"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

[Updated on: Tue, 30 April 2024 14:54]

"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

JPro wrote on Tue, 30 April 2024 15:31

RDOilerfan wrote on Tue, 30 April 2024 12:12 Again, not what I said what so ever. I said the 2 games he just played showed he has the capability to play well in the playoffs. Then said right after. The next thing I said he needs to do is to show he can do it again and again. Feel free to actually READ what I said vs immediately making up complete lies. Nah, I didn't make anything up. It's what you said. And you keep saying it. In the other thread, Mike comes in with stats related to 14 games and how he's concerned that Skinner doesn't have what's needed for the playoffs. You then waited for a whopping TWO wins and come in hot looking to be a smartass and start a fight so you can then play victim again, like you always do. Do you remember this?: RDOilerfan wrote How are some who were worried about Skinner after game 2 feeling now? A poster in here said after his 14 career playoff games, he was almost the worst playoff goalie in the NHL since the early 2000's. After the 2 games in LA where he gave up 1 goal, 2.48 and .919. So that's good right? You knew what you were doing there. Then you conclude that Mike's sample size of 14 was insufficient to determine if Skinner was ready for playoffs, but you feel that 2 games suggests he is in fact ready. Again, no lies. I don't think I missed anything. You try to eek out any tiny victory you can over other posters around here and it's exhausting to witness. I usually skip your posts, but I like Mike's takes, so I entertained the discussion. Big mistake, I'll go back to skipping. Thanks for the reminder!

OilFans is a better place with your posting, JPro

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

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42 Hot damn Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well. Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt? In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots. So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against. So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against. I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD.

The matchups were actually the opposite of that. Bouch and Ek were mostly against kopitars line and gave up 1 high danger chance. Ceci and Nurse gave up 8 high danger chances against the Danault line.

I'm not sure what the spotlogiq data excludes to reduce LA's high danger chances from 14 (based just on shot location/timing data), to 4, but just going by shot locations, the nurse/Ceci pair was on for 11 out of LA's 14 high danger shot attempts.

To me this matches the eye test, because I felt Ceci was kind of alone as a D that was lost in our end most of the night. Most of our D looked like wizards shutting down plays, but Ceci really didnt. I know I am not the biggest Ceci fan :)

We survived though. I still would not expect our game plan last night to cut it against a team like the Avs or Vegas, or even the Canucks. but It was good enough against LA. The ice was total trash too, which worked to our advantage favoring defense.

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 08:58]

"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

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 10:14

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:55 RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49 Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42 Hot damn Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well. Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt? In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots. So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against. So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against. I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD. The matchups were actually the opposite of that. Bouch and Ek were mostly against kopitars line and gave up 1 high danger chance. Ceci and Nurse gave up 8 high danger chances against the Danault line. I'm not sure what the spotlogiq data excludes to reduce LA's high danger chances from 14 (based just on shot location/timing data), to 4, but just going by shot locations, the nurse/Ceci pair was on for 11 out of LA's 14 high danger shot attempts. To me this matches the eye test, because I felt Ceci was kind of alone as a D that was lost in our end most of the night. Most of our D looked like wizards shutting down plays, but Ceci really didnt. I know I am not the biggest Ceci fan :) We survived though. I still would not expect our game plan last night to cut it against a team like the Avs or Vegas, or even the Canucks. but It was good enough against LA. The ice was total trash too, which worked to our advantage favoring defense. Your comment at the end of your 3rd paragraph in my opinion will skew someone's perception of the game. You don't like Ceci so unless he plays perfect, you will find fault in his game. Which isn't meant as a shot. Most people have players they don't care for on their teams. When I watched the game, the Kings didn't get a lot of quality looks even when Ceci was on the ice.

Your Ceci comment history suggests biased viewing as well :)

So, maybe stats can fill the gap.

The real test comes in the next rounds in any case. LA are just a warmup round for these playoffs.

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 10:24]

"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

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 11:08]

"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

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

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

"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

"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

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 23:03]