Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
MadDog2020

GDT: Devils @ Phailures 7:00 PM

235 posts in this topic

My0WIUz.gif

 

FZBaQpn.gif

 

looking at it again, he doesn't seem to receive much of a shove from Volchenkov. If anything he knocks Volch over and it's his contact with Brodeur that prevents Brodeur from having a reasonable shot at making that save. It's a good no goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My0WIUz.gif

FZBaQpn.gif

looking at it again, he doesn't seem to receive much of a shove from Volchenkov. If anything he knocks Volch over and it's his contact with Brodeur that prevents Brodeur from having a reasonable shot at making that save. It's a good no goal.

thanks for the gifs- the overhead view is what does it for me, IMO it's clear that the puck would not have gone in if hartnell didn't knock brodeur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Devils got a gift from the refs. That tying goal was good. Volchenkov knocked hartnell into Marty. There was NO review done in Toronto, not a reviewable play. Flyers score snd tie but refs screw up and Devils get a break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Devils got a gift from the refs. That tying goal was good. Volchenkov knocked hartnell into Marty. There was NO review done in Toronto, not a reviewable play. Flyers score snd tie but refs screw up and Devils get a break.

 

Volch barely touches Hartnell, who makes no effort to avoid contract with the goalie, so it's a bad goal.

 

Also, Hartnell kicked the puck in, also making it a bad goal.

 

So there are 2 pretty big reasons why that goal shouldn't count, definitely not a gift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sixty five-games.  It's not just that they score for Marty, they don't for the other guy - and they don't score for him to a historically low level.  

 

To a degree the organization's become overly dependent on Marty's puckhandling style, to the point where goalies like Cory and Hedberg who shouldn't even try to play the puck keep trying to play the puck.  Not that that fully explains a 1+ goal difference in production...but it's a piece of the puzzle.  

 

It's also a cop-out to say Marty just wins and the other guy doesn't because the other guy won when he was in Vancouver and that doesn't explain why the other eighteen play much better for one than the other.

 

65 games is nothing.  It's 32 for each guy.  This sort of thing happens in baseball all the time - take Nolan Ryan's famous 1987 season where he led the league in ERA but was 8-16.  There was a guy on his team who gave up literally double the runs he did and was 8-17.  Does that make any sense?  Of course not.  People think just because something is highly unlikely that there has to be a cause, but there is not.  Brodeur's puck handling has gotten NJ an extra goal here or there but is not worth anywhere close to what people think it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My0WIUz.gif

 

FZBaQpn.gif

 

looking at it again, he doesn't seem to receive much of a shove from Volchenkov. If anything he knocks Volch over and it's his contact with Brodeur that prevents Brodeur from having a reasonable shot at making that save. It's a good no goal.

that a good shot from above. I retract my lucky comment.  great call, only good call of the game!!  btw hows carters face??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The silliest part of all the Brodeur hate is that after Marty plays a good game, NO ONE is saying that Cory shouldn't play or that Marty is better. Yet, the haters still feel the need to come on and bash Marty and defend themselves as if they are being attacked. Sounds like nothing more than a complex in their own heads.

 

No, there doesn't.  That's just it.  There doesn't have to be anything to it.  Because there isn't.

 

Making such an absolute statement does not demonstrate a mastery of numbers but an ignorance of numbers. Numbers can perhaps tell everything, but there is an infinite amount of numerical qualities in life that we have not yet figured out how to measure, let alone in ice hockey. To say "there isn't" is to say "I know all the factors and I've added them up" and that more than anything is what makes your statement so weak.

 

At some point, advanced stats advocates need to realize that what they write off as "luck" is a failure to accurately model what it takes to win a hockey game.

 

Very well put.

 

Devils only scored two for Marty so I guess it's not a thing anymore. 

 

Devils started Schneider wearing Marty's equipment. It's quite obvious.

 

Please don't attack Marshall for this, he isn't arguing that Marty is better, he is satirizing the pure insanity that has become this board. There, ya'll can relax.

 

You can't just have a break and "admit" that Marty was good enough this last game... He was "good enough" to help the teams his last 4 games... That sound good to me.

Mission is being in Playoff not be sure being right about Hoooow teeeeerrrrrible marty is now.

 

I don't care who is between the pipe as long as we win games... I want this team being in playoff. No one want this team in 7g serie against them... Everyone can beat us to be fair... BUT no one want to play us for sure ! 

 

Marty makes some stellar save last night, Cory is the better goalie this year and obviously for more years to go... But we don't freaky care at this point of the season... 

 

We won last night ! Now focus on this weekend... 4 points is an obligation ! I don't care who will play better or who will play all together... As i don't care who will score, who will assist, who will make the critical play... I want wins ! 

