This day on November 22
Acquired: Kari Takko (1990)
Departed: Bruce Bell (1990)

Happy Birthday To: SAE_10W30, Radville, Flavs93

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Oilers » Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53)Pages (2): [ «  <  1  2]
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729787 is a reply to message #729738 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 22:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oilersfan2  is currently offline oilersfan2
Messages: 8
Registered: May 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta

No Cups

I bet McDavid is wishing he would have signed a 5yr deal. What the hell is wrong with this organization!


Shoot the puck!!

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729789 is a reply to message #729738 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 22:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 10769
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

It's the swarm without the swarm. Just doing...nothing instead.


Ryan Rishaug @TSNRyanRishaug
Puck watching at its absolute finest. Caggiula wide open.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DysfKSdU0AEICqK.jpg

What's the guy in front of the goalie even doing? His stick is not even in a place the puck could go. Basically just pretending to be a table hockey player that no one is controlling.

[Updated on: Tue, 05 February 2019 22:38]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729791 is a reply to message #729789 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 22:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
twilson1111  is currently offline twilson1111
Messages: 106
Registered: October 2010
Location: Calgary

No Cups

Ahahahahahah


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729793 is a reply to message #729789 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 22:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
twilson1111  is currently offline twilson1111
Messages: 106
Registered: October 2010
Location: Calgary

No Cups

So who was most at fault here? I’m thinking Lucic


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729794 is a reply to message #729789 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 22:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
overdue  is currently offline overdue
Messages: 493
Registered: October 2014

No Cups

It wasn't as much of a Talbot melt down as a team melt down. Hard to blame him after all the big saves he made earlier in the game, just too many players not giving as much as they should in the defensive zone. Saw Craig Button on TSN and he was almost gleeful about how bad the Oilers are. Hard to argue though. He said it's another major rebuild to fix things and I tend to agree. He was also joking about showcasing Talbot in the game and said he's doubtful any team would take a chance on a reclamation project goalie at this time of year.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729796 is a reply to message #729789 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 22:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NetBOG  is currently offline NetBOG
Messages: 2948
Registered: January 2006
Location: Parts Unknown

2 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 February 2019 22:36

It's the swarm without the swarm. Just doing...nothing instead.




I'll give Russell a pass. He had just finished making a great play to deny Kane and he's at least trying to intercept the pass.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729809 is a reply to message #729789 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 07:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Oscargasm  is currently offline Oscargasm
Messages: 5911
Registered: May 2009
Location: YEG

5 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 February 2019 23:36

It's the swarm without the swarm. Just doing...nothing instead.


Ryan Rishaug @TSNRyanRishaug
Puck watching at its absolute finest. Caggiula wide open.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DysfKSdU0AEICqK.jpg

What's the guy in front of the goalie even doing? His stick is not even in a place the puck could go. Basically just pretending to be a table hockey player that no one is controlling.


Simply. Stunning.

Trying to figure out who’s standing next to Nurse and can’t confidently figure it out. Is it Rattie? Russel is coming out the of the corner, where he made a play on 88, Lucic on the other side... Loo could have easily covered the Drake there but who’s the plug next to Nurse??



Survivor CHAMP S52 | S66
OG's #MUSTWIN Scale
Category 1 - Lightly Musty
Category 2 - Moderately Musty
Category 3 - Considerably Musty
Category 4 - Severely Musty
Category 5 - Incredibly Musty

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729812 is a reply to message #729789 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 08:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 February 2019 22:36

It's the swarm without the swarm. Just doing...nothing instead.


Ryan Rishaug @TSNRyanRishaug
Puck watching at its absolute finest. Caggiula wide open.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DysfKSdU0AEICqK.jpg

What's the guy in front of the goalie even doing? His stick is not even in a place the puck could go. Basically just pretending to be a table hockey player that no one is controlling.


This is a prime example of what is wrong with the Oilers. What are they doing?????

There is a guy behind the net so is stands to reason that someone would be in chase mode. So that is Russell. But what the hell is Rattie and Nurse doing? Rattie is just standing there watching the guy. WHY?? What are you accomplishing by freaking STANDING their watching. My oldest son is in novice hockey and that's what they do half the time is and and watch the puck carrier. They are 8, they are just learning the game. Rattie is 26. He's probably been playing hockey for over 20 years. What coach, or system or even common sense would tell you that it's a good idea to just STAND there and watch the guy. At least if he was lunging at him, it may not be the right play but he's not just standing there doing nothing.

