Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

2015 Stanley Cup Playoffs


Recommended Posts

Not what I saw for the last several years. Nobody has to 'sit back and defend' aginst a popgun offence.Teams beat the Oilers by attacking and forechecking them hard. The whole team just folds when pressured. The Oilers do OK against teams that are small skating teams. Big aggressive forechecking teams crush the Oil. There is no need to defend against the Oilers, with the exception of the first line, because they have little offence to worry about.. Watch the other team defencemen when the puck is in the Oilers zone(which is much of the game)- they pinch constantly to keep pressure on. It's hardly a risk.

Score effects are real and impact every team. Teams get leads, they ease off on the gas pedal, the trailing team piles up shots.

What they also have in common, in addition to zero NHL experience, is very similar records in the NHL in 2014-15. Their win-loss records after coaching 31 games each is nearly identical. There is really no need to expect anything different.

Well they have the same terrible roster (Nelson's is actually worse. What's important is that they've mostly been in more games and individual players are showing improvement. That's far more important at this point than wins.

Same people, same result. They need a strict, disciplined, experienced coach to get the team working together in a coherent consistent way.

Scotty Bowman and Toe Blake wouldn't get much more out of this roster. As the saying goes: you can';t make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

They have not improved at all statistically in four years, and nearly all of this same team will be back next year.

These two statements, paired together are highly disingenuous. As of the trade deadline, the longest serving Oilers are Eberle, Hall and RNH. This roster is completely different from the one three or four years ago, so those results are irrelevant.

The management is dreadful, and the coaching picks are done from desperation, not from a carefully considered plan. Eakins had to go and Nelson was not picked because they wanted him but because that is truly all there was available in mid season. I full expect MacT to endorse and support his own mistakes, that is clearly his style.

I don't disagree overall, but I think your reasons for dismissing Nelson have nothing to do with his coaching ability and are therefore unfair.

Edited by Black Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 239
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

These two statements, paired together are highly disingenuous. As of the trade deadline, the longest serving Oilers are Eberle, Hall and RNH. This roster is completely different from the one three or four years ago, so those results are irrelevant.

Of course, you failed to note I did not say the roster was the same as five years ago. The roster has been completely overhauled with the same result. And it won't change next year, because the team will be much the same according to MacTavish. There will only be a few roster changes, and those may involve bringing up more babies from junior or the AHL. They'll dump nonentitites like Fraser and Aulie, but mysteriously signed the useless, dead slow Hamilton to a two year deal. MacT has already said his first pairing will be Schultz and KLefbom, which will be undoubtedly the worst 1-2 in the league. He is hedging his bets in acquiring a 1-2 defender. His whole strategy is to trade all the draft picks to get a high quality roster player, but unless he is trading 1, 2 or 3 overall pick it won't work. As always, he has painted himself into a weak corner.

I don't disagree overall, but I think your reasons for dismissing Nelson have nothing to do with his coaching ability and are therefore unfair.

He may be the second coming of Mike Babcock in five years. Then we can hire him. I don't give a shit if it's unfair, I want to see my team progress and Nelson is just another unknown at a time when we need to be moving forward, if only a tiny bit. But the last thing this team needs now is another newbie. Just like they don't need any more 19 year old players unless their name is McDavid. And we don't need our fourth rookie GM in a row either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He may be the second coming of Mike Babcock in five years. Then we can hire him. I don't give a shit if it's unfair, I want to see my team progress and Nelson is just another unknown at a time when we need to be moving forward, if only a tiny bit. But the last thing this team needs now is another newbie. Just like they don't need any more 19 year old players unless their name is McDavid. And we don't need our fourth rookie GM in a row either.

