[GDT/PGT - Page 136] Vancouver Canucks @ Edmonton McDavids | January 13, 2021 | 7 p.m. PT | SN, SN1

[oldnews 56,578]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Ha ha .. Myers had a 1:48 shift and even the announcers took the time to commend his PK .... the first two PKs they had zero shots ... against the best PP ever for the Oilers last season.  Motte was part of that - and his line had four good scoring chances...two for Beagle, one for Motte and one for Sutter.

 

Hamonic went to the box - smart play given whom he was containing - easy goal for that guy without some interference- you take those odds everyday, plus broke up two very good scoring chances for EDM too.   
 

I didn’t see the same game as you did.   As in I didn’t think any Canuck deserved to have the not so good.  Guess I’m a homer. 

Thanks for this.

It's beyond old - reading the vacant accounts of posters that throw players like Motte - and Beagle in particular - under the bus - based on what?  A default, knee-jerk tendency to fluff the 'stars'?

 

Beagle

27.3% ozone starts (8 dzone starts was second only to Edler).

50% corsi (13 on ice shot attempts for, 13 against).

 

Motte

30% ozone starts

50% corsi (15/15).

 

Outstanding.  Particularly on the road imo.  What more do people expect.

Add to those 5 on 5 outcomes that fact that they gave up nothing short-handed.

13 and 15 shot attempts for, playing 15 and 16 minutes....not only were they outstanding without the puck/defensively - but they also did a great job hounding and grinding in the Coil zone, creating chances of their own.  I have no idea how Sutter gets separated out from those two, but whatever.

 

How they wind up on the "not as good" list is noob material.

 

By contrast we see endless fluffing of the "stars" - but let's be real for a moment.

Quinn Hughes, for example, is sublimely talented - however, he does not perform in a vacuum.

 

Hughes

17  offensive zone starts, 1 dzone, 94.4%.

How is it the team manages to provide that - who reverses the ice and produces those ozone starts?

64.3% corsi - taken  out of context - appears outstanding - however, in context, are his 'possession' numbers actually 'better' than Motte and Beagle's?  Not so much.

 

It's a team game.

I 'wish' people would stop playing the 'stars' off the hard minutes players who deserve every bit as much credit, in other ways - but that would require perspective a lot of people evidently don't care to gain.

 

Myers - another 'not so good'

37.5% ozone starts

50% corsi - playing with a rookie defenseman - on the road - where Tippet has last change - and is able to pick spots where he can matchup Draisaitl or McDavid against a rookie...

Juolevi - who himself was 42.9% / 3o4dzone starts - had a team best corsi of 76.5% (13 shot attempst for, 4 against).....and yet, the most talked about thing is a micro-take on one play where he fell/was tripped....fishbowl material....  'the average'.   For me, the most promising thing about that game - beyond the obvious impact that Hoglander had on the Horvat-Pearson line - was how solid Juolevi was and how improved Gaudette looks - a critical factor in my opinion if the team finds itself facing any injuries at center - something the loss of Miller confronted them with right out of the gate. 

 

The entire team was 'good' - bar none.  Hamonic may have struggled a bit parachuting in (maybe an 'exception') however, I was not expecting him to look like mid-season form Chris Tanev (scarcely anyone handles McDavid types as well as Tanev) - and Hamonic winding up one on one with McDavid in a handful of situations - is not on Hamonic alone.  Edler was unreal imo.

Edited January 14 by oldnews

[Canucklehead53 548]

2 hours ago, Jayinblack said:

Yepper.... anything can happen.  What i meant though was the entire > 4min of 3-on-3 the Habs didn't look dangerous at all (which is hard to do)

Dont worry, I totally followed your train of thought (and agree). I just saw it as an excuse for a tongue in cheek response haha

 

 

[apollo 12,700]

3 hours ago, oldnews said:

Thanks for this.

It's beyond old - reading the vacant accounts of posters that throw players like Motte - and Beagle in particular - under the bus - based on what?  A default, knee-jerk tendency to fluff the 'stars'?

 

Beagle

27.3% ozone starts (8 dzone starts was second only to Edler).

50% corsi (13 on ice shot attempts for, 13 against).

 

Motte

30% ozone starts

50% corsi (15/15).

 

Outstanding.  Particularly on the road imo.  What more do people expect.

Add to those 5 on 5 outcomes that fact that they gave up nothing short-handed.

13 and 15 shot attempts for, playing 15 and 16 minutes....not only were they outstanding without the puck/defensively - but they also did a great job hounding and grinding in the Coil zone, creating chances of their own.  I have no idea how Sutter gets separated out from those two, but whatever.

 

How they wind up on the "not as good" list is noob material.

 

By contrast we see endless fluffing of the "stars" - but let's be real for a moment.

Quinn Hughes, for example, is sublimely talented - however, he does not perform in a vacuum.

 

Hughes

17  offensive zone starts, 1 dzone, 94.4%.

How is it the team manages to provide that - who reverses the ice and produces those ozone starts?

64.3% corsi - taken  out of context - appears outstanding - however, in context, are his 'possession' numbers actually 'better' than Motte and Beagle's?  Not so much.

 

It's a team game.

I 'wish' people would stop playing the 'stars' off the hard minutes players who deserve every bit as much credit, in other ways - but that would require perspective a lot of people evidently don't care to gain.

 

Myers - another 'not so good'

37.5% ozone starts

50% corsi - playing with a rookie defenseman - on the road - where Tippet has last change - and is able to pick spots where he can matchup Draisaitl or McDavid against a rookie...

Juolevi - who himself was 42.9% / 3o4dzone starts - had a team best corsi of 76.5% (13 shot attempst for, 4 against).....and yet, the most talked about thing is a micro-take on one play where he fell/was tripped....fishbowl material....  'the average'.   For me, the most promising thing about that game - beyond the obvious impact that Hoglander had on the Horvat-Pearson line - was how solid Juolevi was and how improved Gaudette looks - a critical factor in my opinion if the team finds itself facing any injuries at center - something the loss of Miller confronted them with right out of the gate. 

 

The entire team was 'good' - bar none.  Hamonic may have struggled a bit parachuting in (maybe an 'exception') however, I was not expecting him to look like mid-season form Chris Tanev (scarcely anyone handles McDavid types as well as Tanev) - and Hamonic winding up one on one with McDavid in a handful of situations - is not on Hamonic alone.  Edler was unreal imo.

 

What a post... wow... teared up a little... vintage oldnews. Bravo

 

You really took it to the HNL when you backed it up with all the cold hard stats... tbh I'm not that knowledgeable on advanced stats, too much numbers for me, but I heard way too many complaints about motter and Myers last night...

 

*should say hole

 

People like to complain about Myers because they just focus on the biggest object they see... As for Motter, he didn't get an assist on Brock's goal from Hughes, but he cleared the way for Quinn to make the pass. No Motte, no goal there IMO.

 

It's great we got such defensively sound depth players that we can rely on for defensive draws... no point wasting elite talent like Hughes in the defensive side when you're so stacked defensively.