GDT: GAME 13 | Zub Returns vs the Islanders | Thu Nov 7th 2024, 7PM | TSN5, RDSI

[Micklebot]

We are 1-3 in November, we never led in the game, we lost.

The Islanders planned to grind us out as you said above, and they did. And you’re saying it’s the refs - okay, if that’s what you got out is this maybe DJ Smith’s excuses do actually work on some of the fanbase.

What I said is we were not as bad as people are making it out in that specific game, I supported my position with facts about the game, and how it unfolded. it's more interesting in my mind than being emo about it and pretending we got run out of the building when in fact we did not.

I notice that you did not actually refute that a call from Giroux having a stick around his throat used to toss him aside and turn over the puck to start the breakaway would have changed that goal scoring play, instead you just make nonsense references to DJ as if that strengthens your position.

 

[Micklebot]

I'm not saying they would score less on other teams...I'm saying they score more because they prioritize offense over defense.

That's the exact same thing, We score more because we play on a offense first team (when the stats tend to show something diffent) is the same as saying we'd score less if we played on a defensive team.

Cheating for offense doesn't only mean blowing the zone early.

It means not making your focus in the defensive zone to be 100% about making sure they don't score.

Again, why are we so low in xGA/60? Why isn't cheating for offense translating to more xGF/60?

There's plenty of missed coverage which is an example of this. You could argue that it's just that they're clueless in the defensive zone, but as someone who cheated for offense myself, I can see when they think there might be an opportunity for a turnover, many will abandon their man to "get open" before we even have possession of the puck...so on those 50-50 plays, leads to them having guys wide open who weren't wide open a second or two before. The players on our team were puck watching for opportunities to break out rather than focusing 100% on making sure their man isn't alone in front of the net and in a proper goal side defensive position.

Playing poorly defensively does not equal cheating for offense though, yes, sometimes players cheat for offense, all teams do that, but to suggest that players would score less on defensive minded teams requires that we are a) doing it more than other teams, and b) getting more offensive chances as a result. Neither seems to be the case. In reality, poor in-zone coverage means less counterattacks, and potentially less offense.

 

[jbeck5]

What I said is we were not as bad as people are making it out in that specific game, I supported my position with facts about the game, and how it unfolded. it's more interesting in my mind than being emo about it and pretending we got run out of the building when in fact we did not.

I notice that you did not actually refute that a call from Giroux having a stick around his throat used to toss him aside and turn over the puck to start the breakaway would have changed that goal scoring play, instead you just make nonsense references to DJ as if that strengthens your position.

I notice you're saying emo a lot lol

We haven't made the playoffs in 7 years...8 this year.

We always collapse in November to the point we cant crawl out.

We're 1-3 in November so far

2-5 in our last 7.

Below 500 entering mid November...

But yes, let's call fans who are saying we suck emo.

Funny hearing the word emo brings me back to circa 2007 when that word was being used...long long time ago...hey, we were a good hockey team that long ago. Whaddayaknow!

 

[Tuna99]

What I said is we were not as bad as people are making it out in that specific game, I supported my position with facts about the game, and how it unfolded. it's more interesting in my mind than being emo about it and pretending we got run out of the building when in fact we did not.

I notice that you did not actually refute that a call from Giroux having a stick around his throat used to toss him aside and turn over the puck to start the breakaway would have changed that goal scoring play, instead you just make nonsense references to DJ as if that strengthens your position.

I’m just not gullible enough to think we are a sub .500 team because of the refs.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Stü is not as defensively responsible as Barkov and he also isn't as big as Barkov. He's definitely more offensively talented than Barkov. Brady is better than Matthew. The difference is, Matthew has been on some playoff teams and knows how to play playoff hockey. Matthew also has a penchant for disappearing in the playoffs at times.

Are you seriously suggesting Lundell is better than Norris? Norris has been injured for nearly two full seasons. He's been decent, but snake bitten lately. He's actually one of the better players on the ice lately. Unless he's scoring though, people here hate him.


Based on everything he does, every night. The only thing I don't like about Brady is his habit of leaving the D zone too early. Otherwise he plays like any team would want. Hard on the forecheck, hard in front of the net. Crashing, banging and being strong on the puck. However, like every other player on this team, he needs to learn that offense comes from a good defense. He like others need to hound the puck in every zone. This isn't a one player mentality here. They all need to be better.

I am jealous you think stu is better than barkov. Legitimately I want to live in your world

 

[jbeck5]

That's the exact same thing, We score more because we play on a offense first team (when the stats tend to show something diffent) is the same as saying we'd score less if we played on a defensive team.

Again, why are we so low in xGA/60? Why isn't cheating for offense translating to more xGF/60?