So you'd rather take a chance on an "experienced" coach who may or may not get better results with this garbage roster than a guy who is actually working with the roster you say will be the same next year. By this logic, MacT himself would be a good coaching option. After all, he's experienced. or how about Tortorella: lots of experience there! :rolleyes:

More on Eakins v Nelson after 31 games:

Record: Eakins 7-19-5/Nelson 11-16-4

Goals For: Eakins 65/Nelson 71

Goals against: Eakins 101/Nelson 85

Goal Differential: Eakins -36/Nelson -14

Shots for: Eakins 799/Nelson 841

Shots against: Eakins 891/Nelson 936

Shot Differential: Eakins -92/Nelson -95

PP: Eakins 12.9%/Nelson 21.6%

PK: Eakins 79.3%/Nelson: 76.6%

SV%: Eakins .890/Nelson .900

Obviously there's a lot of variables at work, but anyone suggesting the Oilers are playing the same under Nelson as Eakins is just dead wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing there to indicate that Nelson is worthy of a long term deal. Nothing. Eakins has 7 more points, a natural bounce with a new coach from an embarassed team. Note too that Eakins had four more games agaisnt the West than Nelson in his first 31. That's an automatic 8 point swing.

So, hiring an experienced coach vs, a virgin is 'taking a chance'? Good one.

Note that Calgary has a more or less garbage roster too, and one difference is Hartley.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing there to indicate that Nelson is worthy of a long term deal. Nothing.

Who said anything about a long term deal?

Eakins has 7 more points, a natural bounce with a new coach from an embarassed team. Note too that Eakins had four more games agaisnt the West than Nelson in his first 31. That's an automatic 8 point swing.

Cool, ignore all the other stuff, ignore the improved PP (which wasn't just anemic under Eakins but DOA), ignore the players who say Nelson has changed the culture and feeling in the room, ignore the improvements by individuals like Lander and your whipping boy Yakupov.

So, hiring an experienced coach vs, a virgin is 'taking a chance'? Good one.

It is because the experienced coach will be new to the team. In Nelson you have a guy who is familiar with the players and their skillsets, who has had a half season (more in the case of those who played in the an NHL under him) to build a rapport with the team And you want to chuck that away for some vague quality of "experience" that may or may not make a difference to a roster that is lacking in some key parts. Unless you can get Babcock to come (not happening), I see no harm in giving Nelson the team along with a healthy Taylor Hall and something to actually play for. Next year is probably a write-off regardless unless they win the lottery (also not happening).

Note that Calgary has a more or less garbage roster too, and one difference is Hartley.

The difference between Calgary and Edmonton is largely luck/goaltending/some combination of the two. They're this year's version of last year's Colorado Avalanche.
Edited by Black Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

What a fight to the finish, the wild card spot seems it will flip one each game from here on in.

Winnipeg in, Calgary out, tomorrow ....could be the opposite.

Come on Ottawa (did I really just say that?) take that game in hand you have and win it to put some pressure on Boston. I hope the Bruins dont make it .

Hell this is almost as much fun as the first round of the playoffs- the best time in all of hockey, 1st round action.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said anything about a long term deal?

good point. No deal at all in Edmonton then. or would you prefer yet another rental coach?

is this the time to point out that Nelsons record is now pretty much as shitty as Eakins this year. Nice to see them break their 7 game losing streak. The race to the toilet is getting intense. Buffalo won last night and are 3 poiints back. Arizona and Edmonton are tied.

The difference between Calgary and Edmonton is largely luck/goaltending/some combination of the two. They're this year's version of last year's Colorado Avalanche.

luck. right. Luck wins or loses a game or two. Luck does not get Calgary fighting for a playoff spot at the end of the season.

Calgary works relentlessly and plays as a team under a strict system imposed by some hockey fairy. Oh no wait, they have an experienced NHL coach. . I know these concepts are unknown to Oilers management and fans, but that's the reality.

We are on our third baby coach in a row. Before that we had an experienced guy, before that we had as senile guy.

I'm ready for a change/upgrade, you not so much. What would you think about giving Bucky a shot at the big job?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We are on our third baby coach in a row. Before that we had an experienced guy, before that we had as senile guy.

I'm ready for a change/upgrade, you not so much. What would you think about giving Bucky a shot at the big job?

Why doesnt Katz recognize that the same mngmt has produced the same results for what seems like forever? Lowe ,Mac T

Does Nicholson have any input? Can he not grab Katz' ear and whisper 'fire 'em all ?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I do think a lot of Calgary's success has come from luck.

