2022-23 NHL Discussion Thread

[hockeyrealist]

13 hours ago, Helmethead said:

Anyone watching this junk???

 

It might be the worst thing I’ve ever witnessed. 

You must mean the “skills” competition?

 

OMG watching that is torture, I tried a few times and couldn’t keep it on for more than a couple minutes.

I was not surprised by the female “players” (I use quotes b/c they are not part of NHL, are they part of the same Players Association or something?) but I can think of dozens of NHL’ers who deserved to be there more.

The Sara Nurse “goal” was pathetic, Shesterkin (I think) looked like I do when letting my kid when 5 years old score on me while attempting to make it look like I tried.   That was sickening, imo took female hokey back a step.  So sick of the networks, league shoving female hockey down our throats.   
If there were a bigger market for them, they’d know it. This push marketing style has been out of fashion since the 80’s and has shown to have the opposite effect of what is desired, as in it turns people off.   Such short sighted, simplistic mindset that they think shoving women onto every broadcast is going to make women's hockey profitable.

 

Most of the events were garbage, they messed up a decent thing. The old fixing a problem that didn’t exist b/c I recall skills compétions being quite exciting and entertaining when it was the basic core skills, a stars wanted to shine with skill more than gimmicks.

Just a money grab now.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

14 hours ago, Helmethead said:

Anyone watching this junk???

 

It might be the worst thing I’ve ever witnessed. 

 

Didn't watch it.  I lost interest in the all star game a long time ago.  It seems like a waste of time to me. 

[Habsfan89]

14 hours ago, Helmethead said:

Anyone watching this junk???

 

It might be the worst thing I’ve ever witnessed. 

I haven't watched the skills competition since they change it a few years back . Use to be my favorite to watch. But now it a carny show.  Miss my 90's hockey. 

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, DON said:

I thought the argument against longer OTs, was that they would get too tired to play longer, not compensation as much.

 

With the way NHL/NHLPA CBA negotiations go, the players aren't giving up anything without asking for something in return for the owners.... and with the way things have gone since 2004, I don't blame them one bit. 

[Commandant]

As for the ASG/Skills Comp.

 

Was it really better, or was it just something that was new to us.  I think its lost lustre when you have seen it all 10 times or more.  Its glorified practice now. 

 

We are all pretty hardcore hockey fans, i mean we post on a message board and discuss each and every game. 

 

The thing is the ASG/Skills Comp isn't made for us.  It's made for kids, and getting new fans into the sport. 

[Habsfan89]

13 minutes ago, Commandant said:

As for the ASG/Skills Comp.

 

Was it really better, or was it just something that was new to us.  I think its lost lustre when you have seen it all 10 times or more.  Its glorified practice now. 

 

We are all pretty hardcore hockey fans, i mean we post on a message board and discuss each and every game. 

 

The thing is the ASG/Skills Comp isn't made for us.  It's made for kids, and getting new fans into the sport. 

Always thought all star game should be an outdoor event. 

[revvvrob]

I remember loving Howie Meeker’s Showdown. 
 

Unless I’m just being nostalgic, I would prefer that model for the skills competition. 

[sbhatt]

It's always so half-assed...the NHL never fails to display that it's just barely one of the 'major' sports whenever it puts on an event.  Poor production values, D-list celebrities judging, D-list music acts....every single time.  They'd be further ahead to streamline the production and stick to the actual skill events, and make them ultra-competitive.

[Commandant]

We complain about the NHL... but really all allstar games are shit.  NbA is a joke and so is the pro bowl.  MLB is the best of the bunch but the HR contest is boring and thr gsme isnt as good as 20 years ago either.

 

This happens in every sport, the older you are and more you pay attention, the more boring thr ASG becomes. 

[DON]

I dont mind NBA all-star games, but not a NBA fan.

Dont think i have watched a NHL, MLB or Pro-bowl all-star game in 30+ years (even that gong-show one with Kovalev and other Habs voted in, in centennial year i think it was).

[Plutarch]

17 hours ago, tomh009 said:

xGF% is pretty much even between the two on naturalstattrick.com. Which site were you using for your stats? Everyone has a somewhat different algorithm.

