EMB
Randall Weber
Posts: 4,069
|
Post by EMB on Jan 17, 2016 22:57:32 GMT
Lets just hope somebody else wants the Panthers job next year ! Who would want to work for NB & GM? That's why they backtracked this year isn't it? You can see why the majority of the imports don't come back & the Brits just learn to live with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2016 22:59:47 GMT
Can you explain why he has changed the lines throughout the entire season PM66? Has it benefited us at all?
|
|
|
Post by pantherman66 on Jan 17, 2016 23:08:49 GMT
Baghera, that was my opinion. I don't have one on the game as I didn't see it, only the highlights. It seems I cannot give my opinion on here unless it conforms to the Corey detractors. As you have said yourself, nobody knows if the line changes affected the result, so why does it make certain people so angry when the lines are changed by the coach? What I do know is that if Madolora hadn't made the two howlers, we would have won the game, never mind the 'no goal' fiasco. I was not 'trolling' or criticising anyone, just asking why Corey was getting blamed/flak for something that was not a proven reason for losing the game.
|
|
|
Post by pantherman66 on Jan 17, 2016 23:12:46 GMT
I cannot explain why he changed the lines, I do not know enough about hockey. Who knows if it has benefited us at all, unless we replayed all the games again with the same lines would we know the answer to that poseur.
|
|
|
Post by NotMartinTuma on Jan 17, 2016 23:15:32 GMT
We took your mates from down the road to the cleaners tonight, and to be honest they couldn't live with us, there not a patch on your team. If you can watch the fight Batch v Fitzgerald it's a cracker, awesome to see a Brit easily drawing with this idiot, he even speared a Devils fan when coming off the ice. Good showing by Batch, always liked him. Re Fitz spearing the fan, massive ban should be on his way. You might have spanked Sheff but they are a good team, just yours is so much better, I thinks its the Devils title to lose, would be a nice reward for your lot that stuck by the team in the bleaker times.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Jan 17, 2016 23:28:58 GMT
You dont know if Madolora hadn't made the mistakes we would have won. 1 thing happens differently and the whole course of the game changes. Again Not blaming Coreys tactics for the loss. Just a side note to what I have said earlier in the thread "that I thought we were unlucky and at least deserved a point"
Hes getting flak because its a tactic that he has applied during a time where by enlarge our form has been very poor. Its also a tactic no other top line coach around the world implements. And also which his own players show frustration at. You don't need to be an expert to see it hinders the team.
Thats my point your opinion is on other peoples opinions rather than the team or game. Which you at least partly shared this time.
|
|
|
Post by pantherman66 on Jan 17, 2016 23:29:23 GMT
Just wondered why my post replying to Bagheera was edited.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,625
Member is Online
|
Post by Yotes on Jan 17, 2016 23:33:38 GMT
To remove the insult you aimed at another poster.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2016 23:54:46 GMT
I cannot explain why he changed the lines, I do not know enough about hockey. Who knows if it has benefited us at all, unless we replayed all the games again with the same lines would we know the answer to that poseur. There are posters on here who do know about hockey. They are all saying that constantly changing the lines isn't helping one bit.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Jan 18, 2016 0:08:14 GMT
Il try a different angle as you've just stated you don't know enough about hockey. Forgive me if this sounds patronising. Just aiming it at a level your previous post leads me to.
Firstly, line combinations is one of the most fundamental parts of any hockey team. If you watch NHL games on TV you will here plenty of talk of "line combinations". Most coaches pick 3 players that compliment each other to achieve a goal(usually a goal). But sometimes a shut down line. Usually a 4th line aimed at shutting the oppositions offence down, often putting energy into the team, And if they score its a bonus. When he finds something he likes he sticks with it. Often through a season where possible. If a coach doesn't like what he sees he will tweek the lines occasionally. Ocasionally being the important word.
I could still tell you the lines from the championship season if I tried(this is why it's so frustrating. The last time he stuck with it we won the league).
Secondly I'll use a football analogy. Managers often get critisised for being "Tinker Men" because they change 1 or 2 players every game. This is in an outfield team of 10(Back 4 etc). They get critisised because it is seen as disrupting team chemistry & understanding.
In hockey your forward lines are obviously only 3 players. To change this not only game to game, but in game makes it incredibally tough for just 3 players to know exactly what each others role is every time they go out, and have any chemistry.
On to the weekend and why I raise the issue again. Imagine your Moran & Kolnik. 2 skilled players sent out to score goals. 1 night your playing with David Ling, an incredibly skilled guy who has great hands. Can put thet puck on a plate for you and score goals. The next night David Ling becomes Cam Janssen. A guy at the opposite end of the hockey spectrum. Will create turn overs and get stuck into the corners. This means 9/10 you've got to stay close to him to pick up the lose puck. A very different game 2 nights apart. From Cams perspective. 1 night your on the 4th Grind line. Throwng weight around and hard forechecking. The next your on with 2 skill guys and feel the responsibility to play hockey and contribute offensively without the same skills as the other guys who are out there for that reason. Those examples are just game to game. Imagine how you do that shift to shift. Pretty dammed difficult. Hockey expert or not. Most high performing teams rely on chemistry throughout. As a whole team and in units.