Every year some team catches all the breaks, last year was the Avalanche w Roy at the helm. It just seems like even when they shouldnt , they did.

Calgary appears as this years team for that.

Once upon a time it was Edmonton who made the run to the finals after squeaking in at #8.

The Flames have better goaltending than before and other causes , but some teams just get seem to get it all year.

Hey, some teams get snack bitten in the same way and cannot catch a break. The Leafs are one of those. Its fair to say, while not a great team by anyones imagination (save for Luigi in Vaughan) they certainly were not as bad as they appeared in this half of the season (and not as good as they appeared when tied ofr first). Some of those games they shouold have won, they outplayed the opp but couldnt buy a win. (Not to be confused with the recent quitting which is readily apparent now)

Edited by Guyser2
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you simply cannot get to Game 7 of the final on luck. A short tournament, yes, but not the SC final.

Same with a grinding 82 game regular season. The best teams get to the playoffs, and the best team in the playoffs wins. The OIlers played better and better as the season got on in 05/06, and deserved to beat the #1,#2, and #3 seeds in the West because they outplayed those teams. I was there. It was that simple. It always is that simple in a very long tournament after a very long season..

The Leafs are neither lucky nor unlucky. Quitting isn't unlucky, it's just a normal part of a shitty team getting what they deserve.

Some of those games they shouold have won, they outplayed the opp but couldnt buy a win

This happens to every team. So does the opposite. I don't get your point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

good point. No deal at all in Edmonton then. or would you prefer yet another rental coach?

Long term in my mind is like three or four years. As I said, give him the team for a whole year and see what he can do with it, go from there. The players like him and he's getting some great performances out of key players like RNH, Eberle and Yakupov.

is this the time to point out that Nelsons record is now pretty much as shitty as Eakins this year

We've been through this already and I've already dissected the flaws in this approach.

luck. right. Luck wins or loses a game or two. Luck does not get Calgary fighting for a playoff spot at the end of the season.
Yes, yes it does. See: Colorado last season, the Leafs in the lockout year.
Calgary works relentlessly and plays as a team under a strict system imposed by some hockey fairy. Oh no wait, they have an experienced NHL coach. . I know these concepts are unknown to Oilers management and fans, but that's the reality.
Funny how teams running up unsustainable shooting numbers and hot goaltending always gets chalked up to hard work and coaching, yet when the bubble bursts (and it always does) no one ever blames the coaching or suggests the team stopped working hard.
No, you simply cannot get to Game 7 of the final on luck. A short tournament, yes, but not the SC final.

You concede that luck will play an outsized role in a small samples, so why not in the playoffs (max 28 games)?

Edited by Black Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you simply cannot get to Game 7 of the final on luck. A short tournament, yes, but not the SC final.

The NHL playoffs abound with instances of luck.

If two teams beat each other up for 7 brutal games, and Edmonton gets by in four or five, thats lucky for them and they benefit. It has zero to do with hard work, Oilers werent playing the other two teams when they were beating each other game after game. All it takes is a little luck

And speaking of luck............the year in question, the Western Conf saw all lower seeded teams advance, teams 5 6 7 & 8.

I dont mean they got there solely on luck,but luck plays a part .

The Leafs are neither lucky nor unlucky. Quitting isn't unlucky, it's just a normal part of a shitty team getting what they deserve.

I get that you dont like to say anything but crap about the Leafs/Ontario (petty BS but there ya go) , but it doesnt take much to understand that luck had them in first place late in the year, they would win games and still be outshot or outplayed.

And in a bunch of games on their freefall to the basement they played games they should have won.

And normally....these things do balance out. But once in awhile they don't.

And on

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calgary has dropped two straight and is currently outside the playoff bubble. Since Giordano went down, they've managed a 40% Corsi (they were no hell at 44% with the Norris Trophy-calibre defender in the lineup). If they miss the playoffs, does that mean that Hartley's system doesn't work anymore or the players slacked off?

Edited by Black Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they miss the playoffs, does that mean that Hartley's system doesn't work anymore or the players slacked off?

