Samboni
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2014
- 1,770
- 667
5 on 5 numbersokay but they didn't do anything either. there was no fight. same thing in the oilers game.
it's one thing to deserve to win the game and lose because of bad calls, it's another thing to not deserve to win the game and lose because of bad calls.
1. I wasn't referencing you.1. I’m not sure why you mentioned that (to me)? I’ve never talked about “blowing up the core”.
2. We’ve also had instances where we weren’t clutch. That is one of the reasons we are 8-9-1 now. Not sure why Green would discuss “situational awareness” if there were no issues or concerns. And Green mentioned responding to bad call & goal situations. The advanced stats are OK, and I don’t (& many others) need a lecture on that. But, it still boils down to wins ultimately.
Exactly. That was a very winnable game, made very difficult to win by the refs.5 on 5 numbers
HDCF
Sens 8 Canes 5
HDCF% Sens 61.5% Canes 38.5%
Sens xGA 5 on 5 was 1.6, Canes 1.74
I'd agree.
Or not allowing another goal shortly after due to defensive breakdowns or pinching at inopportune times. He talked about that too (allowing goals in bunches).1. Edmonton game - The score (5 - 2) didn’t indicate that, so there’s a difference here in what constitutes “fine” or how people define “fine”.
2. Disagree. The team can respond and bounce back after a bad goal (or goals in more extreme cases) that is allowed by a goalie. Responding to a bad goal by scoring is part of a situational awareness response. I think that was covered by Staois in the presser as well.