Nurse is actually in the blue paint. WHY?? What defensive coverage says stand a foot from your goal line? The definition of a defenseman is to DEFEND the net. So shouldn't he be out DEFENDING??? If he is doing is job and DEFENDING the net, he'd be in front ready to tie up Caggulia and the play is dead. What is he doing???


I do not understand this team. They don't have enough talent to compete with the big boys, I know that but how are these supposed "pros" not able to play basics? How can these guys play good, defensive hockey for 2 periods then just STOP? It's like they turn their brain off and stop playing. Whatever they were doing for 2 periods was working, they go into the dressing room come out and just stop doing it. It's not even bad breaks or bounces or guys trying to hard, its flat out stupidity. Like not even doing fundamentals like tying up a guys stick, covering the guy in front of your net.

[Updated on: Wed, 06 February 2019 08:36]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729813 is a reply to message #729812 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 08:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner  is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 520
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 08:33

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 February 2019 22:36

It's the swarm without the swarm. Just doing...nothing instead.


Ryan Rishaug @TSNRyanRishaug
Puck watching at its absolute finest. Caggiula wide open.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DysfKSdU0AEICqK.jpg

What's the guy in front of the goalie even doing? His stick is not even in a place the puck could go. Basically just pretending to be a table hockey player that no one is controlling.


This is a prime example of what is wrong with the Oilers. What are they doing?????

There is a guy behind the net so is stands to reason that someone would be in chase mode. So that is Russell. But what the hell is Rattie and Nurse doing? Rattie is just standing there watching the guy. WHY?? What are you accomplishing by freaking STANDING their watching. My oldest son is in novice hockey and that's what they do half the time is and and watch the puck carrier. They are 8, they are just learning the game. Rattie is 26. He's probably been playing hockey for over 20 years. What coach, or system or even common sense would tell you that it's a good idea to just STAND there and watch the guy. At least if he was lunging at him, it may not be the right play but he's not just standing there doing nothing.

Nurse is actually in the blue paint. WHY?? What defensive coverage says stand a foot from your goal line? The definition of a defenseman is to DEFEND the net. So shouldn't he be out DEFENDING??? If he is doing is job and DEFENDING the net, he'd be in front ready to tie up Caggulia and the play is dead. What is he doing???


I do not understand this team. They don't have enough talent to compete with the big boys, I know that but how are these supposed "pros" not able to play basics? How can these guys play good, defensive hockey for 2 periods then just STOP? It's like they turn their brain off and stop playing. Whatever they were doing for 2 periods was working, they go into the dressing room come out and just stop doing it. It's not even bad breaks or bounces or guys trying to hard, its flat out stupidity. Like not even doing fundamentals like tying up a guys stick, covering the guy in front of your net.


Also, where is the center in this frame? Would that be McDavid? Did he go for a change? Did he get beat in the corner?

Rattie is probably where Nurse should be, McDavid should be on the puck carrier, and Rattie should be on his wing. Might be a case where everyone is out of position so no one really knows what they are doing and they are covering the empty spot.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729815 is a reply to message #729813 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 09:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

mightyreasoner wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 08:45

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 08:33

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 February 2019 22:36

It's the swarm without the swarm. Just doing...nothing instead.


Ryan Rishaug @TSNRyanRishaug
Puck watching at its absolute finest. Caggiula wide open.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DysfKSdU0AEICqK.jpg

What's the guy in front of the goalie even doing? His stick is not even in a place the puck could go. Basically just pretending to be a table hockey player that no one is controlling.


This is a prime example of what is wrong with the Oilers. What are they doing?????

There is a guy behind the net so is stands to reason that someone would be in chase mode. So that is Russell. But what the hell is Rattie and Nurse doing? Rattie is just standing there watching the guy. WHY?? What are you accomplishing by freaking STANDING their watching. My oldest son is in novice hockey and that's what they do half the time is and and watch the puck carrier. They are 8, they are just learning the game. Rattie is 26. He's probably been playing hockey for over 20 years. What coach, or system or even common sense would tell you that it's a good idea to just STAND there and watch the guy. At least if he was lunging at him, it may not be the right play but he's not just standing there doing nothing.

Nurse is actually in the blue paint. WHY?? What defensive coverage says stand a foot from your goal line? The definition of a defenseman is to DEFEND the net. So shouldn't he be out DEFENDING??? If he is doing is job and DEFENDING the net, he'd be in front ready to tie up Caggulia and the play is dead. What is he doing???


