Pez68
Fire Waldron
- Joined:
- Oct 31, 2014
- Posts:
- 5,020
- Liked Posts:
- 838
PK is awful.</p>
- Joined:
- May 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 47,886
- Liked Posts:
- 26,376
So is Kent Simpson...</p>
</p>
I know it was his first game and all but dude couldn't even get in position at all.</p>
</p>
I know it was his first game and all but dude couldn't even get in position at all.</p>
Ton
New member
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,991
- Liked Posts:
- 124
- Location:
- Park Ridge, IL
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimson" data-cid="216933" data-time="1387079316">
<div>
So is Kent Simpson...</p>
</p>
I know it was his first game and all but dude couldn't even get in position at all.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
</p>
Which is a problem, because Simpson is a positional goaltender.</p>
<div>
So is Kent Simpson...</p>
</p>
I know it was his first game and all but dude couldn't even get in position at all.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
</p>
Which is a problem, because Simpson is a positional goaltender.</p>
- Joined:
- May 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 47,886
- Liked Posts:
- 26,376
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Tony DeFrancesco" data-cid="216936" data-time="1387080028">
<div>
Which is a problem, because Simpson is a positional goaltender.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
You being the goalie... I mean was it as bad as it looked to an innocent bystander like me?</p>
<div>
Which is a problem, because Simpson is a positional goaltender.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
You being the goalie... I mean was it as bad as it looked to an innocent bystander like me?</p>
Ton
New member
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,991
- Liked Posts:
- 124
- Location:
- Park Ridge, IL
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimson" data-cid="216943" data-time="1387081125">
<div>
You being the goalie... I mean was it as bad as it looked to an innocent bystander like me?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
Yes, lol... I've talked about this openly, pretty much since his first prospects camp.</p>
<div>
You being the goalie... I mean was it as bad as it looked to an innocent bystander like me?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
Yes, lol... I've talked about this openly, pretty much since his first prospects camp.</p>
CLWolf81
Fan Captain
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,107
- Liked Posts:
- 96
- Location:
- Chicago, Illinois
Glad to know I'm not the only one. </p>
Pez68
Fire Waldron
- Joined:
- Oct 31, 2014
- Posts:
- 5,020
- Liked Posts:
- 838
I've seen better positioning from men's league goalies.
- Joined:
- May 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 47,886
- Liked Posts:
- 26,376
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Pez68" data-cid="217003" data-time="1387165794">
<div>
I've seen better positioning from men's league goalies.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
Cutler's fault.</p>
<div>
I've seen better positioning from men's league goalies.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
Cutler's fault.</p>
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,460
- Liked Posts:
- 40
- Location:
- Section 325 - Row 12
My favorite teams
The Blackhawks penalty kill is running at a 100% clip over the last one games.</p>
PatrickSharpRules
New member
- Joined:
- May 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,986
- Liked Posts:
- 0
- Location:
- Southside, Chicago
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="BlackhawkPaul" data-cid="216860" data-time="1386973785">
<div>
I knew that. Sheesh.</p>
</p>
</p>
</p>
Any injury is a "what if." We can play that all day.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
</p>
Well....I said the 1 "what if" because they have no depth, and injuries are almost an inevitability. Backes got hurt last night and Steen just escaped a concussion. </p>
</p>
Now who steps up in Backes' place? </p>
<div>
I knew that. Sheesh.</p>
</p>
</p>
</p>
Any injury is a "what if." We can play that all day.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
</p>
Well....I said the 1 "what if" because they have no depth, and injuries are almost an inevitability. Backes got hurt last night and Steen just escaped a concussion. </p>
</p>
Now who steps up in Backes' place? </p>
- Joined:
- Sep 28, 2010
- Posts:
- 5,997
- Liked Posts:
- 2,338
- Location:
- Somewhere in Indiana
Is the answer Jesus?</p>
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 17,843
- Liked Posts:
- 2,550
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="BlackhawkPaul" data-cid="217259" data-time="1387321067">
<div>
Is the answer Jesus?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
McCown</p>
<div>
Is the answer Jesus?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
McCown</p>
PatrickSharpRules
New member
- Joined:
- May 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,986
- Liked Posts:
- 0
- Location:
- Southside, Chicago
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="BlackhawkPaul" data-cid="217259" data-time="1387321067">
<div>
Is the answer Jesus?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
No, that guy only walked on water. There was no ice where he was from. </p>
<div>
Is the answer Jesus?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
No, that guy only walked on water. There was no ice where he was from. </p>
- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,533
- Liked Posts:
- 440
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Grimson" data-cid="216840" data-time="1386969741">
Bickell's hits and blah blah</p></blockquote>
Can someone please educamate me on how hits help win games and are this super important thing that is needed, especially in the playoffs? Hawks get outhit on a consistent basis and yet seem to win with a high percentage. Last year in the playoffs they were the lowest hits per game of the final four. And real time stats are iffy at best so I think it's just hot air. You do not pay $4M on just hitting and size, that would be foolish. Look at Shaw, small guy, but still causes havoc in front of the net and has scored twice as much at half the pay of Bickell. Bickell contract was a mistake, unless he can consistently do what he did in the playoffs on a regular basis. And his career stats suggest that last years performance was an anomaly.
