Rielly ranked #1 of 2012 draft class in TSN (Craig Button) Top 30 NHL Prospects

[crump]

Too small a sample rate to determine that. Rielly didnt really shine in any preliminary games either, so the coach had good reason to give him lower minutes. To me , when we went down a few goals, he was activated to provide more offense, that's his speciality. If the Canadians get out to a big lead against the Americans I can see Spott run (heh heh) with the older guys to be safe (in his mind).

But I think he showed that he deserves to be on the PP and pushing for more ice time in general. But with Spott, apparently "deserves aint got nothing to do with it."

 

[Bomber0104]

Too small a sample rate to determine that. Rielly didnt really shine in any preliminary games either, so the coach had good reason to give him lower minutes. To me , when we went down a few goals, he was activated to provide more offense, that's his speciality. If the Canadians get out to a big lead against the Americans I can see Spott run (heh heh) with the older guys to be safe (in his mind).

But I think he showed that he deserves to be on the PP and pushing for more ice time in general. But with Spott, apparently "deserves aint got nothing to do with it."

A moderate and accurate point of view, in my opinion.

But we shouldn't assume Rielly was activated. As others have pointed out, Hamilton was out of commission with a cut. Rielly simply capitalized on his opportunity. So maybe this speaks to the need to put Rielly on 1st pairing duty for PP (he was on 2nd before). Even strength I think Spott should be looking at 2nd pairing with Ouelette.

Hamilton is receiving too much ice time and this includes both powerplay and even strength. He simply hasn't been producing on either.

 

[Frankie]

To me, I saw a direct correlation between receiving more opportunities and these improved stats.

In the first period of the Slovakia game, he didn't get a chance to show that much at all as he barely had a handful of shifts. With Canada trailing, embellishing to draw penalties, he started receiving a bit more ice time and capitalized.

I'm not sure why this didn't result in significantly more ice time in the third and to me the fact that he didn't, doesn't seem to help your argument that much.

You're saying he received more ice time because he played better, but then why didn't he continue to receive significantly more in the third after his three points?

if he got less ice time in the third, again i have to believe there was a reason. maybe he had a bad shift. maybe he didn't do something specific that was asked of him. maybe his work ethic is up and down from shift to shift?

i don't believe for a second that the coach is just sitting him down for the heck of it, or giving him increased ice time simply out of necessity (or pure dumb luck, i.e. a cut on hamilton's face).

the argument that players are not legitimately earning their ice time implys that the coach doesn't really want to win. that makes no sense.

 

[Captain Clutch 13]

Too small a sample rate to determine that. Rielly didnt really shine in any preliminary games either, so the coach had good reason to give him lower minutes. To me , when we went down a few goals, he was activated to provide more offense, that's his speciality. If the Canadians get out to a big lead against the Americans I can see Spott run (heh heh) with the older guys to be safe (in his mind).

But I think he showed that he deserves to be on the PP and pushing for more ice time in general. But with Spott, apparently "deserves aint got nothing to do with it."

Oh, Indeed.

 

[Gutchecktime]

if he got less ice time in the third, again i have to believe there was a reason. maybe he had a bad shift. maybe he didn't do something specific that was asked of him. maybe his work ethic is up and down from shift to shift?

i don't believe for a second that the coach is just sitting him down for the heck of it, or giving him increased ice time simply out of necessity (or pure dumb luck, i.e. a cut on hamilton's face).

the argument that players are not legitimately earning their ice time implys that the coach doesn't really want to win. that makes no sense.

It's really, really hard to continue arguing with someone who didn't watch the game and is just throwing out hypotheticals. The reason he got less ice time in the third because Spott was still using him in the same manner he had the entire game - the rare 5 on 5 shift and on the 2nd PP unit.

And the bolded part is ridiculous - coaches make poor decisions all the time, it doesn't mean they're trying to lose.