I wish Calgary gets in, same with Winnipeg and Ottawa. Makes for better veiwing for me.

But what does it mean? Most pundits couldnt explain where Calgary came from, so maybe the are coming down to where they should have been all year......if not due to very hard work and some incredible luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope Ottawa unseats Boston, I loaaatthe Boston. Would love nothing more than to see that team miss playoffs. I also hope the current Western Conference standings, at the time I type this, are the teams that make it. Would also love to see LA miss the playoffs. Their fans have become those annoying "we will win no matter what" fans. It would be a nice if the defending Stanley Cup champions miss the playoffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of excitement abounds these days....for supporters of other teams...not so much mine.

But , as I said the other day , it can flip flop daily.

Calgary, Winnipeg...in . LA out....tomorrow? Who knows.

Ottawa...hey overthere here comes some luck as it were, plays Toronto three times in the next 2 weeks. Call me crazy but maybe the moribund Leafs wake up for a game or two and make Ott work for a win. Sure as hell didnt against SJ last night.

But then Ott gets Pitt (maybe good news as they suck right now) and then trouble, Rangers twice, Lightning , Wings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK: why not?

Because you cannot get all the bounces for 28 straight games playing against the very best opposition. You cannot do it playing roulette, you certainly cannot do it when the opposition is not a statistic.

I get that you dont like to say anything but crap about the Leafs/Ontario

You don't have to take my word for how shitty the Leafs are, all it takes is a review of their actual performance for the last 47 years. What else is there but crap? Same with my team the Oilers for 9 years and counting. This year is no different for either team, more of the same. You can childishly ascribe it to bad luck, but in the real world you very often get the result you deserve. And that is what the Leafs are getting, here and now. What they earned- no more and no less.

Same with the Oilers.

At the heart of longterm failure in pro sports is a common thread: poor management. The Oilers and Leafs have that in abundance. Their actions in the last year or so are bizarre with regard to Shanahan, their undead GM, coaches and assistants. Extreme weirdness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing there to indicate that Nelson is worthy of a long term deal. Nothing. Eakins has 7 more points, a natural bounce with a new coach from an embarassed team. Note too that Eakins had four more games agaisnt the West than Nelson in his first 31. That's an automatic 8 point swing.

So, hiring an experienced coach vs, a virgin is 'taking a chance'? Good one.

Note that Calgary has a more or less garbage roster too, and one difference is Hartley.

Nelson may have had fewer games against Western opponents than Eakins, but Nelson also has more wins against Western opponents (4 vs 1). Also, arguing that Eakins' record isn't that much different from Nelsons' requires adding the losses during the 5 game Craig MacTavish "transistional period" to Nelson's record, which isn't fair because MacTavish was running the practices and the bench during that time. Eakins was 7-19-5, MacTavish was 0-3-2, and Nelson is 13-17-6. And Nelson has had no Taylor Hall, no David Peron, and had Jeff Petry traded away. Trying to sell the injury to Nikitin as a positive for Nelson doesn't work when Nikitin's replacement was guys like Keith Aulie or Jordan Osterle, whoever that is.

A lot of good things have happened since Nelson has taken over. The powerplay is dangerous again. (Notice how we had a great power play under Kruger, then it became the worst in the league as soon as Eakins came to town, and now that Eakins is gone again, it's the hottest PP in the league.) Eberle and The Nuge are on fire. Yakupov has gone from impending bust to promising player again.

And it's just obvious from watching the games how different the players are. Last night was a good example. The Oilers give up a bad goal and the Flyers add 2 more in a hurry. Under Eakins, you could have turned off the TV right then, because the game would have already been over. They had no fight and no confidence under Eakins. Every time they were faced with adversity they crumpled. But last night, they managed to come back to tie it up before the period was over, and went on to win. Under Nelson the Oilers have won 5 games in which their goaltending save % was under .900, including last night. Do you know how often that happened while Eakins was coach? Never. Zero times in 113 games. Under Nelson, they have the confidence to fight back after giving up a bad goal, and under Eakins they always imploded. Nelson has imparted the team with intangibles that they were completely lacking when Eakins was in charge. They act like a real team again.

Obviously the team still has a lot of problems. But why screw around with the coaching yet again when we've somebody who is making progress for a change. Why repeat the mistake of replacing Kruger? What makes you think MacTavish isn't just going to go pick the next Eakins?

There's also the problem of who would actually want this job. Groucho Marx once said "I wouldn't belong to any club that would have me as a member" and I think that a similar problem faces the Oilers in trying to acquire a premier coach: no premium coach is going to come work for this ridiculous franchise. They won't get Mike Babcock. They might get some guy who got canned a few years ago and is desperate to get back into the NHL. Who else is out there? Wait for the Sharks to fire Todd McLellan for failing to get their loaded team into the playoffs?

The Canucks brought in a big name veteran coach prior to last season, and he just about ruined the whole franchise. They fired the guy last summer, replaced him with an AHL coach, and they're dramatically improved and going back to the playoffs. Todd Nelson has the players playing better, feeling confident, and developing in the right direction. Why fire him and risk bringing in the next Dallas Eakins or John Tortorella?

Eakins was a cancer and he had to go. There's no reason to replace Nelson right now, same as there was no reason to replace Kruger 2 years ago. Instead of keep screwing around with the coaching, maybe MacTavish should concentrate on fixing the terrible goaltending and defense. Too bad MacTavish is too stupid to do anything right. He's the second biggest problem with this team, behind Kevin Lowe). Nothing good is going to happen until both of those failures are gone.

Pretty funny to be having this discussion in the Playoffs thread. My kids will be in college before we see the Oilers in the playoffs again, and I don't even have kids yet.

-k

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you cannot get all the bounces for 28 straight games playing against the very best opposition. You cannot do it playing roulette, you certainly cannot do it when the opposition is not a statistic.

28 games MAX , it can end earlier as you know.

You don't have to take my word for how shitty the Leafs are, all it takes is a review of their actual performance for the last 47 years. What else is there but crap?

That conveniently ignores the years that they werent bad, including the Conf finals. But yea....apart from those years there have been some lousy teams.

And poor mngmt wasnt the problem for the 70's, it was a horrible owner who wouldnt allow anything to be done, including hiring good mngmt.

But I wont ignore the part that has contributed to the LEafs woes, poor mngmt.

Same with my team the Oilers for 9 years and counting. This year is no different for either team, more of the same. You can childishly ascribe it to bad luck,

I havent stated the lEafs have been this way due to bad luck, but have said bad luck can appear, fro any team any where, any time.

We both know luck is a weird thing,to be good you have to have luck and to be lucky you have to be good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Winnipeg is in tough going ahead. They have the hardest sched going forward and meet teams they really wish they didnt, but....bring em on they say.

Its a shame, cuz the Sens have two more games versus Points R'Us and having beat them on Sat they are soo close they can smell it. The Jets can only wish they played Points R Us.*





*Copyrighted...not by me

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is a sure win at this point in the season, even Buffalo can give teams some trouble. The Jets, Sens and Minny are the feel good stories of the season. Hopefully they can all overcome and hold off Boston and LA for the next 10 games. Always good to have more Canadian teams in the playoffs, as soon as my team gets eliminated I always cheer for the remaining Canadian teams. Would be nice to bring the cup back home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Winnipeg is in tough going ahead. They have the hardest sched going forward and meet teams they really wish they didnt, but....bring em on they say.

In the last few weeks the Jets have beaten St. Louis, Los Angeles, Tampa, Nashville and Washington and lost to the Leafs. Tough is good. Edited by BubberMiley
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stafford and Myers really proving the trade doubters wrong. They've arguably been among the Jets best players since being acquired. Stafford has played all 3 forward positions for us since being traded. Kane would only ever play LW because he is a "superstar" and can't be bothered to play on his off side or even learn. Stafford has been more effective than Kane was or is and most likely would have been this season and instrumental in our recent 4 game and hopefully 5 game win streak right now. Myers is without a doubt better than Bogosian. Can't wait for Armia to make the jump next year.

Edited by PrimeNumber
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...