Hockey reference I believe

[DON]

 

https://www.habsworld.net/2023/02/2022-23-habsworld-prospect-rankings-41-47/

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, DON said:

https://www.habsworld.net/2023/02/2022-23-habsworld-prospect-rankings-41-47/

A super deep prospect pool. And a good indicator of the depth is that even mid-ranked prospects (Clague, Brook, Stapley) can end up being released -- although Stapley subsequently signed an AHL contract with the Rocket.

 

Looking forward to the full series of Brian's evaluation articles!

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

On 2/4/2023 at 7:51 AM, hockeyrealist said:

You must mean the “skills” competition?

 

OMG watching that is torture, I tried a few times and couldn’t keep it on for more than a couple minutes.

I was not surprised by the female “players” (I use quotes b/c they are not part of NHL, are they part of the same Players Association or something?) but I can think of dozens of NHL’ers who deserved to be there more.

The Sara Nurse “goal” was pathetic, Shesterkin (I think) looked like I do when letting my kid when 5 years old score on me while attempting to make it look like I tried.   That was sickening, imo took female hokey back a step.  So sick of the networks, league shoving female hockey down our throats.   
If there were a bigger market for them, they’d know it. This push marketing style has been out of fashion since the 80’s and has shown to have the opposite effect of what is desired, as in it turns people off.   Such short sighted, simplistic mindset that they think shoving women onto every broadcast is going to make women's hockey profitable.

 

Most of the events were garbage, they messed up a decent thing. The old fixing a problem that didn’t exist b/c I recall skills compétions being quite exciting and entertaining when it was the basic core skills, a stars wanted to shine with skill more than gimmicks.

Just a money grab now.

 

I don’t watch any of this stuff. Saves a lot of aggravation.

 

Regarding women’s hockey, I’ve long nursed a suspicion that the skills gap between the best women and the best men is quite abyssal. (I recall an episode of Amazing Race Canada a few years back where completely amateur pairings of men clobbered professional women’s hockey players in a skill-based, hockey-related challenge). But it’s a chicken and the egg thing. We all want women’s hockey to grow and develop. Does that happen better if we give it a platform and treat it like a big deal even if it isn’t? Or do we take a laissez-faire approach and say, ‘when it gets big enough, we’ll pay attention?’ 

 

Since I think these things need to be nurtured and supported in order to flourish, I’m fine with the sort of gimmickry that includes a few women players at the All Star competition, even if they are equivalent to Junior B male players.

[BCHabnut]

I was young, so maybe it's selective memory, but It seems to me, that the early 80s Campbell vs Wales game was pretty competitive. This just seems like a waste of time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Commandant]

3 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I don’t watch any of this stuff. Saves a lot of aggravation.

 

Regarding women’s hockey, I’ve long nursed a suspicion that the skills gap between the best women and the best men is quite abyssal. (I recall an episode of Amazing Race Canada a few years back where completely amateur pairings of men clobbered professional women’s hockey players in a skill-based, hockey-related challenge). But it’s a chicken and the egg thing. We all want women’s hockey to grow and develop. Does that happen better if we give it a platform and treat it like a big deal even if it isn’t? Or do we take a laissez-faire approach and say, ‘when it gets big enough, we’ll pay attention?’ 

 

Since I think these things need to be nurtured and supported in order to flourish, I’m fine with the sort of gimmickry that includes a few women players at the All Star competition, even if they are equivalent to Junior B male players.

 

There is a major gap between women's and men's sprinters. 

There is a major gap between women's and men's swimmers, speed skaters, and a ton of other sports. 

 

Men just have a physiological advantage. 

We accept it in solo olympic sports and accept that the women are still the best athletes in the world at what they do, but the moment it becomes hockey or basketball or soccer or some team sport, we have issues with them being below the men in size, strength, etc....  I've never understood why we do this for team sports.

[Prime Minister Koivu]

5 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

There is a major gap between women's and men's sprinters. 

There is a major gap between women's and men's swimmers, speed skaters, and a ton of other sports. 

 

Men just have a physiological advantage. 

We accept it in solo olympic sports and accept that the women are still the best athletes in the world at what they do, but the moment it becomes hockey or basketball or soccer or some team sport, we have issues with them being below the men in size, strength, etc....  I've never understood why we do this for team sports.

