

it’s already an epically good road trip. What a time to be a Canucks fan 

[-dlc-]

9 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

That's just your bias talking imo.  Hughes is a top player, he has to get used to being a target.  They targeted Petey too, but he loves that style and it just fuels him.  

What a crock.

 

He has to get used to it? People taking runs at top young players away from the play isn't something to support. Due to someone's bias of the refs.

 

Dahlin should too then. JT checks him during gameplay as he's reaching and it's a penalty in your eyes. But let Quinn deal with it? Away from the play? Double standards are unacceptable.

 

 

[Kragar]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

That's just your bias talking imo.  Hughes is a top player, he has to get used to being a target.  They targeted Petey too, but he loves that style and it just fuels him.  

Yep, it's a big man's league. Doesn't mean at all that there's no room for the little guys, but you gotta know they're coming for ya when you gotta look up to see most of em.

 

It's not the first time players went after Huggy, and it won't be the last.

[stawns]

12 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

The inconsistent ref can be solved by having a huge pool of ref.  If the ref are consistent to the calls, then keep them, if they are inconsistent then assign them to a fewer games in regular season.  Right now, I think that the ref pool is so small and it is a lot easier to keep his job with smaller pool of ref to work with.  If the pool is larger, it becomes easier to monitor them and evaluate them and make decision, even the ref can be let go even if he worked in the playoffs.  Consistent is what we all strive for but

the biggest issue is the union that preventing them from actually terminate the ref that is not consistent.  

 

As far as targeting Hughes, I think that they could have called it charging if they are targeting someone.   Charging can be called by taking steps or taking longer time to make a hit even if passes is long gone, not jumping but to make hit even without strides could be easily be identified.  All the ref has to do is to watch that even long after puck has been gone, not following the puck all the time but making sure that they are skating away from each other then begin to track the puck again and let the back official track the puck from other side.

 

Where are these extra refs going to come from?  I can tell you, they certainly aren't going to be better refs.......the NHL has, literally, the best officials on the planet, whether you like them or not.

 

There isn't some pool of awesome alternate officials out there

[-dlc-]

9 minutes ago, Jaimito said:

 

 

 

Gold. I love the internet.