GDT: Columbus @ Carolina | Dec. 23, 2013 | 7 pm

[What the Faulk]

No, saran wrap. Gotta keep him fresh for later.

 

[Ole Gil]

The scary thing with Skinner, is he seems to get under the skin of the big slow dmen who he's making look awful, and then they just start hitting him illegally. It's one thing to keep your head up, or be careful in traffic. But when they just start boarding/crosschecking, you're sort of at the mercy of the players on the other team.

 

[RodTheBawd]

I hate this cliche, but I used to say his rookie season that Skinner was worth the price of admission. He's back to being that player. Difference now is he isn't as careless, is stronger, and has matured a lot (still a bit too whiny). Similar to what wallym said, after that rookie year he had an ego that many other teams were putting in check (and deservedly so). Regardless of how good he was and could be, I couldn't stand the kid. They also learned all you had to do was play the body when he did his little "10 and 2" ****. Now that he's stronger and smarter, he's able to handle some contact and get some separation. He also isn't leaving himself as vulnerable, making it more difficult for anyone to take a run at him when he's doing his thing. I think his mullet at the start of last year was his turning point. My fiancee is tired of hearing me say "holy ****, this ****ing kid...watch this" every game, but I hope I don't have to stop any time soon

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

It was common sense that Tlusty wasn't going to be shooting at 20% this season and it was common sense that he wasn't going to have nearly the same percentage of two-goal games as he did last year. Considering those two were the biggest factors in his success last year, a major drop in performance (and therefore value) was to be expected.

Most people were expecting a drop off in production.

Not many were expecting a drop from "top 6 glue guy", which is what most viewed him as, to "3rd line checking winger".



http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1410075

Of course, I made the mistake of mentioning LaRose, which apparently completely negates any points being made.

I'm glad that such a silly argument was enough to end the debate at the time.

Contention for what? Worst team ever to eek into a playoff spot, only to get pounded in the first round? We're not winning anything this season worth giving up a single asset.

Contention for a consistent playoff team.

I never said that we can get their this season without giving up a single asset. But neither are we excessively far away.

No it isn't. Guys like Malhotra, Dwyer, Gerbe, Dvorak and Tlusty are on third and fourth lines around the league.

They are. They are also very often not the best players in the bottom 6. Most teams at least have 1-2 guys that are playing at a 40+ point pace. Even, say the Jets, with Mark Scheifele and Michael Frolik.

The best of those guys for us is Nash, who is on pace for a whopping 22 points despite getting good PP time because Muller is insistent on a RH shot on the PP, even a muffin shot and dulled passing skills such the variety that Nash brings. That speaks volumes of why we are having scoring issues this year; our top 6 is struggling, and our secondary support is nonexistent.

And the "elite" teams, like the Ducks, the Blackhawks, the Sharks, have their entire bottom 6 stocked with guys who are on pace for 30-40 points.

As a matter of fact, I'd say our third and fourth lines are *better* now than they've been in any season since 2006.

Our bottom 6 is comprised of a bunch of 15-20 point players. We have a fast guy, a faceoff guy, a streaky Czech sniper and a bunch of jack-of-all-trades/terrible at everything guys who turn valuable minutes of hockey into a demented tennis on ice: back and forth, back and forth and back and forth and back and forth again.

We have no one in our bottom 6 on pace to beat 22 points. That is awful.

Our problem is that the guys we pay like superstars aren't playing like superstars. For $38 million, Eric and Jordan Staal, Alex Semin, Tuomo Ruutu, Tim Gleason and Cam Ward have to be significantly better, stop taking lazy penalties, and work harder.

This is also an issue. Having Jordan Staal and Alex Semin produce at 40 point pace is terrible.

Rearranging deck chairs, IMO.

Do you even know who David Legwand is?

I'm sure that, if you did, you would understand how much of an upgrade he is over Riley Nash. Legwand is excellent defensively, can win faceoffs AND actually knows how to score points; none of which Nash is particularly adept at.

Couldn't disagree with you more, and I'm very glad you're not running the team.

Really? I said we could get wingers if we wanted to part with assets. That's not really an illuminating statement: it's like saying the grass is green or water is wet or Cam Ward glove side high.

However, winger is the least valued position in hockey. For example, Michael Frolik, an excellent, defensively responsible and adept offensively bottom 6 winger went for a 3rd and a 5th at the draft last year.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Most people were expecting a drop off in production.

Not many were expecting a drop from "top 6 glue guy", which is what most viewed him as, to "3rd line checking winger".



http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1410075



I'm glad that such a silly argument was enough to end the debate at the time.

You're right, the argument was silly. After all, LaRose was a 3rd liner checking winger that only produced when put with Staal while Staal was "hot". Putting him away from Staal showed he couldn't produce at nearly the same pace. Tlusty is completely different, as this year has shown. I mean, 30 points over 82 games is completely un-LaRose-like. He's done so well without Eric and Semin.