|
|
|
Post by dgardner on Jan 18, 2016 2:16:57 GMT
Here are the highlights. Their first clearly didn't cross the line. First - 100% didn't go in. Second - going wide and gloved in by Madolora who should stop those all night. Third - hits Roy's foot, wrong foots Madalora, puck lands on Roy's tape and he finishes. Fourth - Horrible deflection off Mosey in front. Fifth - Madalora would want back. Straight through the five hole despite getting a good view of it. At the risk of sounding like a post match CN interview, lady luck didn't smile on us last night and certainly did smile on them. Madalora would want 2 and 5 back too. Fine margins and all that. wasnt there but on the highlights it looks like ferraras goal was misshit and with it being a one timer madalora thought it was coming alot faster, would still want it back but just another bit of steeler luck as usual. Think all there goals had an element of luck in bar there 5th which was just a well hit shot where madalora couldnt get set quick enough. Leagues not over yet but think we now rely too heavily on other results, but win our games in hand and cardiff have a 0 point weekend and we are still well within a shout.
|
|
|
Post by dgardner on Jan 18, 2016 2:22:31 GMT
Il try a different angle as you've just stated you don't know enough about hockey. Forgive me if this sounds patronising. Just aiming it at a level your previous post leads me to. Firstly, line combinations is one of the most fundamental parts of any hockey team. If you watch NHL games on TV you will here plenty of talk of "line combinations". Most coaches pick 3 players that compliment each other to achieve a goal(usually a goal). But sometimes a shut down line. Usually a 4th line aimed at shutting the oppositions offence down, often putting energy into the team, And if they score its a bonus. When he finds something he likes he sticks with it. Often through a season where possible. If a coach doesn't like what he sees he will tweek the lines occasionally. Ocasionally being the important word. I could still tell you the lines from the championship season if I tried(this is why it's so frustrating. The last time he stuck with it we won the league). Secondly I'll use a football analogy. Managers often get critisised for being "Tinker Men" because they change 1 or 2 players every game. This is in an outfield team of 10(Back 4 etc). They get critisised because it is seen as disrupting team chemistry & understanding. In hockey your forward lines are obviously only 3 players. To change this not only game to game, but in game makes it incredibally tough for just 3 players to know exactly what each others role is every time they go out, and have any chemistry. On to the weekend and why I raise the issue again. Imagine your Moran & Kolnik. 2 skilled players sent out to score goals. 1 night your playing with David Ling, an incredibly skilled guy who has great hands. Can put thet puck on a plate for you and score goals. The next night David Ling becomes Cam Janssen. A guy at the opposite end of the hockey spectrum. Will create turn overs and get stuck into the corners. This means 9/10 you've got to stay close to him to pick up the lose puck. A very different game 2 nights apart. From Cams perspective. 1 night your on the 4th Grind line. Throwng weight around and hard forechecking. The next your on with 2 skill guys and feel the responsibility to play hockey and contribute offensively without the same skills as the other guys who are out there for that reason. Those examples are just game to game. Imagine how you do that shift to shift. Pretty dammed difficult. Hockey expert or not. Most high performing teams rely on chemistry throughout. As a whole team and in units. in coreys interview afterwards he said that they tried to play a very attacking game, therefore but putting janssen on that line you giving it more forecheck. Im not saying i agree with it but i can see why he does that, i persoannly think moran and kolnik should be with clarke and then ling should be with lawrence and farmer as that worked better but just my humble opinion
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Jan 18, 2016 8:16:59 GMT
I agree on that dgardner. Think I posted something similar in Belfast thread. For me Kolnik Moran Ling has a lot of skill but having Clarke and Lawerence with Farmer lacks an assist guy. Swapping Ling & Clarke looks more balanced without taking much away. I don't have an issue with reasons for lines. I understand why he might want to use Cam on that line(I dont think its the best option). Just don't like that it was different again.
For now I 'd just be happy to see settled lines. It'd then be a lot easier to see what lines actually work.
|
|
Dan
Forum Admin
Boss
Posts: 5,891
|
Post by Dan on Jan 18, 2016 8:56:35 GMT
Not even nearly over the line, what an absolute shambles by the referee. If not conclusive, the defending side should always get the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Jan 18, 2016 13:07:25 GMT
Not even nearly over the line, what an absolute shambles by the referee. If not conclusive, the defending side should always get the benefit of the doubt. Yet there will still plenty of Steelers fans on Social Media yesterday, swearing blind that the puck definitely went in! Bad eyesight? Sheer stupidity? Very high level of bias? All 3?
|
|
Dan
Forum Admin
Boss
Posts: 5,891
|
Post by Dan on Jan 18, 2016 13:18:31 GMT
Bias is understandable, we've all been there at some point. There's no argument that that went in though...
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Jan 18, 2016 13:28:08 GMT
Bias is understandable, we've all been there at some point. There's no argument that that went in though... Bias in the heat of moment = definitely been there! Bias a day after, when you've won and the evidence is as clear as night follows day, bizarre
|
|
|
Post by shmyrohdear on Jan 18, 2016 20:20:03 GMT
I agree on that dgardner. Think I posted something similar in Belfast thread. For me Kolnik Moran Ling has a lot of skill but having Clarke and Lawerence with Farmer lacks an assist guy. Swapping Ling & Clarke looks more balanced without taking much away. I don't have an issue with reasons for lines. I understand why he might want to use Cam on that line(I dont think its the best option). Just don't like that it was different again. For now I 'd just be happy to see settled lines. It'd then be a lot easier to see what lines actually work. I'd rather Lawrence be with Moran and Kolnik, gives a lot of work and those two would be perfect at giving that perfect set up for Larry. We're only rolling three lines atm so Moran, Myers, McMillan as the three centers and balance the lines with the wingers.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Jan 18, 2016 21:29:37 GMT
I dont mind that combination actually but think Lawerence wins more face offs than any of the other centre on the team at minute.
Happy to be proved wrong but fairly sure we rolled 4 lines. The combinations I saw Friday were.
Kolnik Moran Ling
Farmer Lawerence Clarke
Schultz Bohmbach Lacho
McMillan Myers Janssen.
Janssen & Ling swapped on Saturday.
|
|