 

[Jerkini]

Is Rielly a defensive liability? I've only seen him play at these world juniors, but in the short spurts, he's looked real solid in his own zone. I thought, or hoped, we were getting a guy that could literally excel in every situation on the ice. I need to see him play a 25-30 minute game to know what he's all about.

 

[Bomber0104]

Is Rielly a defensive liability? I've only seen him play at these world juniors, but in the short spurts, he's looked real solid in his own zone. I thought, or hoped, we were getting a guy that could literally excel in every situation on the ice. I need to see him play a 25-30 minute game to know what he's all about.

Put it this way...some coaches in junior like putting out their top forwards when they have last change against Rielly.

 

[Gutchecktime]

Is Rielly a defensive liability? I've only seen him play at these world juniors, but in the short spurts, he's looked real solid in his own zone. I thought, or hoped, we were getting a guy that could literally excel in every situation on the ice. I need to see him play a 25-30 minute game to know what he's all about.

I think some people, especially Leaf fans, get the idea in their minds that you can only be good defensively if you play a safe, stay at home game. They see a mistake from an offensive defenseman and get their panties in a bunch. I'm a little more laidback about mistakes, I guess. I'd rather see a mistake from taking a few more risks and pushing the play offensively when they're as talented as Rielly than a guy make a weak play up the wall getting the puck out. I find Rielly's pretty calm back there and good in this respect. I have no idea why they don't seem to trust him at even strength.

 

[Jerkini]

Put it this way...some coaches in junior like putting out their top forwards when they have last change against Rielly.

I like that. I want him to play against the best opposition he can. And frankly, he's still a +1 on a very bad team. So it's not like he's being overly exposed.

 

[TheLeastOfTheBunch]

Put it this way...some coaches in junior like putting out their top forwards when they have last change against Rielly.

In Moose Jaw, Mike Stothers puts out Rielly against top lines regularly, and it usually works out well for the Warriors. He is one of the few '+' players on MJ.

 

[Gutchecktime]

Put it this way...some coaches in junior like putting out their top forwards when they have last change against Rielly.

Just curious, where do you get this idea from? Based on what? When you check the boxscores from Warriors games, Rielly is not typically on the ice for many goals against and usually when players are overwhelmed defensively, it leads to hooking and holding calls, of which Rielly takes none. This wouldn't really be my strategy if I'm an opposing coach with the last change. I'd want my top forwards out against... you now, any of the MJ defensemen with a negative +/- (all of them but Rielly).

 

[Frankie]

It's really, really hard to continue arguing with someone who didn't watch the game and is just throwing out hypotheticals. The reason he got less ice time in the third because Spott was still using him in the same manner he had the entire game - the rare 5 on 5 shift and on the 2nd PP unit.

And the bolded part is ridiculous - coaches make poor decisions all the time, it doesn't mean they're trying to lose.

all you're doing is throwing out hypotheticals too. neither of us have any real knowledge of what's going on.

if you feel the coach isn't trying to lose, you must think he's simply too stupid to realize what he has in rielly. you think that's really a good possibility? keeping in mind its not just spott, but the team's assistant coaches, scouting staff, and entire wjc hockey canada brass. nobody may have told the coach how good rielly is? after seeing him so often over the past few months, they still haven't clued in?

that sounds a little hard to believe.

i'm sticking with my theory that the players are earning their ice time based on merit. i've said over and over that i don't think spott is great, but i have to believe this staff is bright enough to realize what they have on their roster at this point.

 

[Bomber0104]

I like that. I want him to play against the best opposition he can. And frankly, he's still a +1 on a very bad team. So it's not like he's being overly exposed.

Well coaches have a choice when to put on the Rattie's and the St.Croix's, and the Reinharts, and the Lazar's of the WHL when they have home ice change.

They don't seem to mind when Rielly is on the ice when it's even strength.

You may like it and I may even like it (from a development standpoint) but it certainly should tell you how much they think of his pairing's game if they are putting out their top offensive units willingly against him.

 

[Bravid Nonahan]

Just curious, where do you get this idea from? Based on what? When you check the boxscores from Warriors games, Rielly is not typically on the ice for many goals against and usually when players are overwhelmed defensively, it leads to hooking and holding calls, of which Rielly takes none. This wouldn't really be my strategy if I'm an opposing coach with the last change. I'd want my top forwards out against... you now, any of the MJ defensemen with a negative +/- (all of them but Rielly).

Its funny, in an attempt to discredit Rielly, all Bomber has really done is prove that Rielly is actually pretty good defensively.

 

[Bomber0104]

Its funny, in an attempt to discredit Rielly, all Bomber has really done is prove that Rielly is actually pretty good defensively.

How so?

 

[jboknows]

Put it this way...some coaches in junior like putting out their top forwards when they have last change against Rielly.

This is such a stretch. I'm going to counter by saying "some coaches really fear playing their top-forwards against him".

So, now that we've removed pointless comments, the truth is he's quite capable defensively, but by no means looks like he's ever going to be a top shut-down dman, which wasn't why he was drafted anyway.

 

[Bomber0104]

This is such a stretch. I'm going to counter by saying "some coaches really fear playing their top-forwards against him".

If they feared playing their top end forwards they wouldn't willingly send them over the boards to match up against him would they?

That would be pretty stupid of a coach...to put his top offensive weapons against a player that would just shut them down, in theory. Doesn't make sense right?

I dont think you understand what "last/home change" means

Very elementary hockey term.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Your juvenile attempts to discredit rielly are as transparent as they are false.

I'm confused...

Are these attempts juvenile or false?

Unless you meant erroneous...

From the French side of Canada.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Strikes me as odd that you won't acknowledge that WJC coaches prefer to lean heavily on 19 year olds and younger players aren't always afforded the opportunities their talent would normally dictate.

This seems like basic common knowledge among anyone who's watched this tournament... well pretty much ever.

There's a huge credibility gap between "common knowledge" and "common opinion amongst some fans".

 

[Stephen]

and you're watching them closely, while already knowing the outcome of the game?

nonsense. why watch a replay? just so you can scout rielly?

Why not?

 

[charliolemieux]

Well haven't paid too much attention to the first 2 games. Other than to notice Rielly in on 1/2 of Canada's goals v. Slovakia.

Not liking Spott. BUt After tonight I will have a more definitve perspective.

Slept most of the day so I will be ready to watch todays game.

 

[Bomber0104]

Well haven't paid too much attention to the first 2 games. Other than to notice Rielly in on 1/2 of Canada's goals v. Slovakia.

Not liking Spott. BUt After tonight I will have a more definitve perspective.

Slept most of the day so I will be ready to watch todays game.

You gonna be in the GDT?

 

[zeke]

So in other words,

you dont have a quote for me?

Really just want proof of this outlandish statement:



Unless.....

And therefore should be ignored.

there's no shortage of quotes, and the more you bring it up, the more you demonstrate you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[zeke]

cover my tracks? i said all along that i expected rielly to be great in this tournament. and he has been great.

you're the one who didn't expect him to do anything. you came up with excuse after excuse as to why he couldn't possibly perform well. those excuses have been proven dead wrong. you have been proven dead wrong.

"mass panic" in game one against germany. that's funny. really, you have to do better than that.

stop this charade, admit you were wrong, and give morgan rielly the credit he deserves.

you haven't watched any of the games. you don't know what you're talking about.

you embarassed yourself by running back here after reading the game 2 boxscore and rushing here to pre-emptively argue that you were right all long, despite being clearly proven wrong.

your tactics are as transparent as the fact that you haven't watched any of the performances being discussed.

you are full of it.

 

[Bomber0104]

there's no shortage of quotes, and the more you bring it up, the more you demonstrate you don't know what you're talking about.

I'd really like just one.

See I don't know where to find these things.

I have no access to coaching quotes.

I just need one that says Team Canada plays worse players in front of better players because of seniority ...

Just one.

Please prove you have credibility.