You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
2 on 2 is practically a shoot out because defense would be practically be nil; meaning that if the Sedins miss their shot, will result in an offensive break for the other team, and the chances will just trade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonogunn8
Exactly. Best bet is to throw out fast, on-the-rush-type players. ie. Kesler, Raymond...
Damn it...why couldn't they have done this in the 90s? Federov & Bure would rape on this
Damn it...why couldn't they have done this in the 90s? Federov & Bure would rape on this
It's not guaranteed. In fact I highly doubt that this rule change will get passed. I think it's kinda dumb, actually. I'd rather see the game go straight to the shootout rather than watch a game of professional skaters play shinny at a contest that means something.
It probably means the consequences of icing the puck while on the pk would be the same as icing the puck while 5 on 5 - can't change and the puck goes back to the defensive zone.
Whats that supposed to mean? The team on the PK can't clear?
Yes they can clear. Just not in their own zone, but they have to actually work to walk it up half ice at least.
I'm all for it. The idea of the penalty is to give clear advantage to one team in punishment for the other team. I don't see why one team should get an advantage only to have it partially negated by altering the rules specialized particularly for the penalized team.
Of course this will result in increased scoring but this result can easily be remedied by not taking stupid penalties; team control and self management. Unless those are too much to expect out of a professional player.
There better not fucking pass that "no icing allowed on a pk" rule.
Terrible rule! What's gonna happen is that teams will ice it anyway since they are under pressure and all and getting a chance at a faceoff the next play and a 20 second rest is well worth it. And because of that, the game and flow will slow down even more which negates the whole point.
__________________
GO Canucks GO!
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) hi there
(づ｡◕‿‿◕｡)づ・。*。✧・゜゜・。✧。*・゜゜・✧。・$$$$$゜゜・。*。・゜*✧ .
Yes they can clear. Just not in their own zone, but they have to actually work to walk it up half ice at least.
I'm all for it. The idea of the penalty is to give clear advantage to one team in punishment for the other team. I don't see why one team should get an advantage only to have it partially negated by altering the rules specialized particularly for the penalized team.
Of course this will result in increased scoring but this result can easily be remedied by not taking stupid penalties; team control and self management. Unless those are too much to expect out of a professional player.
the problem is that you're putting WAY too much weight on the officials ability to call a good game. If you think refs take over the game now, its gonna be 100x worse when nearly every game is being decided by PP's because its such a huge advantage. If anything they need to put less control in the hands of the officials because as-is they already influence the outcome too often.
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr.HappySilp ^^ I think u seen jeus..... Lol. u shouldn't be scare of jeus.
lol, I can imagine Luongo deciding to retire if it gets changed to 2 on 2 hockey.
he's gonna get pissed just like how they thought of changing the size of the net a few years ago.
__________________ __________________________________________________ Last edited by AzNightmare; Today at 10:09 AM
LOL I doubt any of those will pass, with the exception maybe of no-touch icing.
I think 4 on 4 OT is stupid enough, giving a "win" for a tie is even stupider, and shootouts are even dumber. If NHL was to ever have 2 on 2, there would be no point in even watching hockey anymore.
The OT, offside and no icing on a PK are stupid changes. I doubt they'll pass.
I'm all for no-touch icing though. Reduces injuries while not taking anything serious away from the game. Sure, maybe there's one exciting footrace for the puck per game if we're lucky but most of the time, it's just one D-man skating gingerly back to touch the puck and wasting time.
LOL I doubt any of those will pass, with the exception maybe of no-touch icing.
I think 4 on 4 OT is stupid enough, giving a "win" for a tie is even stupider, and shootouts are even dumber. If NHL was to ever have 2 on 2, there would be no point in even watching hockey anymore.
Oh, I actually really like the shootouts.
I find them so exciting. It's what I look forward to as soon as regulation time ends.
And then the next 5 minutes seem like a waste of time to me.
I always get so annoyed when the game ends in OT.
Because I wanted to watch a shoot out.
__________________ __________________________________________________ Last edited by AzNightmare; Today at 10:09 AM
So is it that people think the canucks are good is the dream...or is it a dream in a dream that they think they can win a cup....dont worry, i try every day to kick you back to reality.
hahaha...cool video though!
__________________
2013 Toyota Tundra CrewMax TRD Offroad *CURRENT*
2005 Nissan Xterra SE *SOLD*
1991 Toyota Hilux Surf SSR-X Widebody *SOLD*
2001 Acura Integra Type-R *SOLD* Club-Integra.net OG
Your Friendly Neighborhood Firefighter
Will defenseman Willie Mitchell get his Red Wings?
If Willie Mitchell(notes) is healthy -- and Michael Russo reported last week that he has a "clean bill of health" after his concussion rehab -- the former Vancouver Canucks defensive defenseman can help a team in a big way on the blue line; and especially on the penalty kill, where he averaged 4 minutes, 4 seconds in 48 games for the 'Nucks last season.
That he's also a destroyer of Toews is an asset as well ... and something that would endear him to, say, a Detroit Red Wings fan.
It was reported on Friday that there's interest from Mitchell and the Red Wings about the 33-year-old defenseman joining the team, save for two issues that Ansar Khan of MLive.com spelled out on Sunday:
How much can Mitchell command? That's tricky, since he was shelved for the season with a concussion in mid-January. He earned $3.5 million last season in Vancouver and probably is seeking more than the Red Wings can afford under the salary cap, even if it's $2 million a season.
And consider this, too: In Detroit, Mitchell would have no chance of cracking the top four (Nicklas Lidstrom(notes), Brian Rafalski(notes), Brad Stuart(notes), Niklas Kronwall(notes)) this season, barring an injury. Would he want to go somewhere knowing he's cemented as the No. 5 or No. 6 defenseman and won't get as much playing time? It's doubtful.
Unless, of course, he's one of those nutty players that actually puts winning ahead of ice time, at least for a season.
Russo reported that Mitchell could be in line for "a base of $1 or $1.5 million on a one-year deal plus bonuses," and cites the Washington Capitals and San Jose Sharks as "definite possibilities."
(As much as it makes sense, I'd still make the Caps less "definite" than Russo does. I think they're willing to give youth a chance out of camp.)
Even with that salary, Khan sees former Philadelphia Flyers D-man Lukas Krajicek(notes) as a better financial match for Detroit than Mitchell, seemingly because Mitchell will have more suitors.
Then there's Andreas Lilja(notes), who's still asking for about $500,000 more than the Wings are willing to ante. And there are the players already in the system (Derek Meech(notes), Doug Janik(notes), Jakub Kindl(notes) and Brendan Smith) that, via Snapshots, could be GM Ken Holland's solution for the No. 6 defenseman.
If he's healthy, Mitchell could be a last-puzzle-piece kind of player for the right team. Not trying to overrate what is essentially a solid but limited defensive player, but he does the things you need that type of player to do in the postseason ... as the Canucks can tell you, having desperately missed Mitchell while Dustin Byfuglien(notes) set up a lawn chair in the crease for the Blackhawks.
Plus, Mitchell might bring along his giant prop stick, which kills at parties.
So is it that people think the canucks are good is the dream...or is it a dream in a dream that they think they can win a cup....dont worry, i try every day to kick you back to reality.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
