Jump to content

Matteau#32

Member Since 14 Oct 2002
Offline Last Active Mar 27 2015 06:02 AM
*----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: 2014-2015 Around the league thread

23 March 2015 - 06:53 AM

I'd say there are lot more flash-in-the-pan good goalies. They put in an amazing season and get a new contract or get traded and aren't all that great, etc.; and that could very well be what Talbot is this year.

 

That being said, if I were Sather, I would've done what he did 10 times out of 10, in resigning Henrik Lundqvist. Given Sather's track record, do you really trust him with all that money to get the right forward(s)? I'm not so sure I would...

That's true about the flash-in-the pan goalies.  And, it would be very annoying to try to get a new flash in the pan goalie every 2 years.  As far as his track record, wouldn't want him with too much money for FA's, but he has done  very well with trades the past few years.  


What beating the Rags just gave Anaheim. Here's the numbers Talbot vs. Henrik now:

 

Henrik - 39 GP, .922 Sv%, 2.25 GAA, 5 SO

 

Talbot - 32 GP, .929 Sv%, 2.13 GAA, 5 SO

 

I'll say again, at least in the short term, the Rags have a goalie controversy on their hands. Vigneault can say Henrik is going to be the starter all he wants, but if Henrik comes in and doesn't get it done, Talbot could see some playoff time. They're already taking their sweet time in getting Lundqvist back in net. How could they not? Talbot's save percentage is .961 in 9 games started this month.

When Lundqvist first went down, Talbot wasn't all that great.  If Lunqvist comes back and the Rangers lose their defensive focus, then they will be screwed.  Skaters just need to play the same way regardless of who is in net.  However, I agree to some extent.  The first time Lundqvist has a subpar game, the clowns will be out with their pitchforks.  

In Topic: So now that 3-on-3 OT is happening, what about the format?

23 March 2015 - 06:47 AM

Ties can't just be brought back because before the 04-05 lockout, there were too many ties.

 

So what might be a good idea to do is to test out whatever 3-on-3 system they decide on for a season, with shootouts after the OT session. If the system is successful in making the shootout a rare occurrence, then the year after they should get rid of shootouts and bring back ties.

If it is successful in reducing shootouts to a rarity, there would be no need to get rid of it.  People would stop complaining about all the shootouts.

In Topic: Devils are making their move

19 March 2015 - 03:02 PM

To over take the Flyers and maybe Dallas.  Can someone tell me why?

 

 

What's best for the Devils?   IMO a pick in the lower section.

For the organization, yest.  However, the players on the ice are playing for pride, jobs next season.  It is one thing for a GM to hope they lose.  Another for a player to hope they lose or not try to win every game.

In Topic: So now that 3-on-3 OT is happening, what about the format?

19 March 2015 - 02:25 PM

It has nothing to do with 'business'.  The reason it was changed was because Detroit and Columbus made a stink about being in the West.  While they might be Easterly-located in terms of geography and the country's physical landscape, I've said time and time again the fact of the matter is that, of the 30 NHL teams in the league unfortunately for them it just so happened that they were among the 50% that were Westerly-located if you were to draw a line and split the country into two conferences evenly (that to me, is key -- there was nothing wrong with 15 and 15, and to have 16 and 14 makes it unfairly harder for teams in one conference to make the post-season.  

 

I also don't have any issue with cross-over in the playoffs.  The emphasis on divisional games is during the season -- you already play the teams closest to you want more than you do any other inter-conference team, and wayyyy more than outer-conference teams, so there's no reason you shouldn't have playoff matchups cross some imaginary divisional line.  It's the best 8 teams that make the playoffs in each conference, and they should be seeded 1 through 8 accordingly.  It would be dumb to have a #1 Rangers team play a #4 Penguins team just because they're in the same division.  That defeats the purpose of standings altogether, not to mention also unfairly rewards the lowest seeded teams and keeps them from having the uphill battled and having to go against the #1 seed with the best record.

 

I'm sorry, but those ideas are just dumb.

You clearly were not a fan in the 80s and it is the EXACT reason they returned to divisional play-offs.  Bettman said it himself it was to re-kindle divisional rivalries.  They still could have done it and left Detroit and Columbus in the West.  One had nothing to do with the other.  They could have also re-aligned and left it as top-8 in the conference.  Oh, and if you look at the standings, the match-ups are exactly the same for the first round as you would get if it was 1-8 in the conference and the season ended today.  TB-Detroit would be 3-6 and NYI-Pit would be 4-5.  You are wrong on the regular season.  The great rivalries of the Patrick division were born in the play-offs.  Isles and Rangers playing 5 out of 6 years.  Rangers flyers playing each other 4 out of 5 years.  If you are going to go with divisional play-offs, then go with divisional play-offs.  Don't give us this hybrid non-sense.

In Topic: So now that 3-on-3 OT is happening, what about the format?

19 March 2015 - 02:18 PM

top 4 in each division means some teams will make it with fewer points than teams who don't, and that's a situation that no one wants.   in a 21 team league, who cares, if you can't be one of the top 4 teams in a 5 team division, you probably don't deserve it.  now it's a lot different.

Yeah, so?  Same can happen with top-8 in conference.  9th place in once conference has more points than 8th in another.  Besides, even with the divisions, the teams in the Metro play a completely different schedule than the teams in the Atlantic.  I think the phrase I am looking for is, "TOO BAD".  Happens in the NFL, team that is 3rd in the wild card thus not getting in has a better record than a division winner.