 

(but feel free to discuss for hours how bad Marty is now... If it's that important for you... Go ahead) 

 

Perfectly stated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volch barely touches Hartnell, who makes no effort to avoid contract with the goalie, so it's a bad goal.

 

Also, Hartnell kicked the puck in, also making it a bad goal.

 

So there are 2 pretty big reasons why that goal shouldn't count, definitely not a gift.

 

Lol, I'm pretty sure Volch was on his back when Hartnell hit Marty. To me the central reason the goal shouldn't count is that the puck was NOT traveling in towards the net before Hartnell knocks into Brodeur. Marty saves the puck, then with relatively ambiguous contact between Volch and Hartnell, Hartnell knocks Brodeur back into the crease and the puck into the net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The silliest part of all the Brodeur hate is that after Marty plays a good game, NO ONE is saying that Cory shouldn't play or that Marty is better. Yet, the haters still feel the need to come on and bash Marty and defend themselves as if they are being attacked. Sounds like nothing more than a complex in their own heads.

 

 

AMEN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Volch barely touches Hartnell, who makes no effort to avoid contract with the goalie, so it's a bad goal.

 

Also, Hartnell kicked the puck in, also making it a bad goal.

 

So there are 2 pretty big reasons why that goal shouldn't count, definitely not a gift.

 

As you stated Volchenkov does touch him, can't be only a little bit pregnant.

You can see if Hartnell kicked it but if he did  it was a result of being pushed by Volchenkov

Hartnell was definitely trying to move out of the net after the push, you csn see him heading down ice.

 

Score Philly however bad call not counted. I want the Devils to win so I say they got a break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you stated Volchenkov does touch him, can't be only a little bit pregnant.

You can see if Hartnell kicked it but if he did it was a result of being pushed by Volchenkov

Hartnell was definitely trying to move out of the net after the push, you csn see him heading down ice.

Score Philly however bad call not counted. I want the Devils to win so I say they got a break.

All body checks are now charges because you can't be slightly moving. :lol: what a misuse of a phrase you used.

So anytime a player has contact as they charge the net they are free to kick the puck on purpose and push the goalie, to my eyes, on purpose?

I can only imagine you're playing Devils advocate since your position is so off base, as are your arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The silliest part of all the Brodeur hate is that after Marty plays a good game, NO ONE is saying that Cory shouldn't play or that Marty is better. Yet, the haters still feel the need to come on and bash Marty and defend themselves as if they are being attacked. Sounds like nothing more than a complex in their own heads.

 

I heard a lot of malarkey about the Leafs not being a bad team.  They are a bad team getting great goaltending and lots of shootout luck.  I heard the same old story about how Brodeur just wins games.  He had a solid game last night - though I'd like to point out that it seemed the Flyers missed an awful lot of shots - and if he can play like that nightly the team will be okay.  I don't think he can do that, but he's been okay in the last 4 games.

 

 

Making such an absolute statement does not demonstrate a mastery of numbers but an ignorance of numbers. Numbers can perhaps tell everything, but there is an infinite amount of numerical qualities in life that we have not yet figured out how to measure, let alone in ice hockey. To say "there isn't" is to say "I know all the factors and I've added them up" and that more than anything is what makes your statement so weak.

 

Okay, so put your money where your mouth is.  Brodeur from now forward will continue to get the same goal support that he has, Schneider will continue to get the goal support he has.  It's very simple, and it's across all sports - it doesn't make any sense to assign responsiblity for something to someone that appears to have no responsibility for a particular thing.  Sometimes the wildly improbable happens.  There does not have to be a cause for it.  Especially not in a game like hockey which is riddled with chance events - bounces of the puck determine so often whether a play will result in a goal or not.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is, thank you Marty, thank you Jagr

 

DEVILS WIN

 

 

On to Florida...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hopefully both florida teams are no issue.. I would especially hate to waste a loss on the panthers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard a lot of malarkey about the Leafs not being a bad team.  They are a bad team getting great goaltending and lots of shootout luck.  I heard the same old story about how Brodeur just wins games.  He had a solid game last night - though I'd like to point out that it seemed the Flyers missed an awful lot of shots - and if he can play like that nightly the team will be okay.  I don't think he can do that, but he's been okay in the last 4 games.

 

 

 

I'm sorry for interjecting, but theyre sitting at 78 points. They have overachieved due to goaltending but to call them a "bad" team is just silly when theyre second in the division in mid-March. You spewed the same nonsense about the rangers in 2012 all season-long, and yet they came a couple games from the SCF. "bad" is not the word you are looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry for interjecting, but theyre sitting at 78 points. They have overachieved due to goaltending but to call them a "bad" team is just silly when theyre second in the division in mid-March. You spewed the same nonsense about the rangers in 2012 all season-long, and yet they came a couple games from the SCF. "bad" is not the word you are looking for.