Bickell's hits and blah blah</p></blockquote>
Can someone please educamate me on how hits help win games and are this super important thing that is needed, especially in the playoffs? Hawks get outhit on a consistent basis and yet seem to win with a high percentage. Last year in the playoffs they were the lowest hits per game of the final four. And real time stats are iffy at best so I think it's just hot air. You do not pay $4M on just hitting and size, that would be foolish. Look at Shaw, small guy, but still causes havoc in front of the net and has scored twice as much at half the pay of Bickell. Bickell contract was a mistake, unless he can consistently do what he did in the playoffs on a regular basis. And his career stats suggest that last years performance was an anomaly.
PatrickSharpRules
New member
- Joined:
- May 16, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,986
- Liked Posts:
- 0
- Location:
- Southside, Chicago
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="roshinaya" data-cid="217310" data-time="1387381576">
<div>
Can someone please educamate me on how hits help win games and are this super important thing that is needed, especially in the playoffs? Hawks get outhit on a consistent basis and yet seem to win with a high percentage. Last year in the playoffs they were the lowest hits per game of the final four. And real time stats are iffy at best so I think it's just hot air. You do not pay $4M on just hitting and size, that would be foolish. Look at Shaw, small guy, but still causes havoc in front of the net and has scored twice as much at half the pay of Bickell. Bickell contract was a mistake, unless he can consistently do what he did in the playoffs on a regular basis. And his career stats suggest that last years performance was an anomaly.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
While overall I agree with you, during a close 7 game series hits from a 160 pound Shaw do not wear on opposing players. After 3 or 4 hits from a guy the size of Bickell players do change the way they play. Size is not as important as skill as our team has proven, but with that said I do believe that teams need some size to get through a grueling playoff run on the way to the cup.</p>
</p>
His presence was definitely felt last year and although it cost us 4 million, I am not sure it would have been replaceable for any less. Chemistry wise, experience, and potential for play like the 13' cup run is a huge factor in the 4 million as it was integral to our championship.</p>
<div>
Can someone please educamate me on how hits help win games and are this super important thing that is needed, especially in the playoffs? Hawks get outhit on a consistent basis and yet seem to win with a high percentage. Last year in the playoffs they were the lowest hits per game of the final four. And real time stats are iffy at best so I think it's just hot air. You do not pay $4M on just hitting and size, that would be foolish. Look at Shaw, small guy, but still causes havoc in front of the net and has scored twice as much at half the pay of Bickell. Bickell contract was a mistake, unless he can consistently do what he did in the playoffs on a regular basis. And his career stats suggest that last years performance was an anomaly.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
While overall I agree with you, during a close 7 game series hits from a 160 pound Shaw do not wear on opposing players. After 3 or 4 hits from a guy the size of Bickell players do change the way they play. Size is not as important as skill as our team has proven, but with that said I do believe that teams need some size to get through a grueling playoff run on the way to the cup.</p>
</p>
His presence was definitely felt last year and although it cost us 4 million, I am not sure it would have been replaceable for any less. Chemistry wise, experience, and potential for play like the 13' cup run is a huge factor in the 4 million as it was integral to our championship.</p>
- Joined:
- May 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 17,843
- Liked Posts:
- 2,550
I'm going to have to go with PSR on this one... Hits from Bickell at the right time and place are going to be much more valuable than hits from shaw, and you gotta imagine the players on the ice at the time of the hit so the player doing them, what line they are on and who they are hitting. If shaw is on the 4th only hitting the 4th line guys for example then it's probably not impacting the game much. But if you have guys on the upper lines hitting guys on the upper lines I would imagine it's going to be more likely to change the style of play of a skilled player. But I have no scientific analysis to base this on. Just my theory.</p>
LordKOTL
Scratched for Vorobiev
- Joined:
- Dec 8, 2014
- Posts:
- 8,676
- Liked Posts:
- 3,046
- Location:
- PacNW
My favorite teams
For the most part I agree. Ultimately the hitter and the hittee get forced out of position by a good hit, and the time to recover can vary from a few seconds to until the next stoppage--depending on the severity of the hit in both directions.</p>
