mll Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 18 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said: I could be wrong here but I think it depends on the situation. If the new goalie comes in in a tie game, the second goalie gets the W or L. If a goalie comes in while losing and his team ends up winning, that second goalie will get the W. If the replacement comes in while winning I think it depends on minutes played. It can also be dependent on goals scored while he’s in, i.e.: he comes in while winning 3-2 but wins 5-4 after surrendinf the lead, the W will belong to the second goalie. Whichever goalie is on the ice for the game winning goal gets credited with the W or L. If it's on an empty net it's the last goalie on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted December 18, 2018 Share Posted December 18, 2018 5 minutes ago, theo5789 said: I believe it's dependant on when the winning goal is scored. So if a goalie comes in when they're down 5-1 and still end up losing 5-4, the first goalie let in the winning goal and takes the loss. Or in the same situation if they end up losing 6-5, then the second goalie gets the loss because the game winner was let in by the second goalie. But if they come back from being down 5-1 and win 6-5, then the second goalie gets the win as the eventual winner is scored when the second goalie was in. 4 minutes ago, mll said: Whichever goalie is on the ice for the game winning goal gets credited with the W or L. If it's on an empty net it's the last goalie on the ice. That’s kinda what I was getting at. It’s essentially the same as baseball I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted December 19, 2018 Share Posted December 19, 2018 What are the rules for an emergency call up from junior hockey? If the team in the Ahl has only enough players to cover its own positions? Anyone know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted December 20, 2018 Share Posted December 20, 2018 Capfriendly on top of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where's Wellwood Posted December 20, 2018 Author Share Posted December 20, 2018 On 9/9/2018 at 9:31 AM, gurn said: Any skater can take a face off, centers get "tossed out" of the circle a lot and any winger can take his place. Also one game Kevin Bieksa took a face off to save a rookie center from getting into a fight off the drop of a puck. I do not know if the goalie can take a face off, but even if he is "allowed " to it would be a poor choice as his stick would be terrible for a draw and after losing, the puck would end up in his empty net. Did Bieksa win the faceoff he took for Kellan Lain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cramarossa Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 On 12/20/2018 at 12:20 AM, Where's Wellwood said: Did Bieksa win the faceoff he took for Kellan Lain? Yes, although he didn't have to put in much effort to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 No points tonight for rookie of the year "candidates" Dahlin, Tkachuk, and White. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milk and honey Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 any news on how time zones affect players? west coast teams shouldn't be to affected but I imagine for east coast traveling out to the west is a bigger distance and playing a hockey game at 10pm in their body clock compared to 7pm for us is tougher. anyone know when do hockey players go to bed and wake up? I imagine the team eats after games which is after the media time and then head back to the hotel/homes so thinking it will be 1ish and thats with no partying. Special precautions taken in las vegas I imagine but on other hand that might be a city where the team is like hey boys go have a night out enjoy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead80 Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 What is with this scheduling? No games tomorrow? League just had the all-star break. Seemed like half the league had extra time off and another day with no games? Did the players negotiate this into the last CBA so they could all stay up late to drink and party during the Super Bowl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 15 minutes ago, canucklehead80 said: What is with this scheduling? No games tomorrow? League just had the all-star break. Seemed like half the league had extra time off and another day with no games? Did the players negotiate this into the last CBA so they could all stay up late to drink and party during the Super Bowl? There are four games tomorrow (Feb. 4th). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead80 Posted February 3, 2019 Share Posted February 3, 2019 8 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: There are four games tomorrow (Feb. 4th). Haha, got my dates messed up. Apparently I can’t read properly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfreako Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Why don't shootout goals count towards a player's individual goal total? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 19, 2019 Share Posted February 19, 2019 On 2/11/2019 at 4:54 AM, kingfreako said: Why don't shootout goals count towards a player's individual goal total? They aren't gathered very similarly to regular goals. They're far easier to score and have no team involvement. Just speculation on my part as I don't know the official answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackofwind Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Did anyone else hear Sam Gagner's speech in the Edm-Ari game after the first period where he talked about overcoming adversity and it (McDavid being out sick) being a great opportunity to step up and grow? Could the man be a bigger hypocrite? He wouldn't know about stepping up to the plate if his dinner was on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepe Silvia Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 Shower thought here: Is it possible to make a contract "expansion proof"? Let's say the Canucks want to protect Demko and are planning on extending Markstrom after the 2019-2020 season. Is it possible to sign to him a contract that will pay most of his salary the year after the expansion? For example, the Canucks sign Markstrom to a 2 year, $13m contract. Could they structure it in a way that Markstrom would make $1m in year one, then $12m in year 2? Reason being, if Seattle did want to take him, they'd be essentially paying Markstrom $12m per season. Obviously these numbers aren't accurate, and I'm not saying this would be a good move. Just wondering if this theory is possible and could work with other players reaching UFA/RFA after next season. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyBoy44 Posted March 20, 2019 Share Posted March 20, 2019 39 minutes ago, Pepe Silvia said: Shower thought here: Is it possible to make a contract "expansion proof"? Let's say the Canucks want to protect Demko and are planning on extending Markstrom after the 2019-2020 season. Is it possible to sign to him a contract that will pay most of his salary the year after the expansion? For example, the Canucks sign Markstrom to a 2 year, $13m contract. Could they structure it in a way that Markstrom would make $1m in year one, then $12m in year 2? Reason being, if Seattle did want to take him, they'd be essentially paying Markstrom $12m per season. Obviously these numbers aren't accurate, and I'm not saying this would be a good move. Just wondering if this theory is possible and could work with other players reaching UFA/RFA after next season. Thinking outside the box, I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 20 hours ago, Pepe Silvia said: Shower thought here: Is it possible to make a contract "expansion proof"? Let's say the Canucks want to protect Demko and are planning on extending Markstrom after the 2019-2020 season. Is it possible to sign to him a contract that will pay most of his salary the year after the expansion? For example, the Canucks sign Markstrom to a 2 year, $13m contract. Could they structure it in a way that Markstrom would make $1m in year one, then $12m in year 2? Reason being, if Seattle did want to take him, they'd be essentially paying Markstrom $12m per season. Obviously these numbers aren't accurate, and I'm not saying this would be a good move. Just wondering if this theory is possible and could work with other players reaching UFA/RFA after next season. The lowest year cannot be less than 50% of the highest. There is also a 35% variability rule where the difference from one year to the next cannot be more than 35% of the 1st year's salary&bonus. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepe Silvia Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 2 hours ago, mll said: The lowest year cannot be less than 50% of the highest. There is also a 35% variability rule where the difference from one year to the next cannot be more than 35% of the 1st year's salary&bonus. Makes sense. thought there'd be some sort of clause I just didn't know any specifics. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Not really a question, but there's no thread for the Women's World Championships and I don't think it's worth starting one when it's already over.... I have to say that I feel terrible for the Finns. They should be home celebrating their first ever WWC, but thanks to a lousy video review decision, have to settle for Silver. If you haven't seen the replay, a Finnish skater took a shot on goal and then skated between two American players, looking for a rebound. The American goalie lunged for the puck at about the same time the Finnish skater got there and there was contact between the two. However, the contact was instigated by the goalie and it was well outside the crease area. The on-ice officials ruled it a good goal, but the Americans challenged and the goal was overturned by the video review judges. (apparently, under IIHF rules, once a call goes to review, it's out of the the hands of the on-ice officials) The game ended up going to a shoot out, which the US won. I'll leave you to decide whether the Finns were robbed, but they certainly were, IMHO: https://www.theicegarden.com/2019/4/14/18310629/2019-womens-world-championship-iihf-controversy-finland-usa-gold-medal-game-goalie-interference BTW: How do the Yanks keep getting these bent refs? #2012womensolympicsoccer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 2 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: I have to say that I feel terrible for the Finns. They should be home celebrating their first ever WWC, but thanks to a lousy video review decision, have to settle for Silver. Agreed. That should have been a good goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now