I do not understand this team. They don't have enough talent to compete with the big boys, I know that but how are these supposed "pros" not able to play basics? How can these guys play good, defensive hockey for 2 periods then just STOP? It's like they turn their brain off and stop playing. Whatever they were doing for 2 periods was working, they go into the dressing room come out and just stop doing it. It's not even bad breaks or bounces or guys trying to hard, its flat out stupidity. Like not even doing fundamentals like tying up a guys stick, covering the guy in front of your net.


Also, where is the center in this frame? Would that be McDavid? Did he go for a change? Did he get beat in the corner?

Rattie is probably where Nurse should be, McDavid should be on the puck carrier, and Rattie should be on his wing. Might be a case where everyone is out of position so no one really knows what they are doing and they are covering the empty spot.


Good points. The center usually has WAY more defensive responsibilities than wingers. The center should be in the middle. WHERE is the CENTER?

Like I said, too compete with the big boys in the league, the Oilers don't have enough talent to play with them, they just don't. We have all seen some crappy Arizona teams with even less talent than the Oilers go out and beat good teams by playing sound, boring, defensive hockey. They play their position, keep it simple, do the basics. It may not be fun to watch but it works. But for the Oilers, basic fundamentals seems like an impossibility? Are some of these guys just flat out stupid? Like Nurse. I like Nurse a lot. He has 250 NHL games, been playing hockey probably since he was 5. Let's say he was confused with the defensive system and not sure of his position. So if that is the case, if you are unsure, wouldn't a normal person fall back to the basic default position that you have probably done since your were 5? Like go to the front of the net and tie someone up? I am not a pro hockey player or coach. I played when I was younger but not at a high level. I watch a TON of hockey. I have NEVER seen it where any team at any level just lets a guy stand in front of the goal all by himself while the dman just does nothing. At the very least, if all else fails, the dman tries to keep the front clear. Not for the Oilers.

[Updated on: Wed, 06 February 2019 09:09]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729845 is a reply to message #729815 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 10:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
overdue  is currently offline overdue
Messages: 493
Registered: October 2014

No Cups

The Cagulla goal was hard to take because it was Cagulla and because it was such a blatant defensive melt down. More salt on the wound. That type of play where the shooter is left wide open has happened on many goals against this season. Looked to me like Lucic being Lucic was too slow to get to Cagulla and Nurse was anticipating Taves coming around the back of the net with the puck.( he guessed wrong ) What Rattie was doing, flat footed in front of the net with his back to the shooter. at the same time interfering with the goalie, was a total brain cramp on his part. It's just more of the same. They fall apart under pressure in their own zone and forget to look for the open man coming in behind the play, hypnotized by the puck carrier.

[Updated on: Wed, 06 February 2019 10:33]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729797 is a reply to message #729738 ]
Tue, 05 February 2019 23:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
twilson1111  is currently offline twilson1111
Messages: 106
Registered: October 2010
Location: Calgary

No Cups

I just saw Hitch’s post game and didn’t like one thing he said. He said that he pulled Cam just to ‘get a timeout without a timeout’. To me this is either a dumb move because it’s not worth demoralizing a goaltender to get a timeout, or it’s disingenuous because that’s not really why he did it. Either way I think he made a mistake here.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729801 is a reply to message #729738 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 02:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4418
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

Nothing to say. Just. Wow.


McDAVID! Oh YEAH Baby!!
Tic-Tac-Tao!
Keep on Rockin' in the Free World
P. Chiarelli math.. T. Hall = A. Larsson, Yak= bag o'pucks (OK he got one right...) K. Russell = $4.1 M+NMC, G. Reinhart= M. Barzal + A. Beauvillier, J. Eberle = R. Spooner,

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729823 is a reply to message #729801 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 09:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mazankowski  is currently offline mazankowski
Messages: 27
Registered: June 2006
Location: Kelowna BC

No Cups

Honestly, the Nurse Russell pairing is having a difficult time. Nurse had an awful third period in particular. The 2-2 goal, he can clearly see that there's back pressure on the puck carrier with a pretty bad angle to the net, and yet he draws towards him rather than taking the only threat to score, being the man cross crease. This is simple simple hockey, stuff I teach my Minor Bantam's. If the puck carrier is going to drive the net, or shoot it, and he somehow scores, then that's on the goaltender. But this was flat out telegraphing the play to the puck carrier of what to do.

