'7' Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 sometime in December when we play consecutive scoreless ties I'll go into a rant about the state of the NHL, but I don't feel like explaining it right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammyk Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 sometime in December when we play consecutive scoreless ties I'll go into a rant about the state of the NHL, but I don't feel like explaining it right now. Hmmm...last time we did that was against the Isles wasn't it? In December no less! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tretyak 20 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Sorry but I just can't judge a game's excitment level based on the number on the scoreboard. Probably the most exciting regular-season game I ever saw was a 0-0 tie afew years back between Edmonton and some other Western team. By contrast I sometimes watch old Oiler's dynasty games on ESPN Classic, and they're some of the more boring games I've seen. When guys used to shoot 45mph unscreened wrist-shots by goalies from 30 feet and the goalie just fell down and then looked around like an idiot, THAT was boring hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 man, those are some moronic comments I don't know where to begin.... You know, the idea of a 30ft wrist shot going in isn't so far fetched when Gretzky or Kurri or Messier is firing it off an end to end rush, and the goalie is actually wearing normal equipment. It might be tough to grasp for the Johnny come lately hockey fans like yourself who think trap = excitement, clutch & grab = thrills and chills, up = down. the next step for the NHL is eliminating the nets altogether. Bettman is thankful for guys like you, the last thing he wants is for you to wisen up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 I'll argue somewhere in between... it's not necessarily that low scoring is boring and high scoring is exciting. Clutch and grab hockey is boring, even if it ends in a 5-4 final, for instance. 7 of those 9 goals could be garbage goals. But if there was a 1-0 game without much clutching and grabbing and with a fair amount of end-to-end rushes back and forth, that would be an exciting game. I'm with Don Cherry - I don't love or hate the trap. I don't mind scoreless games, but they have to be good games... as long as most of the game isn't spent in the neutral zone or re-collecting pucks, I'll probably enjoy watching it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfsharkalligatorhalfman Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 huh? '7' your attack was completly off base and pointless. Completly ridiculous he was just saying the most exciting hockey game he saw was a 0-0 tie. I have no doubt that the most exciting games you've seen have been close. maybe they were 100-99 but they were close and personally i feel the close low scoring games are the most entertaining where both teams seem to pour their hearts out onto the ice with tension building and building until the release of a goal. or maybe i'll just wisen up, leave the bettman evil empire and watch a basketball game, the most boring spectacle on earth...BUT ITS HIGH SCORING!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Is anyone else in Central NY having trouble getting the Devils AND Rangers game? I'm in Syracuse, and I have both Msg/Fox showing YOU GOTTA SEE THIS...when it should be DEvils and Isles and the Rangers I had the same problem here in Ithaca. Ended up watching the Rangers game on ESPN2 and fuming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ringtwins Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Gionta should have three goals, one of Rafalski's goals hit Gionta before going in the net. Could we get fifteen this year from the little guy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJD Jester Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 sometime in December when we play consecutive scoreless ties I'll go into a rant about the state of the NHL, but I don't feel like explaining it right now. I'd love to hear it. I mean, the game last night was awful (expect of course for the DEFENDING CHAMPIONS looking like themselves for once, and for MadDog getting off the schnide). But close games, defensive hockey...it all works for me if there is passion on the ice, which there wasn't last night. The problem with the NHL is the systematic elimination of checking and fighting by Bettman's draconian officials and rule tweaking, rather than a lack of scoring. <JESTER> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJD Jester Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 (edited) the next step for the NHL is eliminating the nets altogether.Bettman is thankful for guys like you, the last thing he wants is for you to wisen up OK, so I just went back and read this post, and I have to ask: What exactly has Bettman's NHL done to support defensive hockey, and why would they be happy with fans who are happy with the trap? I've been ranting and raving for years about the articifial ways the league has tried to juice scoring and discourage physical play. I find it really interesting to see someone who feels the league has actually encouraged low-scoring games. <JESTER> Edited October 29, 2003 by NJD Jester Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nieuwy25 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 I finally got to watch the whole game for the first time. So I was watching and wondering, what's supposed to be wrong with this team? They looked like the Devils to me! Good game, at a good time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammyk Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 I finally got to watch the whole game for the first time. So I was watching and wondering, what's supposed to be wrong with this team? They looked like the Devils to me! Good game, at a good time. Hmm so in the other games did you only watch the 1st period? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 the next step for the NHL is eliminating the nets altogether.Bettman is thankful for guys like you, the last thing he wants is for you to wisen up OK, so I just went back and read this post, and I have to ask: What exactly has Bettman's NHL done to support defensive hockey, and why would they be happy with fans who are happy with the trap? I've been ranting and raving for years about the articifial ways the league has tried to juice scoring and discourage physical play. I find it really interesting to see someone who feels the league has actually encouraged low-scoring games. <JESTER> Jester, some fans, writers, players and especially agents believe that Bettman has supported defensive hockey in an attempt to keep goal scoring down. That would lead to lower salaries...in theory. This is actually a conspiracy theory. You may have noticed they occasionally crop up here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nieuwy25 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 I finally got to watch the whole game for the first time. So I was watching and wondering, what's supposed to be wrong with this team? They looked like the Devils to me! Good game, at a good time. Hmm so in the other games did you only watch the 1st period? If you mean, did I miss the meltdowns? Yeah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevils_info Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 This group is getting weirder and weirder by the day! But I'm glad to see everyone happy after a game (for the most part, at least!) ---------------------------------------- After a disappointing loss against the Bruins (5-2), the Devils retaliate to improve their away record with a shutout against the New York Islanders, who stand at 2nd place in the Atlantic Division. The Devils had some time to think about the previous night Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJD Jester Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Jester, some fans, writers, players and especially agents believe that Bettman has supported defensive hockey in an attempt to keep goal scoring down. That would lead to lower salaries...in theory. Wow...I have to say, that's the first time I've heard that. To those who buy into that theory, where does Bettman's tightening of the obstruction calls, 4-on-4 overtimes and moving the nets out to create more room behind the goal--you know, in theory, for the goalscorers--fit in with this wacky notion that the same guy who marketed Mario Lemieux as the guy would carry the league into the mainstream could then turn around and promote defensive hockey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Jester, some fans, writers, players and especially agents believe that Bettman has supported defensive hockey in an attempt to keep goal scoring down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted October 29, 2003 Author Share Posted October 29, 2003 I was happy before the game. We all went to the local sparts bar (almost smokefree) so I finally got to watch a game on TV! here's the kicker though... Rebecca kept watching the Rangers game over my shoulder ... I like to think she was enjoying their humiliation ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 First Tie Domi & now the Rangers? PK, are you sire they sent you home with the right kid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammyk Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Rebecca kept watching the Rangers game over my shoulder ... I like to think she was enjoying their humiliation ... She probably liked the cartoonish Ducks uniforms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halfsharkalligatorhalfman Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 low goal scoring equals lower salries? The only way that makes sense is having players avoid their bonuses, which is an amazingly stupid theory. There are still players who score more than other players and they are going to be paid accordingly. Whether you lead the league in points with 100 or 200 points you are still in high demand by teams and they will pay as much for you as a goal scorer as they would before, assuming that all the other players relative value is the same. And what has bettman done to cause the league to be low scoring?? we could go over all the same reasons why the league is low scoring again, and the only one that i could chalk up to being bettman's fault is expansion. And low scoring as a result of expansion was a side effect not the goal. The real reason everyone hates bettman is because the canadian teams are falling by the wayside in bettmans NHL. That's not Bettman's fault that's the Canadian governments fault with obscenly high taxes. If it's easier to have a sucessful hockey team in Columbus Ohio than it is in Montreal you have serious problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJD Jester Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 adding space behind the nets actually take away space from the neutral zone, four feet total, which makes it easier for teams to clog up the neutral zone. Agreed, only when Bettman and his cronies made the decision to move the nets, it was to boost offense. It was a move to create more skating space for players like Mario in back of the goalie, increase passing to the slot and to not allow defenses to clamp down behind the net. What it managed to do, to the horror of Bettman and goal-hungry fans, was create an environment where the trap was allowed to blossom. <JESTER> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 low goal scoring equals lower salries? The only way that makes sense is having players avoid their bonuses, which is an amazingly stupid theory.There are still players who score more than other players and they are going to be paid accordingly. Whether you lead the league in points with 100 or 200 points you are still in high demand by teams and they will pay as much for you as a goal scorer as they would before, assuming that all the other players relative value is the same. I don't believe in the conspiracy theory but there is a way that, if you could keep goal scoring down, it would keep salaries down for Restricted Free Agents and that is through arbitration. If you can keep goals down compared to previous years then the scoring stats that players will bring into arbitration will not look as good as they would have before. They compare themselves to players with similar stats to prove their "worth"...the lower you keep the goal totals, the lower you can keep the salaries...in theory. In fact, if a guy has a "bad" enough year, he won't go to arbitration at all, because he knows he will lose and then you have him over a barrel...or he has to hold out, which is just kind of stupid overall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Gionta should have three goals, one of Rafalski's goals hit Gionta before going in the net. Could we get fifteen this year from the little guy? Why not - provided he stays healthy, he had 12 last year and missed around 25 games, so he was on pace for more than 15. The big question is can we get 15 from Pando Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 I finally got to watch the whole game for the first time. So I was watching and wondering, what's supposed to be wrong with this team? They looked like the Devils to me! Good game, at a good time. Well I guess you should watch more often then since you're good luck 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.