GDT: Kings vs Jackets | 6pm | Game 27

[jepjepjoo]

What is the team GF/GA in this same stretch??

Goal scoring is WAY up in the league, it’s time some people look at more than just how many points guys are putting up, and also stop comparing it to past norms.

Last 6 games

5v5 with Laine on the ice 7GF 4GA +3
without Laine 7GF 11GA -4

All strengths with Laine on the ice 11GF 5GA +6
Without Laine 9GF 19GA -10

 

[Marioesque]

Last 6 games

5v5 with Laine on the ice 7GF 4GA +3
without Laine 7GF 11GA -4

All strengths with Laine on the ice 11GF 5GA +6
Without Laine 9GF 19GA -10

"He is still the problem." Thebus88, probably

 

[Fro]

Probably arguing because Gaudreau knocked the puck in the net with his glove.

Really shouldn’t have counted. I know they allow some questionable shit nowadays and it’s not really consistent, but, I’m pretty sure the rule wording is that you cannot “direct” the puck into the net with anything other than your stick.

Sure, they allow “deflections” of skates, and MANY nowadays are pretty clearly directed towards the net and shouldn’t count IMO.

From one of the top angles above the net you could see Gaudreau pretty clearly “punch” the puck with his right hand/glove. I’m fairly certain the LA player has to have possession/control with the puck and the way it went in shouldn’t have mattered after Gaudreau hit it with his glove like that.

I’m interested in the explanation the refs/“Toronto” gave them, I’d be pissed if it went against the CBJ.

So, going to just ignore the kings player playing the puck that nullifies JG13s possible (I think it actually hit his elbow) hand play

 

[CBJx614]

The official ruling from the war room was that the defender put the puck into his own net.

That seemed sketchy to me.

Gaudreau knocked the puck towards the net with his glove. While it was in the air, the defenseman waved at it, got a small piece of it, and then accidentally backhanded it in while trying to recoil and take another swing. If I wrote the rulebook, that would not be a goal. If the defenseman had never touched it at all, it still goes in, and it doesn't count. It seems unfair to punish him for trying to make a play.

Plus, if there had been a delayed penalty on L.A. on the play, and that little touch in mid-air was deemed enough to stop play, I'd have been furious. So to say it's enough to deem the d-man responsible for the puck going in seems unfair as well. Yeah, I know it's dicey to try to use the logic of one rule and apply it to another, but that's where my head went.

The defender got enough of the puck to change the direction of the puck, and even if he didn't he was the last one to touch the puck. This isn't football where the player would need to gain posession. It's no different than the puck being touched before it going out on a delay of game or being touched on a potential icing. It doesn't matter how much was touched, just the fact that it was touched AT ALL by the opposing team is all that matters.

 

[CBJ goalie]

Probably arguing because Gaudreau knocked the puck in the net with his glove.

Really shouldn’t have counted. I know they allow some questionable shit nowadays and it’s not really consistent, but, I’m pretty sure the rule wording is that you cannot “direct” the puck into the net with anything other than your stick.

Sure, they allow “deflections” of skates, and MANY nowadays are pretty clearly directed towards the net and shouldn’t count IMO.

From one of the top angles above the net you could see Gaudreau pretty clearly “punch” the puck with his right hand/glove. I’m fairly certain the LA player has to have possession/control with the puck and the way it went in shouldn’t have mattered after Gaudreau hit it with his glove like that.

I’m interested in the explanation the refs/“Toronto” gave them, I’d be pissed if it went against the CBJ.

Doesn't matter if Gaudreau kicked it on purpose towards the net...an LA player touched the puck before it crossed the goal line. Even accidentally touched still counts.

The official ruling from the war room was that the defender put the puck into his own net.

That seemed sketchy to me.

Gaudreau knocked the puck towards the net with his glove. While it was in the air, the defenseman waved at it, got a small piece of it, and then accidentally backhanded it in while trying to recoil and take another swing. If I wrote the rulebook, that would not be a goal. If the defenseman had never touched it at all, it still goes in, and it doesn't count. It seems unfair to punish him for trying to make a play.

