Hawks PK - first impressions

[HockeySauce]

17% actually outside of 5 and 4/3's and an own goal.

Lol.

 

[Martini*]

Considering those units had 110, 109 point seasons from Ovechkin, a 101 point season from Backstrom, a 73 and 76 point season from Mike Green, and a 97 point season from Datsyuk... Yea, again... I'd say you're in a bit over your head.

Wow.

Never thought I would see such on this forum.

 

[Chris Hansen]

The Hawks are currently producing at a 4.8% higher clip than the best powerplay of the past decade. Sample size I know, but his original claim was that our PP looked "bad".

Whoops, for some reason I thought they were at 22% right now.


The powerplay has looked a good deal better than last year's. Much more movement, and while the net presence hasn't been perfect, at least guys are there. Shaw and Stalberg, namely. They'll get better at it with some time.

 

[Martini*]

Lol.

Really? Where are the statistics wrong?

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

You can keep stating that, but it doesn't change the fact that everything you've said in this thread has been debunked.

But please, continue to misconstrue the data as if your cherry picked stats that don't apply to another single team in the league with such a minute sample size have any basis in reality.

Still waiting on why we should have the single greatest man advantage powerplay since the 70's Canadiens.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Wow.

Never thought I would see such on this forum.

What does this even mean?

 

[HockeySauce]

Really? Where are the statistics wrong?

The own goal was a deflection off a stick that was going in regardless. You make it sound like a Dallas player took the Sharp pass, controlled it and then fired it into his own net. That pass was going to result in a goal regardless.

As for the rest of the nit-picking, I could care less. 22% without the 5-on-3 and 4-on-3 goals. 22%. Not 17, 22.

 

[Martini*]

You can keep stating that, but it doesn't change the fact that everything you've said in this thread has been debunked.

But please, continue to misconstrue the data as if your cherry picked stats that don't apply to another single team in the league with such a minute sample size have any basis in reality.

Still waiting on why we should have the single greatest man advantage powerplay since the 70's Canadiens.

There is no cherry picking stats here. Take away three of the Hawks PP goals, one gimmie goal, one at a two man advantage, and one on a 4/3, thats how you tell just how good the Hawks PP has been. Thats three almost gimmie goals there and puts the PP at 17%.

Just being objectionable with statistics provided. You cannot expect the Hawks to get 5/3 every other game, nor can you expect teams to give up own goals every game. If you dont look deeper into the statistics provided, sooner rather then later many here will be saying just how bad the PP is.

I just beat everybody else to the punch on this one.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

There is no cherry picking stats here. Take away three of the Hawks PP goals, one gimmie goal, one at a two man advantage, and one on a 4/3, thats how you tell just how good the Hawks PP has been. Thats three almost gimmie goals there and puts the PP at 17%.

Just being objectionable with statistics provided. You cannot expect the Hawks to get 5/3 every other game, nor can you expect teams to give up own goals every game. If you dont look deeper into the statistics provided, sooner rather then later many here will be saying just how bad the PP is.

I just beat everybody else to the punch on this one.

I just.... I don't even...

 

[Cullksinikers]

I haven't gone through this mess, but is Martini saying the PK has been good or bad?

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

There is no cherry picking stats here. Take away three of the Hawks PP goals, one gimmie goal, one at a two man advantage, and one on a 4/3, thats how you tell just how good the Hawks PP has been. Thats three almost gimmie goals there and puts the PP at 17%.

Just being objectionable with statistics provided. You cannot expect the Hawks to get 5/3 every other game, nor can you expect teams to give up own goals every game. If you dont look deeper into the statistics provided, sooner rather then later many here will be saying just how bad the PP is.

I just beat everybody else to the punch on this one.

Like when Nick Leddy didn't make the team?

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I haven't gone through this mess, but is Martini saying the PK has been good or bad?

In full blown make absolute no sense, the argument is about our PP.

 

[RayP]

I haven't gone through this mess, but is Martini saying the PK has been good or bad?

I've been keeping up, and I have absolutely no idea what he is trying to say. I think his new tactic is to just confuse the hell out of everyone so no one can say he is wrong.

 

[Cullksinikers]

How can one ***** and moan about a PP that potted three the last game and scored a PP goal in the other three games, too? It doesn't matter how you get them if you are putting the puck in the back of the net.

 

[Martini*]

The own goal was a deflection off a stick that was going in regardlessYou make it sound like a Dallas player took the Sharp pass, controlled it and then fired it into his own net. That pass was going to result in a goal regardless.

No it wasnt. You had Stalberg on the other end and even then it would have been 50/50 if he could have touched the puck and I am being generous with that. Pure speculation with the end result being an own goal. Not that I dont mind, mind you.

As for the rest of the nit-picking, I could care less. 22% without the 5-on-3 and 4-on-3 goals. 22%. Not 17, 22.

I refuse to could the own goal.

 

[HockeySauce]

There is no cherry picking stats here. Take away three of the Hawks PP goals, one gimmie goal, one at a two man advantage, and one on a 4/3, thats how you tell just how good the Hawks PP has been. Thats three almost gimmie goals there and puts the PP at 17%.

Just being objectionable with statistics provided. You cannot expect the Hawks to get 5/3 every other game, nor can you expect teams to give up own goals every game. If you dont look deeper into the statistics provided, sooner rather then later many here will be saying just how bad the PP is.

I just beat everybody else to the punch on this one.

The third "gimme goal" goes from a shouldn't count "own goal" to now a "gimme" because you were so, so, soo wrong in your orginal portraying of what happened on that goal? Lol. That "gimme goal" was on a 5-on-4 and it was created by excellent puck-movement by Kane and Sharp. Plain and simple. Why are you trying so hard when you're so clearly wrong? Why do you continue to stick to trying to take away that one extra goal?

22% Marty.. 22%. Just move on.

 

[Cullksinikers]

Calling Sharp's PP goal that deflected off Daley an "own goal" when you consider that if Daley doesn't make an attempt to stop it or get it out of harm's way, Stalberg has a tap-in goal is foolish.

 

[HockeySauce]

No it wasnt. You had Stalberg on the other end and even then it would have been 50/50 if he could have touched the puck and I am being generous with that. Pure speculation with the end result being an own goal. Not that I dont mind, mind you.

I refuse to could the own goal.

Dear lord. It's just funny at this point Marts. Not "Ha ha" funny, mind you.. more "Why?" funny, if y'know what I mean.

 

[Cullksinikers]

The power play has proven it can succeed in all situations. It can succeed 5-on-4, 5-on-3, or 4-on-3. It can also succeed when we need one to get back in it, tie the game, extend a lead, or win the game. All of this has happened this year. A power play goal in each of the first four games and three the last. Scores off these have come in various different manners, different times, with different personnel, and different number of players on the ice. For anyone to say the seventh best power play in the league right now is getting lucky or isn't worth of praise can GTFO.

 

[Martini*]

Like when Nick Leddy didn't make the team?

 

[Chris Hansen]

There is no cherry picking stats here. Take away three of the Hawks PP goals, one gimmie goal, one at a two man advantage, and one on a 4/3, thats how you tell just how good the Hawks PP has been. Thats three almost gimmie goals there and puts the PP at 17%.

"There is no cherry picking stats here."
*Cherry picks stats in next sentence*

Beautiful.

 

[HockeySauce]

Oh no! A turnover that neither Leddy or Roszival reacted well too? Welp.. there goes Leddy's career. Back to the AHL with you Ledds.. that is.. if you can survive. I've heard rumors that guys like Leddy and Kruger wouldn't survive in the AHL. It's too.. manly; too.. rough.

OOOHHHHH! The horror! Why Chicago! Why are you sending poor Nick Leddy to the A...

Wait... What? Nick Leddy's been playing very well in Chicago? He's not getting sent down? He's on a 4-game point streak?!?

 

[Cullksinikers]

You are blaming Nick Leddy for Rozy's egregious turnover?

Please, for the love of all that is holy, get some perspective and learn more about the game of hockey and stop holding unnecessary personal grudges against 21-year-old kids making obvious strides in their game.

 

[Chris Hansen]

Leddy was in the correct position to begin with on that play. Outlet for Roszival (and one that he should have used, evidently). That goal was completely on Roszival.

 

[Sir Psycho T]

I am just waiting for Martini to blame global warming on Leddy too.

Plus I love how a gimme goal doesn't count, last time I checked the team created the gimme goal but it doesn't count because it was easy to score, so I guess the only goals that count are ones that are hard to score.