The Strome goal, my god, close the gap man. If Nurse steps up instead of back tracking, that puck is deflected or dumped into the corner and the transition from defence to offence is initiated. But no, he literally gets caught flat footed, screens the goaltender and knows there is only one place where the puck is going and that's to the house.

The goaltender interference play is a toss up. I see that the contact is initiated outside of the blue paint, but once the player comes into the crease with the goaltender, is that not when the goaltender interference begins to impede the goalie from getting across to try and make the save? The argument could be made there is no way in hell Talbot can shuffle from one side to the other in time. However, I counter that with the argument that could he have done the back roll in desperation to try and make the save or even tried to lunge? Bottom line, the goaltender was not allowed to attempt to make the save because a player was in the crease with a skate between his pad and his leg, decision done.

The Caggiula goal I had already gone to bed because I live in Toronto and it was about 11pm and I was hating myself for staying up. Until this D core including the down low forward (which usually is a C) can identify where the scoring areas are, and that plays starting from down low don't go any lower, but rather only come higher (points, slot, half wall), then there's no point in breaking down the play.

Rant over, the hockey IQ is a real issue and likely due to an overwhelming amount of minutes being fed to Russell and Nurse.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729825 is a reply to message #729823 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 09:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 7174
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

mazankowski wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 09:36

Honestly, the Nurse Russell pairing is having a difficult time. Nurse had an awful third period in particular. The 2-2 goal, he can clearly see that there's back pressure on the puck carrier with a pretty bad angle to the net, and yet he draws towards him rather than taking the only threat to score, being the man cross crease. This is simple simple hockey, stuff I teach my Minor Bantam's. If the puck carrier is going to drive the net, or shoot it, and he somehow scores, then that's on the goaltender. But this was flat out telegraphing the play to the puck carrier of what to do.

The Strome goal, my god, close the gap man. If Nurse steps up instead of back tracking, that puck is deflected or dumped into the corner and the transition from defence to offence is initiated. But no, he literally gets caught flat footed, screens the goaltender and knows there is only one place where the puck is going and that's to the house.

The goaltender interference play is a toss up. I see that the contact is initiated outside of the blue paint, but once the player comes into the crease with the goaltender, is that not when the goaltender interference begins to impede the goalie from getting across to try and make the save? The argument could be made there is no way in hell Talbot can shuffle from one side to the other in time. However, I counter that with the argument that could he have done the back roll in desperation to try and make the save or even tried to lunge? Bottom line, the goaltender was not allowed to attempt to make the save because a player was in the crease with a skate between his pad and his leg, decision done.

The Caggiula goal I had already gone to bed because I live in Toronto and it was about 11pm and I was hating myself for staying up. Until this D core including the down low forward (which usually is a C) can identify where the scoring areas are, and that plays starting from down low don't go any lower, but rather only come higher (points, slot, half wall), then there's no point in breaking down the play.

Rant over, the hockey IQ is a real issue and likely due to an overwhelming amount of minutes being fed to Russell and Nurse.


I ranted and raved at the start of the season and through in to the start of the Hitchcock era about overplaying a group of 7 or 8 guys. The Oilers have persisted in doing it, maybe because they have AHL-quality players in so much of the rest of the lineup, and it's caught up to them. I'd guess there's a fair amount of fatigue for all the top guys - and I think that's why we've seen even McDavid's numbers drop off a little bit.



"Thinking that a bad team's best players are the reason the team is bad is the "Tambellini re-signing Lennart Petrell" of sports opinions." @Woodguy55
#FireBobbyNicks

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729841 is a reply to message #729825 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 10:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Adam wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 09:59

mazankowski wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 09:36

Honestly, the Nurse Russell pairing is having a difficult time. Nurse had an awful third period in particular. The 2-2 goal, he can clearly see that there's back pressure on the puck carrier with a pretty bad angle to the net, and yet he draws towards him rather than taking the only threat to score, being the man cross crease. This is simple simple hockey, stuff I teach my Minor Bantam's. If the puck carrier is going to drive the net, or shoot it, and he somehow scores, then that's on the goaltender. But this was flat out telegraphing the play to the puck carrier of what to do.

The Strome goal, my god, close the gap man. If Nurse steps up instead of back tracking, that puck is deflected or dumped into the corner and the transition from defence to offence is initiated. But no, he literally gets caught flat footed, screens the goaltender and knows there is only one place where the puck is going and that's to the house.