Plus, if there had been a delayed penalty on L.A. on the play, and that little touch in mid-air was deemed enough to stop play, I'd have been furious. So to say it's enough to deem the d-man responsible for the puck going in seems unfair as well. Yeah, I know it's dicey to try to use the logic of one rule and apply it to another, but that's where my head went.

Too many if's......fact of the matter, an LA player basically knocked it in his own net. Good CBJ goal.

The defender got enough of the puck to change the direction of the puck, and even if he didn't he was the last one to touch the puck. This isn't football where the player would need to gain position. It's no different than the puck being touched before it going out on a delay of game or being touched on a potential icing. It doesn't matter how much was touched, just the fact that it was touched AT ALL by the opposing team is all that matters.

This guy gets it .

 

[tunnelvision]

The defender got enough of the puck to change the direction of the puck, and even if he didn't he was the last one to touch the puck. This isn't football where the player would need to gain posession. It's no different than the puck being touched before it going out on a delay of game or being touched on a potential icing. It doesn't matter how much was touched, just the fact that it was touched AT ALL by the opposing team is all that matters.

What if the puck was in mid air behind the net and someone of the attacking team punched it towards goal crease, and the puck would go in off goalie's back or arm? Would it still count?

 

[CBJ goalie]

^^^^^
Yes, I believe it would

 

[tunnelvision]

^^^^^
Yes, I believe it would

Hey this should be the next Zegras/Milano play then! Only exception being that instead of flipping the puck to another player, the guy behind the net would flip it to himself and try to throw and bank it in off a goalie or opposing player. Imagine that as a GWG in a playoffs game, fans would love it.

 

[CBJ goalie]

Hey this should be the next Zegras/Milano play then! Only exception being that instead of flipping the puck to another player, the guy behind the net would flip it to himself and try to throw and bank it in off a goalie or opposing player. Imagine that as a GWG in a playoffs game, fans would love it.

Get a load of this goal:

 

[Halberdier]

Last year he played with veteran playmakers (Domi, Voracek) a LOT. This year he's not.

In other words, they're putting more on his plate (carry linemates) while also shrinking his ice time and taking him off of PP2. That's a big adjustment and a recipe for a sophomore slump, it's not necessarily evidence that he hasn't improved as a player. He's having fewer opportunities to succeed.

Ryan Johansen had similar regression from his rookie season to his second (and that was his D+3 whereas Sillinger is in his D+2) while playing more minutes a night before breaking out and becoming a 60 point player in his third year.

He had insane expectations coming into this year. Part of his growth as a player will come from how he navigates not meeting those. His development this year is more nuanced than the statline, especially given the changes in linemates/deployment.

Progress isn't linear. It's frustrating to watch this prolonged slump, but I still 100% buy him as an eventual all-situations top six forward who plays at that level for a decade.

Yes, I agree with most of your post, and progress isn't linear. However, I think you are talking more about results, I am talking more about his play.

For sure Voracek was tremendous help for Sillinger last season and would have been this season also, even with relatively "slow start" by Jake. With Jakub, his results on ice would be better, both ends. I am not concerned about his results, I am concerned his play on ice, and that's not taken steps up from last season, maybe he has even gotten slightly worse as a player.

I hope he gets sent down and they focus training on his weaknesses. Currently he is just dragging eg. Johnson down, and that's not helping other than tanking purposes. I am sure he will eventually fix his problems to some degree, and after that he should be effective 3C, maybe even decent 2C, but right now he just isn't.

 

[thebus88]

So, going to just ignore the kings player playing the puck that nullifies JG13s possible (I think it actually hit his elbow) hand play

The defender got enough of the puck to change the direction of the puck, and even if he didn't he was the last one to touch the puck. This isn't football where the player would need to gain posession. It's no different than the puck being touched before it going out on a delay of game or being touched on a potential icing. It doesn't matter how much was touched, just the fact that it was touched AT ALL by the opposing team is all that matters.

Doesn't matter if Gaudreau kicked it on purpose towards the net...an LA player touched the puck before it crossed the goal line. Even accidentally touched still counts.