</p>
A guy like Bickell has more of a chance to lay a hit that will force the guy he hits out of position with the hit and a chance to cause the player longer to return to said position. Plus, as aforementioned, playing on the top line gives more of a chance to take a skill player out of position.</p>
</p>
Ultimately, it does take the hitter out of position for a bit, so it's a profit/loss equation. A guy like Shaw taking out, say, Chara with a hit means that for a split second, we lose Shaw and they lose Chara. theus is a micro-moment where it's 4 on 4 without those players and it's advantageous to us. Conversely, if we use Seabrook, if Seabrook takes out, say, Stalberg, it's a disadvantage to us. If the time Seabrook is out of position delivering the hit is minute, it's a good play. If it's a crucial moment, he's better not laying the hit.</p>
</p>
It thus comes down to hockeyIQ--not just a big body laying the hits, but knowing when to go for the hit and when to stay in position.</p>
</p>
A guy like Bickell has more of a chance to lay a hit that will force the guy he hits out of position with the hit and a chance to cause the player longer to return to said position. Plus, as aforementioned, playing on the top line gives more of a chance to take a skill player out of position.</p>
</p>
Ultimately, it does take the hitter out of position for a bit, so it's a profit/loss equation. A guy like Shaw taking out, say, Chara with a hit means that for a split second, we lose Shaw and they lose Chara. theus is a micro-moment where it's 4 on 4 without those players and it's advantageous to us. Conversely, if we use Seabrook, if Seabrook takes out, say, Stalberg, it's a disadvantage to us. If the time Seabrook is out of position delivering the hit is minute, it's a good play. If it's a crucial moment, he's better not laying the hit.</p>
</p>
It thus comes down to hockeyIQ--not just a big body laying the hits, but knowing when to go for the hit and when to stay in position.</p>
- Joined:
- Oct 19, 2013
- Posts:
- 7,956
- Liked Posts:
- 829
- Location:
- Wish You Were Here
Bergeron's spleen says Bickel's hits are effective...</p>
Variable
New member
- Joined:
- Jul 24, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,023
- Liked Posts:
- 122
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="roshinaya" data-cid="217310" data-time="1387381576">
<div>
Can someone please educamate me on how hits help win games and are this super important thing that is needed, especially in the playoffs? Hawks get outhit on a consistent basis and yet seem to win with a high percentage. Last year in the playoffs they were the lowest hits per game of the final four. And real time stats are iffy at best so I think it's just hot air. You do not pay $4M on just hitting and size, that would be foolish. Look at Shaw, small guy, but still causes havoc in front of the net and has scored twice as much at half the pay of Bickell. Bickell contract was a mistake, unless he can consistently do what he did in the playoffs on a regular basis. And his career stats suggest that last years performance was an anomaly.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
Bickell's presence was felt in the postseason mainly because he suddenly became nearly a point per game player, whereas he was never anything like that before, not primarily because he hits people, which he always did (maybe not as much as some people liked, but he always did). He matched his 9 goals throughout the entire regular season in the playoffs. Tied for the team lead in game winning goals in the playoffs. For a successful Stanley Cup run, you usually need a player like that to emerge or a role player to have a postseason like he (and Frolik for that matter) did, and we know the Hawks needed it with a player the caliber of Toews not having as great a playoff when it comes to producing points.</p>
</p>
People buy into the hits meaning more than they do because that's what hockey has been telling us our entire lives watching it. We all know this, but the Hawks are a puck possession team. If a Hawks player has a chance to play the puck and perhaps cause a turnover or go for a big hit after the puck has already left that player, I'd rather have them play the puck every single time. How many times did the Bruins get burned by trying to lay a big hit to the Hawks? It cost them dearly at the end of Game 6. I'm not saying it's wholly unimportant, but it's not the Hawks' style of play. When they play their puck possession game, chances are you aren't beating them in a 7 game series, no matter who got "worn down" or not by hits. Their success doesn't hinge on that.</p>
<div>
Can someone please educamate me on how hits help win games and are this super important thing that is needed, especially in the playoffs? Hawks get outhit on a consistent basis and yet seem to win with a high percentage. Last year in the playoffs they were the lowest hits per game of the final four. And real time stats are iffy at best so I think it's just hot air. You do not pay $4M on just hitting and size, that would be foolish. Look at Shaw, small guy, but still causes havoc in front of the net and has scored twice as much at half the pay of Bickell. Bickell contract was a mistake, unless he can consistently do what he did in the playoffs on a regular basis. And his career stats suggest that last years performance was an anomaly.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</p>