Clearly, the comparison was off.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Well, in fairness, this year Semin and Staal have stunk also, so none of them have done particularly well without each other (other than Staal's scoring more recently, but I attribute that more to Skinner).

The problem with the position that the Canes could "sell high" on Tlusty because he had an abnormally high shooting percentage, an abnormally high number of multi-goal games and that almost 20% of his goals were EN...is that those are the same reason why other GM's wouldn't pay as much. It's not like a few people on a hockey forum are unique in noting this.

IMO, Tlusty's a guy you keep if you can sign him to an affordable contract. He's struggling this year as much as it's a case of coming back down to earth.

-This is his worst shooting % of his career.
-The entire team (except Skinner) is struggling to score, not just Jiri.
-Last year, he had 8 PP points / 48 points in 2:37 of PP time / game
-This year, he only has 1 PP point in only 1:27 of PP time / game.

Was last year an aberration for him? sure. But this year is a bit of an abberration on the negative side also. Tlusty will never be a guy that drives the team, he is a complementary player so as the team goes, he'll most likely go, but he usually does more good than bad (usually) when not scoring as he skates well, plays the body, plays well defensively, can PK, can be on the PP, etc..and he's still relatively young at 25.

I just don't think (even after last season) that the Canes can (or could have) gotten back something more valuable than what they would give up as the line-up is devoid of talent as it is.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

You're right, the argument was silly. After all, LaRose was a 3rd liner checking winger that only produced when put with Staal while Staal was "hot". Putting him away from Staal showed he couldn't produce at nearly the same pace. Tlusty is completely different, as this year has shown. I mean, 30 points over 82 games is completely un-LaRose-like. He's done so well without Eric and Semin.

Clearly, the comparison was off.

Chad LaRose hit 30+ points 3 times in his 8 year NHL career. He did it twice, in the 2010-2011 season, and the 2011-2012 season. Both of which he spent with Eric Staal.

No matter how you slice if, Tlusty's half season last year was more impressive than anything Chad LaRose has ever done.

Back to the main point; most people expected a drop off. A drop off to a 22 point checking line winger was about as expected as Jordan Staal and Alexander Semin's drop off to 40 point players.

Anyone could see last year that Tlusty's production stemmed from a large part of playing with Eric and Semin...so the fact that both started off the year in their respective "lazy" forms would lead that Tlusty's production would suffer, no?

 

[WalkerBabe]

The scary thing with Skinner, is he seems to get under the skin of the big slow dmen who he's making look awful, and then they just start hitting him illegally. It's one thing to keep your head up, or be careful in traffic. But when they just start boarding/crosschecking, you're sort of at the mercy of the players on the other team.

I agree. The better he plays, the bigger the target on his back. I think he does protect himself more than his first season. I also think the two bad concussions he suffered affected his personality for a while. I think people who've never been badly concussed can't imagine how it can affect you for quite a while afterwards. I hope he can stay healthy ... he is magical on the ice when he's at his best.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Chad LaRose hit 30+ points 3 times in his 8 year NHL career. He did it twice, in the 2010-2011 season, and the 2011-2012 season. Both of which he spent with Eric Staal.

No matter how you slice if, Tlusty's half season last year was more impressive than anything Chad LaRose has ever done.

He's had 23 points in 58 games, 31 points in 81 games, 28 points in 56 games, 31 in 82, and 32 in 67. Some of them playing with Staal, some of them playing without. Needless to say, he was pretty much a 25-35 3rd line checking winger.

Tlusty's had 12 points in 57 games, 36 in 79 games, 38 in 48, and so far 10 in 37. Two good years, two poor years. And his two good years are almost entirely about playing with Staal and/or Semin.

There's still some room for debate about Tlusty, but outside of what could very easily be a fluke year due to extremely favorable circumstances, he looks to be a 25-35 3rd line checking winger. And it wasn't completely unexpected that he would be that type of player this year. But he's been a streaky scorer, and there's still time in this season to prove that wrong.

 

[My Special Purpose]

Do you even know who David Legwand is?

I'm sure that, if you did, you would understand how much of an upgrade he is over Riley Nash. Legwand is excellent defensively, can win faceoffs AND actually knows how to score points; none of which Nash is particularly adept at.

You mean the 33-year-old guy (will be 34 on opening day next season) on the Predators with a $4.5 million cap hit? Yeah, I'm familiar. Riley Nash makes 575 grand. You really want to compare the two? Do you live in a world without financial considerations or a salary cap? Maybe if we weren't flushing money down the toilet for Jordan Staal, Tuomo Ruutu, Alex Semin, Tim Gleason and Cam Ward, we could afford a $4.5 million third-line center, but in the universe that we currently inhabit, it's not realistic.

 

[Swag Surf Aho]

We sucked completely except for the first 55 minutes.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

We sucked completely except for the first 55 minutes.

I disagree. We basically sucked except for the first 15 minutes of the 3rd period. Irrespective of the score and shots on goal, Columbus was outplaying (and outworking) the Canes for the first two periods.

