Millpond
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2015
- 3,194
- 2,778
Yes, you couldIf 8 points is "slightly", we could say Guelph is "slightly" out of first place in the West.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10d90/10d9034f00ff93d62711ca9ed1272c292dc0dd91" alt="Winking face :wink: 😉"
Yes, you couldIf 8 points is "slightly", we could say Guelph is "slightly" out of first place in the West.
I thought Petro looked good back there and Ethier also looked good. Not only was this a 3 in 3 but a tough one. Bus to Erie on Wed play Thurs,bus to St Kitts on Fri play then bus home and play an always tough Storm team at home.I liked the effort a lot better tonight. It was a tight game and Guelph took the edge. I thought Petrovski handled the point on the PP adequately and didn't look out of place. Ethier looked good in his limited minutes.
Ethier is a really interesting player to me. We haven't gotten to see him much but he skates well and seems pretty comfortable handling the puck. In the pre-season he showed off a pretty good looking shot too. At 6 foot and 187lbs he's not small either. I'm really intrigued with what he can do next year when there will be some more opportunities.I thought Petro looked good back there and Ethier also looked good. Not only was this a 3 in 3 but a tough one. Bus to Erie on Wed play Thurs,bus to St Kitts on Fri play then bus home and play an always tough Storm team at home.
I liked what he did last night.Ethier is a really interesting player to me. We haven't gotten to see him much but he skates well and seems pretty comfortable handling the puck. In the pre-season he showed off a pretty good looking shot too. At 6 foot and 187lbs he's not small either. I'm really intrigued with what he can do next year when there will be some more opportunities.
And yet no penalty on the play....causing the fight[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD]Player[/TD]
[TD]Date of Game[/TD]
[TD]Discipline[/TD]
[TD]Eligible to Return[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]GUE[/TD]
[TD]Ryan McGuire[/TD]
[TD]Jan. 6[/TD]
[TD]2 games[/TD]
[TD]Jan. 13[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
That would be nice to see as well. Gives Sedley a few extra days to rest and heal while getting Smith a turn to see some game action. They have some extra bodies on the back end so it would seem wise to not rush Sedley back and have him healthy for the stretch run.I liked what he did last night.
Maybe Gabriel Smith gets a game this week with Sam out .
Strange and quick suspension? I see McArthur was back being a linesman.And yet no penalty on the play....causing the fight
I could be wrong but I think the suspension was for being over the fight limit which has an automatic 2 game suspension which would explain why it was posted so quick. That was McGuire's 6th fight on the season. The media release wasn't exactly clear but I don't think it had anything to do with the hit.Strange and quick suspension? I see McArthur was back being a linesman.
Too bad that instigator wasn't called.I could be wrong but I think the suspension was for being over the fight limit which has an automatic 2 game suspension which would explain why it was posted so quick. That was McGuire's 6th fight on the season. The media release wasn't exactly clear but I don't think it had anything to do with the hit.
Teams have the opportunity to appeal to the league if they feel there should have been one applied to prevent suspension. I think in this case it was a good non call. The fight didn't happen immediately after the hit but a few seconds later after play had continued and both combatants squared up. Nobody was truly "instigated upon" in this scenario i don't think.Too bad that instigator wasn't called.
Yes it was reported by Mark McKelvie , 2 games for exceeding fight limitI could be wrong but I think the suspension was for being over the fight limit which has an automatic 2 game suspension which would explain why it was posted so quick. That was McGuire's 6th fight on the season. The media release wasn't exactly clear but I don't think it had anything to do with the hit.
I watched that game. McGuire dropped his gloves before Hookey.Too bad that instigator wasn't called.
Ahhh, they didn't show it on the replay, just assumed the other player instigated since it was after a McGuire hit. Thanks for clarifying.I watched that game. McGuire dropped his gloves before Hookey.
sIm sure i saw mcguires gloves fall just as the reply stopped, before hookey, but thats what i saw. but if they didnt show anything on the reply (i disagree but dont care enough to argue) how could you be so sure either way.Ahhh, they didn't show it on the replay, just assumed the other player instigated since it was after a McGuire hit. Thanks for clarifying.
sIm sure i saw mcguires gloves fall just as the reply stopped, before hookey, but thats what i saw. but if they didnt show anything on the reply (i disagree but dont care enough to argue) how could you be so sure either way.
ethier is a defenceman? he didnt play on the 4th line, he played 3rd line d but was mixed and matched with vets. according to instat he played just under 9 minutes, his most common partner was steen and jordan.I agree with the above poster, the Ethier kid played ok. But something that bugs me, and alot of coaches do it, is when you put a kid on the ice who has played 3 games, why put him pout with the 4th line? Don't you want to insulate him a little. As i predicted, you guys were fortunate to beat two bottom feeders, but came up short against a good team. Half in at this point is what it looks like to me. No good half inor half out
He was paired with a veteran d man, of course they have 6 d. Thanks for letting me know that, great information! I meant playing with the 4th F line. Why not insulate him and play him with the top 1 or 2 lines.ethier is a defenceman? he didnt play on the 4th line, he played 3rd line d but was mixed and matched with vets. according to instat he played just under 9 minutes, his most common partner was steen and jordan.
huh? you mentioned ethier and a rookie who has played 3 games then playing on the 4th line?????He was paired with a veteran d man, of course they have 6 d. Thanks for letting me know that, great information! I meant playing with the 4th F line. Why not insulate him and play him with the top 1 or 2 lines.
are you talking about another rookie, you only mentioned one in your post? the attack dont have any other rookies who have only played 3 games.I agree with the above poster, the Ethier kid played ok. But something that bugs me, and alot of coaches do it, is when you put a kid on the ice who has played 3 games, why put him pout with the 4th line?
ok then, if thats the angle your going at, are you sure that happened all the time, i have the data, and im not sure that it says that.I said you put him out with the 4 th line, as in he is playing defense with his d partnert, while the 4th line on the ice with him, totalling 5 players. 3 of which are the 4th line. not that hard to understand is it? Just if I was a coach, I would do more to set the kid who has played 3 game up to succeed
go ahead and look at the data, i have it too, we can compare, but i'm sure the trade deadline is so close your employer will be looking for your opinion on possible trades instead of you combing the chat rooms with idiots like meok then, if thats the angle your going at, are you sure that happened all the time, i have the data, and im not sure that it says that.
Check who is now on the 4th line....explains alot in the change of attitudeok then, if thats the angle your going at, are you sure that happened all the time, i have the data, and im not sure that it says that.