Bickell's presence was felt in the postseason mainly because he suddenly became nearly a point per game player, whereas he was never anything like that before, not primarily because he hits people, which he always did (maybe not as much as some people liked, but he always did). He matched his 9 goals throughout the entire regular season in the playoffs. Tied for the team lead in game winning goals in the playoffs. For a successful Stanley Cup run, you usually need a player like that to emerge or a role player to have a postseason like he (and Frolik for that matter) did, and we know the Hawks needed it with a player the caliber of Toews not having as great a playoff when it comes to producing points.</p>
</p>
People buy into the hits meaning more than they do because that's what hockey has been telling us our entire lives watching it. We all know this, but the Hawks are a puck possession team. If a Hawks player has a chance to play the puck and perhaps cause a turnover or go for a big hit after the puck has already left that player, I'd rather have them play the puck every single time. How many times did the Bruins get burned by trying to lay a big hit to the Hawks? It cost them dearly at the end of Game 6. I'm not saying it's wholly unimportant, but it's not the Hawks' style of play. When they play their puck possession game, chances are you aren't beating them in a 7 game series, no matter who got "worn down" or not by hits. Their success doesn't hinge on that.</p>
Shantz My Pants
New member
- Joined:
- Dec 10, 2014
- Posts:
- 3,923
- Liked Posts:
- 787
According to NHL stats, a hit is when a player (checker) through body contact, separates a defender from the puck or forces them to lose possession. So in reality it's a turnover stat. Problem is, a lot of people who record said stat are subjective on what they define as a "hit" and that forces the stat to be arbitrary.
For example, say Bieksa makes a breakout pass to Sedin on the boards. Immediately after he makes said pass, Bickell comes over and checks him. A lot of statisticians would consider this a "hit" while others would not. Technically, it should not be recorded as a hit.
Now say Bieksa is about to make a breakout pass and Bickell checks him on the boards and forces Bieksa to make a bad pass, or separates him from the puck and gains possession. That should be recorded as a hit.
That all being said, Bickell is a physical player when he wants to be and isn't afraid to finish his checks. Does he get credit for finishing his checks? Sure, but unless a turnover is caused he doesn't deserve it. Though, finishing your check is more a mental and physical angle than a statistical angle.
When a coach yells at a player for not finishing their checks, usually its because they are trying to make the puck carrier feel rushed with the puck. They want to take away said players time and space to make plays. When you know that you don't have as much time to make that great pass you will start doing stupid things with the puck and forcing it into areas that it should go. Mentally you will feel rushed and make that last check didn't make the ribs feel so good so you are more worried about it happening again.
The biggest issue is that in the past few years hitting and checking have come to mean the same thing, when in fact they are not.
For example, say Bieksa makes a breakout pass to Sedin on the boards. Immediately after he makes said pass, Bickell comes over and checks him. A lot of statisticians would consider this a "hit" while others would not. Technically, it should not be recorded as a hit.
Now say Bieksa is about to make a breakout pass and Bickell checks him on the boards and forces Bieksa to make a bad pass, or separates him from the puck and gains possession. That should be recorded as a hit.
That all being said, Bickell is a physical player when he wants to be and isn't afraid to finish his checks. Does he get credit for finishing his checks? Sure, but unless a turnover is caused he doesn't deserve it. Though, finishing your check is more a mental and physical angle than a statistical angle.
When a coach yells at a player for not finishing their checks, usually its because they are trying to make the puck carrier feel rushed with the puck. They want to take away said players time and space to make plays. When you know that you don't have as much time to make that great pass you will start doing stupid things with the puck and forcing it into areas that it should go. Mentally you will feel rushed and make that last check didn't make the ribs feel so good so you are more worried about it happening again.
The biggest issue is that in the past few years hitting and checking have come to mean the same thing, when in fact they are not.