Post-Game Talk: A game

hockey20000

Registered User
Dec 23, 2018
5,423
3,311
crazy game but glad to get 2 points gonna need to play better vs jersey on thursday to get the win there though
 

Boud

Registered User
Dec 27, 2011
14,193
7,934
Zub out is quite concerning.

Likely we have Hamonic, JBD, Kleven in the lineup at the same time.

Essentially the same quality defense we've had the last 2 seasons.
 

Senovision

Registered User
May 23, 2011
3,028
2,132
Nice to see Josh Norris get 2 goals.
The defense held LA to 25 shots.
We needed some more saves.
Our goalies let 7 goals in on 25 shots. Yikes.
Penalty kill was not good. Except for the last kill when they did not allow any shots by the Kings.
Big Mac with 2 goals.
 
Last edited:

Joeyjoejoe

Registered User
Dec 18, 2015
6,548
9,553
This game shows that we have the forwards + dcore but not the goalies to take the next step.

We don't have an ECHL affiliate this year, where's soogard gonna go?

yy710q2y16rc1.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: senswon and milkbag

Pierre from Orleans

Registered User
May 9, 2007
28,066
21,352
Also I thought they did something to enhance the parking lot after the game. Lot 5 is bumper to bumper on the way out. Brutal
 

Loach

Registered User
Jun 9, 2021
3,672
2,615
Armani, an hour before yours. Did you take one of those famous "Thanksgiving walks" with the cousins today?
Just hoooold on. I'm getting ready to watch the game. No gdt. "Jeez, what's with the gang? They never miss one. I'll make a cheapo one, they can fix it and mock me for a poor effort." is what I thought. Nobody thought to shut it down and let me know there was already one? I see. That's the way it is. Ok. No Christmas cards for the lot of you!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
58,138
36,137
NST says we dominated the Kings in xGF%. Moneypuck says we had better xGF%, but only marginally. Which one is actually more accurate?
So, Moneypuck excludes rebound shots from their model because they said including them was less predictive of wins (the say rebounds are probably more luck based though they might disagree if they watched our backup goalies), but we know rebound shots are very high quality chances. I'd suggest NST might be more accurate in terms of how many quality chances were seen while money puck might be more predictive of future results?

Edit: I might have misunderstood something on their site, rebounds might only be excluded for their win prediction model, not their normal xgf model. So, idk...
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad