Jump to content

New Kovy Update ("As the Kovy Turns")


DevsFan7545

Recommended Posts

I wish they would announce that NHLPA is going to fight it already. There is so much still to do with trading (hopefully Rolston) or and Salvador. Just seems like everyone has stopped talking the silence is weird!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

one of my fav videos :cheers:

The greatest thing about that video, aside from Kovy going berserk on Avery, is Brodeur heckling Avery while he is getting pounded into the ice. Usually Brodeur just starts skating around and drinks some water during fights, but you could tell this one got him riled up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By luck I'm not talking about injuries, which of course can reverse the fortunes of an otherwise dominant team very quickly. I'm talking about claims that, we hit a lot of posts, we got a bad call, the bounces didn't go our way, etc., but we're still a better team. Make your own luck by converting on your chances, not taking dumb penalties, playing well on your penalty kill. "Dominating play" is not a statistic that counts, or even has any meaning.

Saying a team got "outplayed" but still won, especially in a seven game series, where the law of averages would say that the better team should win is utter nonsense.

lol, the law of average doesn't hold over 100 games in some instances. gimme a break. a 7 game series is nothing.

dominating play correlates with winning games. sometimes it doesn't win games. that doesn't change the fact that it wins more often than not, and teams who decide to adopt a strategy that doesn't win more often than not, well, good is good when good's the best that can be expected.

Edited by Triumph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hahahaha and i know you werent serious i was just saying. I shouldnt have quoted you in the first place

OMG, I never saw that before - that is way too funny! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, the law of average doesn't hold over 100 games in some instances. gimme a break. a 7 game series is nothing.

dominating play correlates with winning games. sometimes it doesn't win games. that doesn't change the fact that it wins more often than not, and teams who decide to adopt a strategy that doesn't win more often than not, well, good is good when good's the best that can be expected.

Again, this mushy "dominating play" has no meaning at all. If you're getting a lot of glorious chances, but you can't put the puck in the net, you're not dominating anything that matters. Being able to finish, has just as much, if not more, to do with "dominating play" than anything else does.

You can out-chance the other team 20 to 3. If the other team ends up winning though, they're doing something right, and you're doing something wrong. That holds even more true over the course of a seven game series.

And so far as law of averages goes, you maybe can win/lose a game here or there on a funky bounce, an Ed Hockulee-esque blown call, something like that. It's not going to happen in all four of your losses in a playoff series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmao..if kovy does that, i,i,i,i,i don't know :saddevil:

Don't worry bud, Kovy's alright when it comes to a scrap. In every sense.

vs. McCabe

I remember reading McCabe's interview after that...he said he might have given Kovy a bit of slack to begin with as he couldn't quite believe what was going on, but quickly realised he had to 'give it his all'. I'll try and dig that interview out. It was in the (Miami) Herald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, this mushy "dominating play" has no meaning at all. If you're getting a lot of glorious chances, but you can't put the puck in the net, you're not dominating anything that matters. Being able to finish, has just as much, if not more, to do with "dominating play" than anything else does.

You can out-chance the other team 20 to 3. If the other team ends up winning though, they're doing something right, and you're doing something wrong. That holds even more true over the course of a seven game series.

And so far as law of averages goes, you maybe can win/lose a game here or there on a funky bounce, an Ed Hockulee-esque blown call, something like that. It's not going to happen in all four of your losses in a playoff series.

you're just incorrect about this. you don't understand the way that we can understand chance events through probability, or the non-repeatability of certain events (which is much of what i characterize as 'luck' - 'luck' is a loaded word, so i can't blame people for not understanding what i mean by it). nothing will explain it to you, and you're using absurd outliers to drive home your 'position'.

here's a hint: what could possibly separate a group of NHL players who outchance another given NHL team 20 to 3 from all other hockey teams who have outchanced any other NHL team 20 to 3? when you understand that the answer to this is 'very little', perhaps you'll have nudged slightly closer to understanding what i am talking about.

goal scoring is fundamentally chance-related. the key is getting MORE chances, thus bending luck to your favor.

Edited by Triumph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time for crazy rambling...

Goaltending is based on probability a whole lot. You want to cover as much net as possible, and be in the position the puck is likely to come. Great goal scorers get the goalie to move and beat him in transition. With a sniper, if a goalie is covering 90% of the net, the sniper is accurate enough to hit the open 10% forcing the goalie to make a reaction save.

If a team is CONSISTENTLY outchancing its opponents, "they're doing something right" could be as simple as the goalie making reaction saves to bail out his defense, or it could be "you're doing something wrong" and your shooters are not accurate enough to hit the open net, forcing the goalie to move. If you are consistently outchancing your opponents, it means you are playing a solid positional game. At that point it comes down to skill and execution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here's a hint: what could possibly separate a group of NHL players who outchance another given NHL team 20 to 3 from all other hockey teams who have outchanced any other NHL team 20 to 3? when you understand that the answer to this is 'very little', perhaps you'll have nudged slightly closer to understanding what i am talking about.

Obviously more can separate them than you think, since the team that dominates play sometimes will lose a seven game series, or team that gets dominated will win. Yes, you're right, it won't happen as often as it doesn't, but it does, and probably more often than you're giving it credit for. And plenty of teams will advance far in the playoffs that don't follow the formula (having more dynamic scorers or superstars than the other guy) that I originally wrote wasn't the end all be all of success in the post lock out league, and vice versa.

And by the way...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6w4eIQuhac

Edited by Daniel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously more can separate them than you think, since the team that dominates play sometimes will lose a seven game series, or team that gets dominated will win. Yes, you're right, it won't happen as often as it doesn't, but it does, and probably more often than you're giving it credit for. And plenty of teams will advance far in the playoffs that don't follow the formula (having more dynamic scorers or superstars than the other guy) that I originally wrote wasn't the end all be all of success in the post lock out league, and vice versa.

And by the way...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6w4eIQuhac

the fact that you color the idea with 'be all end all' shows you're not understanding what i'm saying or deliberately misunderstanding. you can win without superstars. it's just difficult, and very likely involves good fortune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the fact that you color the idea with 'be all end all' shows you're not understanding what i'm saying or deliberately misunderstanding. you can win without superstars. it's just difficult, and very likely involves good fortune.

"Be all end all" was a response to someone else's post, way back. I used as a counter-example to that post was the Carolina/Edmonton finals, and other SC playoffs where undynamic teams have done better than more dynamic ones. You jumped in and said I was wrong on that point, so I assume you agreed with what the other guy wrote. Ok, so we're on the same page, and probably aren't disagreeing about all that much here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry bud, Kovy's alright when it comes to a scrap. In every sense.

vs. McCabe

I remember reading McCabe's interview after that...he said he might have given Kovy a bit of slack to begin with as he couldn't quite believe what was going on, but quickly realised he had to 'give it his all'. I'll try and dig that interview out. It was in the (Miami) Herald.

That first fight was against Mr. Hillary Duff!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.