 

The Leafs have a -12 goal differential outside of shootouts.  Sometimes teams with negative goal differential sneak into the playoffs, that doesn't make them good teams.

 

The Leafs are an insane 16-4-8 in one goal games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By my reading of the rule it was the correct call, so I won't call it luck.

"If an attacking player initiates contact with a goalkeeper, incidental or otherwise, while the goalkeeper is in his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed."

Seems pretty black and white... I guess the only legit argument you can make is if volchenkov forced hartnell into brodeur, but on the one replay I saw I didn't see that at all. And even if he did hartnell still needs to make a reasonable effort to avoid the contact.

 

That's not the rule that should be applied. A different part of that rule (78.5) also says a goal should be disallowed "(v)  When an attacking player has interfered with a goalkeeper in his goal crease." Also see 69.1, the goalie interference rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Leafs have a -12 goal differential outside of shootouts.  Sometimes teams with negative goal differential sneak into the playoffs, that doesn't make them good teams.

 

The Leafs are an insane 16-4-8 in one goal games.

 

No doubt theyve been fortunate. But this late in the game its a far cry from being a 'bad' team. Getting into shootouts the amount of times they do suggests they find ways to compete in games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry for interjecting, but theyre sitting at 78 points. They have overachieved due to goaltending but to call them a "bad" team is just silly when theyre second in the division in mid-March. You spewed the same nonsense about the rangers in 2012 all season-long, and yet they came a couple games from the SCF. "bad" is not the word you are looking for.

 

Agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt theyve been fortunate. But this late in the game its a far cry from being a 'bad' team. Getting into shootouts the amount of times they do suggests they find ways to compete in games.

 

Cool, well when they put the shootout in the playoffs, I guess the Leafs'll be really good.

 

At best the Leafs are mediocre.

 

As for the Rangers in 2012, they got immediately better when they brought up Carl Hagelin and became merely a mediocre team outside of Lundqvist at that point.  Sometimes mediocrity wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'mon...you make it sound like the Devils had them all the way.  Far from it.  Not too mention if that no-goal call had happened to the Devils, I doubt most people on here would've been saying "Well, can't really argue about it, it was the right call."  Fans would've been plenty pissed.

 

But it's a win against a big opponent and it wasn't a 3-pointer, so I'll happily take it.

 

You gotta stop with this "being in people's" head nonsense.  I for one would have definitely said that should have clearly been a no goal.  Reading the responses on the Flyers board on HF, many feel it was the correct call.  You seriously don't give Devils fans enough credit here that if the roles were reversed we would be bitching about the call.  I don't believe that for a second.  We're a rational group despite the fact we tend to be immature.

 

Anyways, from watching that game, I didn't notice any real good scoring chance the Flyers had.  As I said, that 3rd period was a defensive clinic, and Marty never had to make any really hard saves.  The only hard save he did have to make was that glove save through a screen of like 4 guys.  I personally believe the Flyers never had as many shots as they were credited with last night.  It definitely only felt like 25 at most.  Flyers also had 6 powerplays.  And some of those were gifts from the refs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fwiw the Rangers thought so much of their team in '12 they immediately started remaking it (Gaborik/Dubinsky/Anisimov out, Nash, etc in).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the rule that should be applied. A different part of that rule (78.5) also says a goal should be disallowed "(v) When an attacking player has interfered with a goalkeeper in his goal crease." Also see 69.1, the goalie interference rule.

right, I posted later on that rule 78.5 was applied, but the nhl came out and said it was disallowed under 78.5 (ix), which is the goalie getting pushed into the net while making the save. I don't think this was the case but it's what the referee ruled on the ice. He was wrong in what rule he applied but it was the correct result either way.

What I quoted was 69.3, which is what I believed should have been the rule enforced.

Edited by dmann422

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, well when they put the shootout in the playoffs, I guess the Leafs'll be really good.

At best the Leafs are mediocre.

As for the Rangers in 2012, they got immediately better when they brought up Carl Hagelin and became merely a mediocre team outside of Lundqvist at that point. Sometimes mediocrity wins.

They'll be in close games during the playoffs. That's not the definition of mediocrity.

As for the 2012 rags, I don't want to be in a position to defend them, but they didn't suddenly go from awful to mediocre and then cup contender due to Carl Hagelin lol. They were never bad to begin with.

Edited by devlman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0