 

[What the Faulk]

"Irrespective of the proof, Columbus was outplaying Carolina because...I said so?"

Oddly enough, the first part of the 3rd through the Hurricanes' goal is the only time Columbus passed Carolina on the Fenwick chart. http://www.extraskater.com/game/2013-12-23-blue-jackets-hurricanes

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

"Irrespective of the proof, Columbus was outplaying Carolina because...I said so?"

Oh Give me a break WTF. I realize you are the ever optimist on this board, but it seems to be skewing your objectivity. Now you're resorting to snarky comments as well?

Oddly enough, the first part of the 3rd through the Hurricanes' goal is the only time Columbus passed Carolina on the Fenwick chart. http://www.extraskater.com/game/2013-12-23-blue-jackets-hurricanes

Ok, since you posted this, let's analyze it a bit more. If I read the charts correctly and take into account what I observed, just using this "Shot Fenwick" as a measuring stick (which you know as well as I that it is not the only indication of play):

1st period:
- For the first ~10 min, it the teams were about equal via Fenwick.
- Then, Columbus took 2 penalties and the Canes outplayed CLB for the 2nd half of the 1st.

Watching the game though, until they took the penalties, the Canes had very little flow and were constantly harassed by the forecheckers, were getting beat to loose pucks etc. There weren't a lot of prime scoring chances outside the PP, Did you not see that or are you choosing to ignore it?

NET: ~Equal for 10 min, Canes outplayed CLB for 10 min (after CLB took penalties..surprise).

2nd Period
- The "Fenwick" shows that the CLB vastly ouplayed Carolina for the whole period, no? Carolina started at 18 and ended at 25, CLB started at 5, ended at 25.

NET: CLB vastly outplayed the Canes for the full 20 min. Wouldn't you agree?

Third period
-The "Fenwick" shows what I said. Although CLB started the period a bit better, Carolina dominated that period until the wheels fell off the last 5 min. Wouldn't you agree?

So tell me, how does this data exactly dispute what I posted? Ok, maybe you can argue for that 10 min. of the 1st (while CLB was taking penalties), the Canes outplayed them, but other that, this data supports what I said.

 

[What the Faulk]

Because they didn't "basically suck" for everything but the first 15 minutes of the third. That's completely selling them short and biasing your objectivity based on the results. If they held on but did not allow the two goals, but nothing else had changed, would you really be calling their performance "outplayed"? Probably not.

I wasn't arguing for the Hurricanes controlling play so much as taking issue with you saying they didn't show up for the majority of it. At worst, this was an evenly played game. At best, the Hurricanes outplayed, outshot, outchanced, and outscored the Jackets by a little (if only because of the PPs) until a few bad turnovers and defensive lapses changed the tide.

It doesn't change the outcome, no, but let's not act like they barely hung on and were only in the game because of luck.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Because they didn't "basically suck" for everything but the first 15 minutes of the third. That's completely selling them short and biasing your objectivity based on the results.

Ok, I only used those words as a response to the poster who said they "sucked for all but 55 minutes", which was way more inaccurate than what I stated, yet you chose not to take issue with that for some reason.

If they held on but did not allow the two goals, but nothing else had changed, would you really be calling their performance "outplayed"? Probably not.

For part of the 1st period and the full 2nd period, my opinion would not have changed. The last 5 min. have no bearing on past events. I'm not sure how can anyone watch that 2nd period OR look at the stats and not say they sucked for that period. We can argue/disagree some about the 1st, but IMO, the CLB forecheck was causing all sorts of havoc with the Canes and they were being outplayed until those penalties hit. I'm obviously not the only one who thought that:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=76686397&postcount=53

I wasn't arguing for the Hurricanes controlling play so much as taking issue with you saying they didn't show up for the majority of it. At worst, this was an evenly played game. At best, the Hurricanes outplayed, outshot, outchanced, and outscored the Jackets by a little (if only because of the PPs) until a few bad turnovers and defensive lapses changed the tide.

Again, I disagree. My point, is that until that 10-15 min. stretch in the 3rd, I did not feel that Carolina carried the play at all, other than for a span in the 1st when CLB started taking penalties. Even the fenwick stats you posted show that.

My view of the game (without hyperbole's and exaggerations to make a point):

They were struggling to get anything going and being outplayed and outworked at the start, but when CLB took penalties, Carolina took advantage of that. They were vastly outplayed by CLB in the 2nd. They came on strong in the 3rd and were controlling the play until the last 5 min.

It doesn't change the outcome, no, but let's not act like they barely hung on and were only in the game because of luck.

I never said that. I said they basically sucked for much of the game until the 3rd. While I admit that was an overexageration in response to another post, let's not act like Carolina was outplaying CLB except for the last 5 minutes, as that's not the case.

 

[Swag Surf Aho]

I can't remember a better game we've played against Columbus as of late. All went well until that 3rd period breakdown when it was all too obvious that our valiant effort to comeback wouldn't prevail.

The goals scored were all beauties.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Honestly, in a rivalry as big as this one it was bound to happen.