Too many if's......fact of the matter, an LA player basically knocked it in his own net. Good CBJ goal.



This guy gets it .

I don’t think you guys know what the actual rule is. Whether it’s his glove/hand or elbow doesn’t/shouldn’t matter.

It didn’t just bounce off Gaudreau’s body, he made a clear punching motion and made contact with the puck and sent it towards the net. The only thing I can think is that the officials/NHL actually somehow missed the arm contact, I’m not sure how they consider that a “deflection” when there’s clear intent.

It also ABSOLUTELY matters how much control of the puck or impact the opposing team has on where the puck ends up. I think that’s the only thing here that’s up for debate, and IMO within the “spirit of the rule”, the LA player didn’t play or “control” that puck ANYWHERE near enough for that goal to count.

 

[thebus88]

Get a load of this goal:

I was always under the impression that this goal was never reviewed.

I’m assuming the ref/league had some ridiculous restrictions on changing the calls back then, but, how did they allow this to count??

 

[Halberdier]

I don’t think you guys know what the actual rule is. Whether it’s his glove/hand or elbow doesn’t/shouldn’t matter.

It didn’t just bounce off Gaudreau’s body, he made a clear punching motion and made contact with the puck and sent it towards the net. The only thing I can think is that the officials/NHL actually somehow missed the arm contact, I’m not sure how they consider that a “deflection” when there’s clear intent.

It also ABSOLUTELY matters how much control of the puck or impact the opposing team has on where the puck ends up. I think that’s the only thing here that’s up for debate, and IMO within the “spirit of the rule”, the LA player didn’t play or “control” that puck ANYWHERE near enough for that goal to count.

The LA guy (Fiala?) did not only play the puck once with his stick, but twice. His first (on purpose?) backhand contact stopped the puck from going forward to the net, but unfortunately to him, he accidentally made second contact with his stick (forehand) to the puck sending it into the net. Therefore it was a good goal.

I understand that it hurts your feeling not because Johnny got a goal, but because some lazy bum got an assist.

(Btw. I am not sure whether that assist should count since that was an own goal by Fiala. On the other hand he didn't have the control of the puck, so in that sence the assist went right)

 

[Fro]

I don’t think you guys know what the actual rule is. Whether it’s his glove/hand or elbow doesn’t/shouldn’t matter.

It didn’t just bounce off Gaudreau’s body, he made a clear punching motion and made contact with the puck and sent it towards the net. The only thing I can think is that the officials/NHL actually somehow missed the arm contact, I’m not sure how they consider that a “deflection” when there’s clear intent.

It also ABSOLUTELY matters how much control of the puck or impact the opposing team has on where the puck ends up. I think that’s the only thing here that’s up for debate, and IMO within the “spirit of the rule”, the LA player didn’t play or “control” that puck ANYWHERE near enough for that goal to count.

Guess when you pick a hill you'll die on it...
Fiala played the puck twice...it pretty much doesn't matter what means at that point the puck got there...it was played by the opposing player

 

[NotWendell]

The official ruling from the war room was that the defender put the puck into his own net.

That seemed sketchy to me.

Gaudreau knocked the puck towards the net with his glove. While it was in the air, the defenseman waved at it, got a small piece of it, and then accidentally backhanded it in while trying to recoil and take another swing. If I wrote the rulebook, that would not be a goal. If the defenseman had never touched it at all, it still goes in, and it doesn't count. It seems unfair to punish him for trying to make a play.

Plus, if there had been a delayed penalty on L.A. on the play, and that little touch in mid-air was deemed enough to stop play, I'd have been furious. So to say it's enough to deem the d-man responsible for the puck going in seems unfair as well. Yeah, I know it's dicey to try to use the logic of one rule and apply it to another, but that's where my head went.

That's a lot of ifs and buts and pity for the opposing team. I see it that Gaudreau was trying to make a play and accidentally got his glove on it (although he says it went off his pants) Regardless, the point is moot because the defender DID indeed put the puck in his own net.