I don’t understand why women’s hockey does not allow body checking.
 

It is a huge component to the game and it changes playoff series. Some games become chess matches because of it. It brings meaning and importance to the dance between big forwards vs. the smaller puck moving Dman for example. 
 

The physical part of hockey is a big deal to the game and women’s hockey isn’t the same. 

[GHT120]

<< On prêche que le hockey est pour tout le monde, mais l’est-il vraiment ? Les actions des Rangers et de Provorov montrent qu’il y a beaucoup de choses qui se passent derrière les portes closes et qui font en sorte que l’acceptation, dans le hockey, n’est pas pour tout le monde. >>

- Jordan Harris (La Presse)

 

It took guts for a young player like Jordan Harris to say:

We preach that hockey is for everyone, but is it really? The actions of the Rangers and Provorov show that there is a lot going on behind closed doors that make acceptance in hockey not for everyone.

 

Good for him to express his opinion.

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

34 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

There is a major gap between women's and men's sprinters. 

There is a major gap between women's and men's swimmers, speed skaters, and a ton of other sports. 

 

Men just have a physiological advantage. 

We accept it in solo olympic sports and accept that the women are still the best athletes in the world at what they do, but the moment it becomes hockey or basketball or soccer or some team sport, we have issues with them being below the men in size, strength, etc....  I've never understood why we do this for team sports.

 

Even weirder is that in sports where the physiological distinction matters relatively little - e.g., curling, or arguably golf or in some respects baseball - the gender division is nevertheless rigorously maintained. 

[Commandant]

11 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Even weirder is that in sports where the physiological distinction matters relatively little - e.g., curling, or arguably golf or in some respects baseball - the gender division is nevertheless rigorously maintained. 

 

The stones in curling are heavier and how hard you throw them equates to some of the takeouts and multi stone combos thrown.  it makes sense.

 

Golf, the men hit the ball farther, it makes sense. 

 

Baseball as well, stronger players who throw harder, run faster, hit farther and harder. 

I'm fine with the divisions between men and women, but still enjoy the women's version of the sport and realize that being a top 10 woman in the world at a sport is just as hard as being a top 10 man, even if he raw results are different.  Its all relative to competition. 

[GHT120]

11 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

The stones in curling are heavier and how hard you throw them equates to some of the takeouts and multi stone combos thrown.  it makes sense.

 

Golf, the men hit the ball farther, it makes sense. 

 

Baseball as well, stronger players who throw harder, run faster, hit farther and harder. 

I'm fine with the divisions between men and women, but still enjoy the women's version of the sport and realize that being a top 10 woman in the world at a sport is just as hard as being a top 10 man, even if he raw results are different.  Its all relative to competition. 

Well said

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

On 1/31/2023 at 9:06 AM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Allvin the Chipmunk - LOL.

 

The Miller-over-Horvat decision looks absolutely terrible in retrospect. In fairness to these boobs, however, I think they assumed Horvat would be signable as a 60-point C. Instead he exploded into a 50-goal pace during his contract year. They weren’t banking on his having a crazy outlier season and expecting to get paid accordingly, and that’s why he’s no longer a Canuck.

 

Further to this, I don’t believe Horvat is going to get paid according to his career norms. Like every other guy who has an aberrant contract year (see Gomez, Scott), he will get paid according to his production during that one season. All it takes is one idiot GM with cap space. So think, what, 8.5, 9 mil, something like that.

 

Aaaand, 8.5 mil for 8 for Horvat.

[tomh009]

17 hours ago, Commandant said:

The stones in curling are heavier and how hard you throw them equates to some of the takeouts and multi stone combos thrown.  it makes sense.

I think the difference in curling is actually primarily with the men's ability to sweep harder. But, yes, I agree with your sentiments 100%.

[GHT120]

6 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

I think the difference in curling is actually primarily with the men's ability to sweep harder. But, yes, I agree with your sentiments 100%.

There is also the "leg drive" strength for takeouts.

[DON]

I think you could come up with many logical reasons women could never ever compete with men in many (vast majority?) of sports.

Be same as expecting an OHL team to be competitive vs a NHL team, just silly. Not biased or chauvinistic, just a fact.