Habitforming Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Komisarek is back with the Bulldogs....practising at least. They figure he is still 2 weeks away from his debut. He would bolster the blueline bigtime....I can't wait to see it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Originally posted by HabitformingKomisarek is back with the Bulldogs....practising at least. They figure he is still 2 weeks away from his debut. He would bolster the blueline bigtime....I can't wait to see it! Its will be interesting to see if the Dogs can make the playoffs. The additions of Begin/Komisarek will help alot. But it'll still be close, at least the team is on a roll right now... The Dogs really lost alot of talent from last year... Gratton/Perezhogin/Hossa/Balej/Beauchemin/etc ... yikes! Not to mention that we have 2 really young goalies on the 04-05 team, and one of them is horrible (Ellis).. The dogs are also one of the youngest teams in the AHL this season. When you consider this, the Dogs 04-05 season looks better. Maybe the fans expect to much out of the dogs and Jarvis? Then again, its always good to have high expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beckham Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Bulldogs must at least be the league average in age. I would think they are more likely to be one of the older teams than one of the younger teams. Their goalies are 24 or 25. Not exactly spring chickens by AHL standards. You will have to find another excuse for the team's crappy record. Oh, and there isn't much difference in the stats of Danis and Ellis, so don't use that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamBulldogs must at least be the league average in age. I would think they are more likely to be one of the older teams than one of the younger teams. Their goalies are 24 or 25. Not exactly spring chickens by AHL standards. You will have to find another excuse for the team's crappy record. Oh, and there isn't much difference in the stats of Danis and Ellis, so don't use that. No, they are one of the youngest teams in the AHL. I read/heard/saw it from a good source somewhere, I forget where right now. But hey, dont beleive me if you want. And Danis/Ellis have a big different in records. Danis: 16-11 (5 SO loses) .. 2.43 , .923 Ellis: 7-17 (1 so loss) ... 2.73 , .908 I dont know what a "big difference" is to you. But that looks like a huge difference to me. Danis is 5 games over 500, while Ellis is 10 games under it. Its obvious that Danis is making the big saves at the right times and helping his team win (okay.... he does get a bit more goal support) . Danis also has a .30 advantage in GAA, thats hardly nothing, either is a .15 advantage in Save percentage. Its not like we're talking a .01 difference in stats here, the difference is significant. [Edited on 2005-2-25 by puck7x] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beckham Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 I checked their average age against the Leaf's and the Sen's farm team. They are exactly the same as the Baby Leafs and older (by nearly a year on average) than the Baby Sens. Can't be bothered to check the whole league, but I'm skeptical based on that. As for Danis and Ellis, no I really don't see such a huge difference. On any given night either one could be great or stink. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakiqc Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by Fanpuck33 Finally, I just did the math, and with the addition of Begin the average age of the team is just over 23. Only 6 players are 26 or older: Begin(26), Ward(26), Morgan(28), Focht(27), Carpentier(26) and Plante(26) ---------- And as Dan pointed it out, Focht is out so it makes the team even younger. The thing is not to excuse the struggles of Hamilton this year, but to point the fact that the team and the players are learning and progressing. We have to be patient. I'd like to see Kostitsyn scores more, still I have to be satisfied with around half a point per game since the WJC. Begin will surely help the younger players with his great attitude. Komisarek as well, I see him as a positive influence.. we'll see!:ghg: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by sakiqcOriginally posted by Fanpuck33 Finally, I just did the math, and with the addition of Begin the average age of the team is just over 23. Only 6 players are 26 or older: Begin(26), Ward(26), Morgan(28), Focht(27), Carpentier(26) and Plante(26) ---------- Its not just that either... The fact that the leaders of the team are young matters alot. Plekanec, Higgins, Ott, Hainsey, Daley, ... all young guys. The only "old" leader is Ward, and maybe morgan I guess. Teams like the baby Sens and leafs have older-leaders, guys David Ling, Denis Hamel, JS Aubin, Pothier, Perrott, etc. [Edited on 2005-2-25 by puck7x] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beckham Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Myehhh...the top scorers on the other teams are both younger than Plekanec. Aren't Morgan, Begin, and Ward supposed to be the "leaders" in Hamilton? That is what everyone here has been touting them as. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamMyehhh...the top scorers on the other teams are both younger than Plekanec. Aren't Morgan, Begin, and Ward supposed to be the "leaders" in Hamilton? That is what everyone here has been touting them as. Yeah... Thats why I mentioned Ward/Morgan Begin is not applicable. We're talking about the Dogs 04-05 season to-date arent we? , and our expectations for the team? Begin hasnt played yet. [Edited on 2005-2-25 by puck7x] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beckham Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by puck7x Originally posted by sakiqcOriginally posted by Fanpuck33 Finally, I just did the math, and with the addition of Begin the average age of the team is just over 23. Only 6 players are 26 or older: Begin(26), Ward(26), Morgan(28), Focht(27), Carpentier(26) and Plante(26) ---------- [Edited on 2005-2-25 by puck7x] It is closer to 24 than 23 with the players currently on the rostor. The point is not how old the team is but how old in relation to all the other teams in the league. If you check them all out, the Bulldogs fall somewhere in the middle. So you can't delude yourselves about how well they would do if they weren't such a "young" team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamIt is closer to 24 than 23 with the players currently on the rostor. The point is not how old the team is but how old in relation to all the other teams in the league. If you check them all out, the Bulldogs fall somewhere in the middle. So you can't delude yourselves about how well they would do if they weren't such a "young" team. Delude? lol. Listen, I'd do the math, but its a waste of effort and time to figure out the average age for 28 teams (Accurately) , you'd argue the results anyways. The Dogs are one of the youngest inexperienced teams in the league, its a fact. Beleive it or not. no point continuing this... [Edited on 2005-2-25 by puck7x] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamIt is closer to 24 than 23 with the players currently on the rostor. The point is not how old the team is but how old in relation to all the other teams in the league. If you check them all out, the Bulldogs fall somewhere in the middle. So you can't delude yourselves about how well they would do if they weren't such a "young" team. You must be counting wrong, because I did the calculations myself, and replacing Focht with Begin just brings the age down some more. You must not be taking into account that most players haven't turned their next age yet, since most birthdays haven't happened yet this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montreal Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamBulldogs must at least be the league average in age. I would think they are more likely to be one of the older teams than one of the younger teams. Their goalies are 24 or 25. Not exactly spring chickens by AHL standards. You will have to find another excuse for the team's crappy record. Oh, and there isn't much difference in the stats of Danis and Ellis, so don't use that. Thanks for the laugh. How many games have you seen? Cause there's no way Ellis is near the level of Danis. Ellis looks more like a ECHL level goalie out there. His rebound control is brutal, and he is known for letting in his fair share of soft goals. Danis has had some bad nights, but most of the time he is very good, if it wasn't for Danis this team would likely be in last place in the league as Ellis has struggled mightly. Even their stats show a big difference, but it's not about stats, just watch them play. As for the age thing, well again what the hell are you talking about? Lets use some common sense. Goalies- 23 and 24 years old but both are rookies in the AHL. Ave age 23.5 Defense- 11 guys have played defense, from ages 27 (although he only played in 26 games) to 20 (although he's only played in 19 games) . Here's all the ages. 21, 22, 21, 23, 23, 23, 26, 22, 20, 24, 27. Add them all up you get 252. Ave age 22.909 or 23. Forwards- 15 guys have played forward not including Urquhart's one game. Ages 22, 21, 22, 20, 26, 28, 22, 20, 23, 22, 20, 26, 26, 22, 24. Add them you get 344. Ave age 22.933 or 23. Now some common sense. The goalies age might be 23/24 but they are rookies with little AHL experience, which should be taken into consideration. The defense has used 11 guys, but Focht-age 27 played in only 26 games, Shasby age 24 played only 11 games, and Sanford age 20 played only 19 games. That drops the average to 22.625 The forwards have used 15 guys but Larrivee- age 22 has played in only 9 games, Miettinen- age 24 has played in only 11 games. Then you have Carpentier and Ivanans who are both 26, but play on the 4th line in very limited duty. Take them out the average drops to 22.3636. When you consider that most AHLers don't make the jump until they are 20 or older (since 18-19 year olds are rare) well anyone can see we have a young team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beckham Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 The issue is how "old" they are in relation to the league. That is what bothers me, everyone seems to operate under the illusion that the Bulldogs are made up of teenagers while the rest of the league is in their 30s or something. Not true. I'd be willing to bet that there are as many teams that are younger on average in the AHL as compared to the Bulldogs than older. Stop using that as a reason for their lack of success, because it isn't valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 I for one wasn't using it an an excuse, I was just pointing out your error about the team's age. The reason they are struggling is because they have very poor D and two inexperienced goalies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck7x Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamThe issue is how "old" they are in relation to the league. That is what bothers me, everyone seems to operate under the illusion that the Bulldogs are made up of teenagers while the rest of the league is in their 30s or something. Not true. I'd be willing to bet that there are as many teams that are younger on average in the AHL as compared to the Bulldogs than older. Stop using that as a reason for their lack of success, because it isn't valid. Excuse? No All I said is that the dogs are doing okay this year when compared to last year and the talent they had. Its not an excuse, its a fact... the team lost alot of talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montreal Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by beckhamThe issue is how "old" they are in relation to the league. That is what bothers me, everyone seems to operate under the illusion that the Bulldogs are made up of teenagers while the rest of the league is in their 30s or something. Not true. I'd be willing to bet that there are as many teams that are younger on average in the AHL as compared to the Bulldogs than older. Stop using that as a reason for their lack of success, because it isn't valid. No one things the Bulldogs are made up of teenagers since no one that follows AHL hockey would think any team would be made up of teenagers since almost the entire league is made up of guys over 20 years old. Show me any team in the AHL with an average age under 22. 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.