Playing poorly defensively does not equal cheating for offense though, yes, sometimes players cheat for offense, all teams do that, but to suggest that players would score less on defensive minded teams requires that we are a) doing it more than other teams, and b) getting more offensive chances as a result. Neither seems to be the case. In reality, poor in-zone coverage means less counterattacks, and potentially less offense.

Because you're not looking at the right stats.

There are no stats that show if the reason that we allowed a shot on net was due to our player not knowing who to cover vs leaving his man early.

I visually see players covering their man, only to not be covering them a second later when they get the puck for a chance against.

Our players obviously knew to get their man initially, so why did they just leave their man? Almost every time I rewind to see why they left their man, it's because a puck on the boards or something looks like it gets loose so they get excited and stop focusing on staying on their man. Call it puck watching. Call it getting excited for offense. Either way, it seems to be the potential of the puck turning over that makes them forget about the man they were just covering.

We can all disagree on the reason they leave their man, and there are no stats that will give us the reason..I'm just giving my opinion based on often rewinding plays several times to dissect them that the most often reason seems to be the potential for a puck to get loose or go the other way causes them to forget about their man. Whether you call it puck watching or offensive excitement, it's basically the same thing.

We don't know how to stay square to our man and play the body and not allow them to get into a scoring area when there is chaos of the puck switching possession back and forth quickly. We seem to get confused of if we should be staying squared up or trying to get the puck up ice when there are scrambles. We don't take care of our own end first.

 

[Butchy Dakkar]

What month is it again?

So disappointed. Now I won’t even be that happy if we win the next one, it would only get as back to .500

Just when I was thinking we were finally a good team, better than our record.

I know this place can be bipolar, and I’m piling on, but F. Why can’t this team play hard every shift. If we are going to lose, like Switch said, “not like this”

 

[PlayOn]

I don’t think we defend very poorly this year in general. That’s an area we are visibly improved in, even if we’re not great.

Our dmen have a total of 3 goals combined. At the beginning of the year our 2nd line was going, Pinto was driving our third and our PP was running hot. Pinto got hurt, the 2nd line got cold, our PP dried out and you have a team that is now struggling to score.

I don’t think we are necessarily as poor offensively as the last 4-5 games might indicate. We’re probably not as good at the first 4-5 either.

 

[Loach]

Was it just me or did you guys notice Stutzle demeanour change when Brady got taken off his line?

He went from listless to MacKinnon. Was pretty stark difference.

I've been thinking about this post for two cups of coffee. Brady seems to be one of those people that always has energy, is "on". Always...moving around, up to something, busy...even when he is relaxed. Personally I can only handle people with that kind of energy for so long. It makes me tired, on edge. So I go and have a smoke so I can mentally breath. (Sometimes the person will be right there when I get back. "Where'd ya go bud? You all good? Let's go, you don't miss this!" ...and I want to rip thier face off.) Maybe putting Stu and Brady on different lines is the right thing. It would let Stu have his space.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

So Amado looked waaaay better with tkatchuk and stutzle lol.

Man that guy really does nothing. Making a pretty penny as well.

Crazy what I was told from people in Ottawa… who watched…. A lot of Vegas… and know hockey…..

Not physical. No offensive talent to speak of. Not even really that great defensively. If he didn’t win a cup last year he’s likely scratched at this point.

 

[Micklebot]

I notice you're saying emo a lot lol

We haven't made the playoffs in 7 years...8 this year.

We always collapse in November to the point we cant crawl out.

We're 1-3 in November so far

2-5 in our last 7.

Below 500 entering mid November...

But yes, let's call fans who are saying we suck emo.

Funny hearing the word emo brings me back to circa 2007 when that word was being used...long long time ago...hey, we were a good hockey team that long ago. Whaddayaknow!

I'm calling a spade a spade, there are games where we were actually really bad and deserve all the criticism, the game against Colorado for example, This game, not so much. We certainly could have been better, the first 10 were bad, and imo set the tone for all the criticisms we're seeing here, but the other 50 mins had a lot of strong play. Coach saw the same thing, talked about it in his post game. But reading this thread, you'd get a very different impression of the game. It's an emotional reaction rather than a rationale one.

 

[Tuna99]

I'm calling a spade a spade, there are games where we were actually really bad and deserve all the criticism, the game against Colorado for example, This game, not so much. We certainly could have been better, the first 10 were bad, and imo set the tone for all the criticisms we're seeing here, but the other 50 mins had a lot of strong play. Coach saw the same thing, talked about it in his post game. But reading this thread, you'd get a very different impression of the game. It's an emotional reaction rather than a rationale one.

The fan reaction isn’t to 1 lose, it’s a reaction to the promise the team would be different but its the exact same thing every year and Travis Green and you now both sound like DJ Smith on Nov 7 last year and that’s why people are on you.

You’re talking up a team with a losing record and the fans are responding to a plan and a team they don’t see working

 

[Burrowsaurus]

I'm calling a spade a spade, there are games where we were actually really bad and deserve all the criticism, the game against Colorado for example, This game, not so much. We certainly could have been better, the first 10 were bad, and imo set the tone for all the criticisms we're seeing here, but the other 50 mins had a lot of strong play. Coach saw the same thing, talked about it in his post game. But reading this thread, you'd get a very different impression of the game. It's an emotional reaction rather than a rationale one.

The game was pretty much even. We didn’t give the islanders THAT much.

They gave us quite a bit.

But there’s a trend here. Our players are not able to make teams pay. Why? While they make us pay often

Forsberg was playing well last night. Got beat 3 times I wouldn’t put the game on forsberg

We’ve been coach to play these even games… what takes us to the next level of actually winning these games? I think we get out skilled. Out talented.

 

[Micklebot]

Because you're not looking at the right stats.

There are no stats that show if the reason that we allowed a shot on net was due to our player not knowing who to cover vs leaving his man early.

I visually see players covering their man, only to not be covering them a second later when they get the puck for a chance against.

Ok, so how is this leading to more offense, because that's your premise, we score more because of our lack of focus on Defense. It doesn't show up in any stats,

Our players obviously knew to get their man initially, so why did they just leave their man? Almost every time I rewind to see why they left their man, it's because a puck on the boards or something looks like it gets loose so they get excited and stop focusing on staying on their man. Call it puck watching. Call it getting excited for offense. Either way, it seems to be the potential of the puck turning over that makes them forget about the man they were just covering.

Usually it's a bad read, we don't play a strict man on man system, but again, that doesn't lead to more pts here, just goals against. so, the initial claim of 60pts here is 50 elsewhere is unsupported.

We can all disagree on the reason they leave their man, and there are no stats that will give us the reason..I'm just giving my opinion based on often rewinding plays several times to dissect them that the most often reason seems to be the potential for a puck to get loose or go the other way causes them to forget about their man. Whether you call it puck watching or offensive excitement, it's basically the same thing.

We don't know how to stay square to our man and play the body and not allow them to get into a scoring area when there is chaos of the puck switching possession back and forth quickly. We seem to get confused of if we should be staying squared up or trying to get the puck up ice when there are scrambles. We don't take care of our own end first.

If we don't know how to do this, why are we 13th in HDCA/60 8th in FA/60 and 7th in xGA/60? Every team makes mistakes, we do make some catastrophic ones though, but a propensity for catastrophic mistakes while otherwise playing alright doesn't lead to the claim you made of we get more offense than we would in different environments.

 

[Micklebot]

The game was pretty much even. We didn’t give the islanders THAT much.

They gave us quite a bit.

But there’s a trend here. Our players are not able to make teams pay. Why? While they make us pay often

Forsberg was playing well last night. Got beat 3 times I wouldn’t put the game on forsberg

We’ve been coach to play these even games… what takes us to the next level of actually winning these games? I think we get out skilled. Out talented.

Yeah, we didn't finish, and in some cases didn't even get the shot off on chances we created, that's got to get resolved, I'd agree with that. Whether it's a talent issue or not, I'm not so sure. Sometimes things get in your head, confidence is a big factor, look at Gaudette, he's been finishing and is no where near as talented as say Norris.

As for Forsberg, he kept us in it the first 10 mins, and none of the goals were bad, but that giveaway did cost us. Seemed a bit like a communication issue, so it might not be entirely on him.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Yeah, we didn't finish, and in some cases didn't even get the shot off on chances we created, that's got to get resolved, I'd agree with that. Whether it's a talent issue or not, I'm not so sure. Sometimes things get in your head, confidence is a big factor, look at Gaudette, he's been finishing and is no where near as talented as say Norris.

As for Forsberg, he kept us in it the first 10 mins, and none of the goals were bad, but that giveaway did cost us. Seemed a bit like a communication issue, so it might not be entirely on him.

That shit happens. We had nothing going at 2-0. And just because we scored 2 down 3. Doesn’t mean we would have scored 2 down 2.

It just happens too often that the other goalie happens to be playing well over several seasons now. I really don’t think we have the shooting ability or the patience to beat goalies and defences by passing. Look how we pass the puck. Like it’s never seamless. It’s never crisp. Off every team in watched the puck bobbles on us more than anyone else (I don’t hav data to support this).

I think we’ve been oversold on some of these players.

 

[Micklebot]

The fan reaction isn’t to 1 lose, it’s a reaction to the promise the team would be different but its the exact same thing every year and Travis Green and you now both sound like DJ Smith on Nov 7 last year and that’s why people are on you.

You’re talking up a team with a losing record and the fans are responding to a plan and a team they don’t see working

what you are describing is a reaction to a particular game and how it played out, being based on a long term situation rather than the specific facts of that game. So an EMOtional basis for an opinion of a specific event not based on that specific events, but rather feelings tied to the past.

I'm evaluating the game, not the past 7 years.

 

[Tuna99]

what you are describing is a reaction to a particular game and how it played out, being based on a long term situation rather than the specific facts of that game. So an EMOtional basis for an opinion of a specific event not based on that specific events, but rather feelings tied to the past.

I'm evaluating the game, not the past 7 years.

You’re two arguments are “the refs screwed us” and “you’re being emotional”

 

[Micklebot]

You’re two arguments are “the refs screwed us” and “you’re being emotional”

No, may arguments are the team created more chances than the opposition, and the play was not one sided as the post here would suggest. I can support my position with the data too. I can also show the missed call video that I pointed to , I once again see that you've made no effort to refute my position that the call was missed, and that it lead to a goal, probably because you know it's true.

My position is not that we deserved to win, or would have won if not for the refs, it's that the game was close, we and played relatively well, that the doom and gloom about how we played that game is misplaced.

 

[seafoam]

Pageau at 6 is better than Norris at 8

Another two on one. If varlamov didn’t hit that puck it was going wide lol.

Isles fan here, I've seen this multiple times in here.

Pageau's cap hit is 5M per and his base salary is 4M this season and 3.5M next season.

 

[Blotto71]

Last year was the year where they were assessing everything they had.

Then they changed like a third of the roster in the off season AFTER spending all last year fiddling their thumbs ASSESSING the team.

This year was not meant to be a second full year of assessment. Not at all.

I disagree to an extent. Last year they assessed what the team needed - staffing, systems, support (which generated the Amadio, Perron signings and Jensen deal). Now there is a new system being implemented and how players perform in it will be assessed, and modifications to the roster made in the off-season. Just my thoughts.

I agree with everyone here that the absolute best scenario was for the Sens to collectively buy-in and leave the previous Era habits behind - we aren't seeing them do that consistently (yet?). 13 games in is tough to expect it all to be fixed. These guys have 82 games, and if they aren't fitting in, then they need to be f#$%ing off. FIFO. I use it all the time.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Isles fan here, I've seen this multiple times in here.

Pageau's cap hit is 5M per and his base salary is 4M this season and 3.5M next season.

Woops. Okay pageau at 5 is waaay better than Norris at 8

 

[Burrowsaurus]

I disagree to an extent. Last year they assessed what the team needed - staffing, systems, support (which generated the Amadio, Perron signings and Jensen deal). Now there is a new system being implemented and how players perform in it will be assessed, and modifications to the roster made in the off-season. Just my thoughts.

I agree with everyone here that the absolute best scenario was for the Sens to collectively buy-in and leave the previous Era habits behind - we aren't seeing them do that consistently (yet?). 13 games in is tough to expect it all to be fixed. These guys have 82 games, and if they aren't fitting in, then they need to be f#$%ing off. FIFO. I use it all the time.

I think this team looks nothing like DJs team. So much better. Last night was not some system issue or habits issue. Neither was the Montreal loss. Neither was the New Jersey loss or the Vegas loss or the rangers loss.

 

[Micklebot]

I think this team looks nothing like DJs team. So much better. Last night was not some system issue or habits issue. Neither was the Montreal loss. Neither was the New Jersey loss or the Vegas loss or the rangers loss.

Our biggest issue right now imo is we aren't creating any offense with Sanderson on the ice. 1.08 GF/60 while he's been on the ice, 2.35 xGF/60.

If Sanderson gets back to even last year's form (2.68 GF/60 and 2.71 xGF/60) we're fine.

 

[BankStreetParade]

I think this team looks nothing like DJs team. So much better. Last night was not some system issue or habits issue. Neither was the Montreal loss. Neither was the New Jersey loss or the Vegas loss or the rangers loss.

And yet at this point in the season we have an identical record...we have "better" veterans, a "better" starting goalie, a "better" coach and coaching staff, a "better" defensive corps, a "better" GM, a "better" front office...so how the f*** do we have the same goddamn record we did last year after 13 games?

Our roster is supposed to be night and day from last year's, injury-laden, "improperly built" shitshow that had both goalies put in bottom 10 worst single-season goaltending performances in team history. Right? And yet we have the same f***ing record after 13 games...what does that tell you?