The goaltender interference play is a toss up. I see that the contact is initiated outside of the blue paint, but once the player comes into the crease with the goaltender, is that not when the goaltender interference begins to impede the goalie from getting across to try and make the save? The argument could be made there is no way in hell Talbot can shuffle from one side to the other in time. However, I counter that with the argument that could he have done the back roll in desperation to try and make the save or even tried to lunge? Bottom line, the goaltender was not allowed to attempt to make the save because a player was in the crease with a skate between his pad and his leg, decision done.

The Caggiula goal I had already gone to bed because I live in Toronto and it was about 11pm and I was hating myself for staying up. Until this D core including the down low forward (which usually is a C) can identify where the scoring areas are, and that plays starting from down low don't go any lower, but rather only come higher (points, slot, half wall), then there's no point in breaking down the play.

Rant over, the hockey IQ is a real issue and likely due to an overwhelming amount of minutes being fed to Russell and Nurse.


I ranted and raved at the start of the season and through in to the start of the Hitchcock era about overplaying a group of 7 or 8 guys. The Oilers have persisted in doing it, maybe because they have AHL-quality players in so much of the rest of the lineup, and it's caught up to them. I'd guess there's a fair amount of fatigue for all the top guys - and I think that's why we've seen even McDavid's numbers drop off a little bit.


Even if you are an AHLer, you should know not to leave a guy wide open in front. You shouldn't have to be a hall of famer to figure that out.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53) [message #729831 is a reply to message #729823 ]
Wed, 06 February 2019 10:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

mazankowski wrote on Wed, 06 February 2019 09:36

Honestly, the Nurse Russell pairing is having a difficult time. Nurse had an awful third period in particular. The 2-2 goal, he can clearly see that there's back pressure on the puck carrier with a pretty bad angle to the net, and yet he draws towards him rather than taking the only threat to score, being the man cross crease. This is simple simple hockey, stuff I teach my Minor Bantam's. If the puck carrier is going to drive the net, or shoot it, and he somehow scores, then that's on the goaltender. But this was flat out telegraphing the play to the puck carrier of what to do.

The Strome goal, my god, close the gap man. If Nurse steps up instead of back tracking, that puck is deflected or dumped into the corner and the transition from defence to offence is initiated. But no, he literally gets caught flat footed, screens the goaltender and knows there is only one place where the puck is going and that's to the house.

The goaltender interference play is a toss up. I see that the contact is initiated outside of the blue paint, but once the player comes into the crease with the goaltender, is that not when the goaltender interference begins to impede the goalie from getting across to try and make the save? The argument could be made there is no way in hell Talbot can shuffle from one side to the other in time. However, I counter that with the argument that could he have done the back roll in desperation to try and make the save or even tried to lunge? Bottom line, the goaltender was not allowed to attempt to make the save because a player was in the crease with a skate between his pad and his leg, decision done.

The Caggiula goal I had already gone to bed because I live in Toronto and it was about 11pm and I was hating myself for staying up. Until this D core including the down low forward (which usually is a C) can identify where the scoring areas are, and that plays starting from down low don't go any lower, but rather only come higher (points, slot, half wall), then there's no point in breaking down the play.

Rant over, the hockey IQ is a real issue and likely due to an overwhelming amount of minutes being fed to Russell and Nurse.

I agree with you. The hockey IQ seems to be lacking. The mistakes they are making just seem like stuff you do when you are a kid. Sometimes guys make mistakes because they are trying too hard and are doing too much and they get out of position. I don't see that. The picture of the Caggulia goal. Everyone is just standing there doing nothing. No one is taking the man in front. Just a bunch of guys puck watching.

You described the Strome goal. What coach is EVER going to tell a defender. Give up the line, back way, way, way in and give hi all the time in the world to shoot.

I listen to Lowtide talk about the game. He says as always. "They don't have the horses". He's right. They don't have the horses to compete for a cup. BUT that is an excuse. They have the horses to be better than they were last night. Guys aren't doing their job. You don't need to be a norris trophy dman to go pick up a wide open man 10 ft from your goal. You don't need to be a norris trophy dman to not allow a forward to walk in unpressured and get a wide open shot. That crap is hockey basics.



Send a private message to this user  

Pages (2): [ «  <  1  2]  
Previous Topic:Pregame: Edmonton @ Minnesota (Game #54)
Next Topic:Pregame: Chicago @ Edmonton (Game #53)
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2022.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement


Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca