Satans Hockey Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 6 hours ago, Nicomo said: My nightmare would be trading for Domi Jr, and drafting a demon spawn of Sean Avery. Imagine an Avery - Domi - Foote, line...lol My nightmare would be instead of forfeiting our pick we end up drafting Mattaeu's kid and he ends up becoming a complete bust and doesn't even score an ot playoff goal for us against the Rangers.... Oh wait, fvck. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 6 hours ago, Daniel said: you forgot Caddyshack 2 lol i just got back from my radio show and i did talk about Caddyshack on air haha Our episode was on Natural Born Killer and i mentioned how Rodney Dangerfield's characters were quiiiiiiiiiite different in those lol Edited February 18, 2020 by SterioDesign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AEWHistory Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) On 2/16/2020 at 7:39 PM, MB3 said: Sort of annoying — if the Canucks miss the playoffs this year, the pick slides to 2021. So we have to hope for a last second slip in to the playoffs and a quick first round exit. True, but I haven’t read anything about the pick having any protections next year. The ideal scenario then actually becomes the Canucks missing the playoffs this year and then collapsing completely next year. We can’t get their first rounder in the top end of the round this year, but if it isn’t lottery protected then we could theoretically have two shots at the number one pick next year. At the least we could get a very high pick next year instead of a later pick this year. If the Devils find that the player they want can be picked later then they’d be able to trade back and add even more assets. This Coleman trade could be parlayed into a potentially huge haul with some luck. So here is to whomever is player the Canucks today..... kick their asses for the next season and a half! Now please excuse me while I take another hit......... yea, that’s the stuff. Edited February 18, 2020 by AEWHistory 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lateralous Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 6 hours ago, AEWHistory said: True, but I haven’t read anything about the pick having any protections next year. The ideal scenario then actually becomes the Canucks missing the playoffs this year and then collapsing completely next year. We can’t get their first rounder in the top end of the round this year, but if it isn’t lottery protected then we could theoretically have two shots at the number one pick next year. At the least we could get a very high pick next year instead of a later pick this year. This is essentially what happened to the Senators in the Duchesne / Turris deals and it eventually cost them the 4th overall. Not sure that will happen to the Canucks but who knows if a guy like Petterson gets a long term injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guadana Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 50 minutes ago, Lateralous said: This is essentially what happened to the Senators in the Duchesne / Turris deals and it eventually cost them the 4th overall. Not sure that will happen to the Canucks but who knows if a guy like Petterson gets a long term injury. Kings trade Toffoli to van. I think Vancouver has more chances for playoff after that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is indeed overall better than Star Trek: The Motion Picture. They released a new director's cut of Star Trek: The Motion Picture a decade or so ago that is actually quite better than the theatrical release. The director, Robert Wise of The Sound of Music fame, cut finishing the movie so close that he had to physically bring the "finished" copy to the premier of the movie. He stated many times over the years that the theatrical cut was not really is vision. The main changes with the director's cut was the completion of several special effects shots that were somewhat incomplete in the theatrical cut, the addition of some special effects shots that clarified the story and visuals a bit (and getting a better look at the film's antagonist, V'Ger), and the cutting of several minutes of the cast literally staring at the viewscreen on the bridge. That last part was a huge complaint of the theatrical cut as many felt half the movie was literally the theater audience watching the cast watching the Enterprise bridge viewscreen. The new director's cut did certainly close the relative gap in terms of quality between the two films but Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is still indeed better and more in the spirit of the original show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagknife Posted February 19, 2020 Author Share Posted February 19, 2020 So real quick trade injection here in the middle of this sequel talk, lol Pronman’s analysis of Foote’s game has me excited if for no other reason than “he will drive into the dirty areas,” something we didn’t do AT ALL last night. I’m no advanced stats guy by any means but the graph Todd Cordell posted of us taking ZERO shots from the slot pisses me off to no end. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 hour ago, jagknife said: So real quick trade injection here in the middle of this sequel talk, lol Pronman’s analysis of Foote’s game has me excited if for no other reason than “he will drive into the dirty areas,” something we didn’t do AT ALL last night. I’m no advanced stats guy by any means but the graph Todd Cordell posted of us taking ZERO shots from the slot pisses me off to no end. He needed a graph to say that instead of just saying "Devils took no shots on goal from the slot the entire game"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicomo Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 9 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said: He needed a graph to say that instead of just saying "Devils took no shots on goal from the slot the entire game"? He did say it, he just also provided a graph... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, Nicomo said: He did say it, he just also provided a graph... Good god is that pretentious and redundant. That goes for both the addition of a graph and the wording. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Just now, MB3 said: I found that graph interesting. What a bizarre thing to get upset about. I am not upset in the slightest lol. I just find it amusing how self-important stat-nerds tend to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 hour ago, MB3 said: “Stat nerds” ~ “literally doing his fvcking job” but, uh, word. I guess I am the weirdo for thinking needing a heat map and using the phrase "The Blue's slot was a complete no-fly zone tonight" as being pretentious to describe the Devils getting no shots from the slot in the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevils1214 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 50 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said: I guess I am the weirdo for thinking needing a heat map and using the phrase "The Blue's slot was a complete no-fly zone tonight" as being pretentious to describe the Devils getting no shots from the slot in the game. He's a writer so he's going to keep it more interesting than "no shots from the slot". Since when is using "no-fly zone" pretentious? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devil Dan 56 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 46 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said: I guess I am the weirdo for thinking needing a heat map and using the phrase "The Blue's slot was a complete no-fly zone tonight" as being pretentious to describe the Devils getting no shots from the slot in the game. I'm not a big fan of over-analyzing stats but I didn’t see anything pretentious about his wording or graph. It showed statistically what the eye test was saying. It felt like we had no high chance shots and that confirms it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, Devil Dan 56 said: I'm not a big fan of over-analyzing stats but I didn’t see anything pretentious about his wording or graph. It showed statistically what the eye test was saying. It felt like we had no high chance shots and that confirms it. lol I guess I am old-school but a simple "Devils took no shots from the slot the entire game" without a heat-map would have done the job just as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, NJDevils1214 said: He's a writer so he's going to keep it more interesting than "no shots from the slot". Since when is using "no-fly zone" pretentious? Looks like you answered your own question. I am not pissed or upset about all this lol. I just find it really amusing how much they try to sound smarter. At least it is not yet on the cringe level as when these pseudo hockey bloggers write "player x is a treat to watch." Sorry but that gets my skin crawling lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevils1214 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said: Looks like you answered your own question. I am not pissed or upset about all this lol. I just find it really amusing how much they try to sound smarter. At least it is not yet on the cringe level as when these pseudo hockey bloggers write "player x is a treat to watch." Sorry but that gets my skin crawling lol. I don't agree. "No-fly zone" is a colloquial saying. It isn't like he scoured the depths of the oxford dictionary to use obscure or unnecessary wording. Also, he is a stats guy by trade. He even works for a junior team doing just that. The people that follow him on twitter must do so to get that kind of content. This came to mind: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 3 hours ago, DevsMan84 said: Good god is that pretentious and redundant. That goes for both the addition of a graph and the wording. I gotta admit, neither the wording nor the graph bothered me at all...if anything, I like that the graph fleshed out what he said...because my next question would have been "OK, so where did most of the shots come from...ah, there we go!" And if anything, the graph shows just HOW futile the Devils were on offense last night. There are certain teams that just SO completely have their way with the Devils...yes, the Devils will have their fun and entertaining wins here and there, but some of these losses...just torture on the eyeballs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 46 minutes ago, NJDevils1214 said: I don't agree. "No-fly zone" is a colloquial saying. It isn't like he scoured the depths of the oxford dictionary to use obscure or unnecessary wording. Also, he is a stats guy by trade. He even works for a junior team doing just that. The people that follow him on twitter must do so to get that kind of content. This came to mind: I rarely hear anyone use "No-Fly Zone" colloquially. Maybe I need to be around smarter people lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 46 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: I gotta admit, neither the wording nor the graph bothered me at all...if anything, I like that the graph fleshed out what he said...because my next question would have been "OK, so where did most of the shots come from...ah, there we go!" And if anything, the graph shows just HOW futile the Devils were on offense last night. There are certain teams that just SO completely have their way with the Devils...yes, the Devils will have their fun and entertaining wins here and there, but some of these losses...just torture on the eyeballs. Without the graph I would have assumed from the perimeter of the Blues zone. I mean, where else would they have come from unless the Devils decide to have some fun and take shots from their own goal line. My main thing is that the graph was just redundant. Add to the fact that the Devils are a team that is really hard-pressed for scoring and played against one of the top 5-6 teams in the league the end-result was pretty much what I expected. I don't really think seeing where shots coming from changes how bad the game was for the Devils. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titans04 Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 7 hours ago, Devil Dan 56 said: I'm not a big fan of over-analyzing stats but I didn’t see anything pretentious about his wording or graph. It showed statistically what the eye test was saying. It felt like we had no high chance shots and that confirms it. Same here, I'm only bothered by the fact that he was dead on with his analysis. That game was nowhere close to the final score. Turn the page, burn the tape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 I’m more annoyed by the people who insist it was a coaching issue, like they were told to only take sh!tty shots from outside the slot, not that the Blues just absolutely sh!t them down. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisis Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 12 minutes ago, mfitz804 said: I’m more annoyed by the people who insist it was a coaching issue, like they were told to only take sh!tty shots from outside the slot, not that the Blues just absolutely sh!t them down. Well they could mean that the offensive strategy implemented was getting shut down and pushed outside by the Blues and the coaching staff did not adjust or just couldn't crack it. So that could be the coaching issue. I don't know how far off script the players are allowed or willing to go after a GM and coach get fired during the same season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titans04 Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 (edited) While I certainly want them to clean house from the GM on down, there's only so much you can do with one almost respectable offensive line and 9 guys who couldn't consistently put the puck in the ocean. Edited February 20, 2020 by titans04 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 8 minutes ago, Crisis said: Well they could mean that the offensive strategy implemented was getting shut down and pushed outside by the Blues and the coaching staff did not adjust or just couldn't crack it. So that could be the coaching issue. I don't know how far off script the players are allowed or willing to go after a GM and coach get fired during the same season. I don’t buy that. If they could’ve, they would’ve. The Blues wouldn’t let them. This (and not everything that is wrong) is not a coaching issue. Dont get me wrong, we’re FULL of coaching issues, this just isn’t one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.