IS WINNING ALL THAT MATTERS?

Jason Gregor
May 29 2013 10:36AM

We've heard the phrase, "It doesn't matter how you win, as long as you win," for years. It makes sense in pro sports, where it is your job to win, but if you win by playing boring, non-creative hockey is it still worth it?

If you ask fans of the LA Kings they will surely say they love Kings' hockey, and it is easy to see why since they've won six straight playoff series. However, I find myself turning off the TV and tuning out of their games on a nightly basis this year.

In 13 playoff games this year the Kings have scored a paltry 26 goals, two goals/game and they've had 29+ shots only five times. Last year, enroute to their first Stanley Cup the Kings scored 57 goals in 20 games, 2.85 goals/game and in 10 of their 20 games they had 28+ shots and in six of those games they fired 37+ shots.

The Kings weren't nearly as offensively challenged/boring last year. This year the Kings have decided to win with boring, uncreative hockey. It works for them, but don't confuse that with exciting or entertaining. Don't let close games fool you into believing they are entertaining. Just because every game is a one goal game shouldn't mean it is exciting.

The Penguins are exciting. The Bruins are exciting, the Hawks/Wings are exciting but the 2013 LA Kings are not.

I wonder if fans have been duped into believing this style of play is actually entertaining? Do you watch games to see guys be smart away from the puck, make no mistakes, pack five guys in front of the net and skate fast with little creative flair? 

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you should pay players four, five or six million dollars because they chip and chase, dump it out of their zone and create little to no offence. The game has much more potential than that, but I feel the culture of hockey has started to brainwash people into believing that defensive hockey is the way to go. Many coaches use it because it is easier to play and easier to control, rather than asking players to be creative and allowing them to make mistakes.

You can find many players who can skate fast, dump and chase the puck, and never try anything creative. Those types of players are a dime a dozen, and it seems the NHL would rather groom that type of player than allow those with skill to flourish.

The Pittsburgh Penguins are a rarity in today's NHL. They encourage creativity, and they are proving you can win with it.

The Penguins have scored 4+ goals in 9 of 11 playoff games. They've had 30+ shots in 8 of their games, and they've given up 30+ shots eight times as well. That is entertaining hockey.

They attack, and in doing so they do expose themselves to allowing the other team some scoring opportunities. Is Dan Bylsma a bad coach because he doesn't preach defence every second of every shift? I don't think so.

I don't buy the argument that the Kings can't play more offensive. They have plenty of skilled players in Anze Kopitar, Dustin Brown, Justin Williams, Jeff Carter and Mike Richards, yet they rarely attack.

The biggest fallacy in the game is that you can't play offensive hockey and keep your goals against down at the same time. The Penguins are proving that you can.

Marc-Andre Fleury was brutal in three games, but since he was replaced by Tomas Vokoun the Penguins have still been able to produce numerous goals without surrendering many.

In his seven starts, Vokoun has faced 239 shots (34.1/game) and he's allowed 14 goals, .941SV%.
In 13 starts, Quick has faced 382 shots (29.3/game) and he's allowed 20 goals, .948SV%.

Are the Kings really benefiting that much more than the Penguins by playing such an atrociously boring style of game? Are the enticing more fans to want to watch? No chance.

Is winning so important that you have to make the game almost unwatchable? I hope most fans realize that the Kings' style of play is not exciting or entertaining. They win, but unless you are diehard Kings' fan I'd hope you don't appreciate it or enjoy their games.

IT IMPACTS LOWER LEVELS

The way the Kings play the game does impact amateur hockey. A lot of the talk surrounding minor hockey in Canada today is focused on the decision by Hockey Canada to ban body checking until bantam. This decision was based solely on player safety, and it is hard to argue with that when you realize that 95% of the kids playing won't play in the CHL, NCAA or NHL.

However, according to Steve Serdachny the skating and skills coach of the Edmonton Oilers and the owner of Serdachny Powerskating and Hockey body checking isn't the major issue within hockey right now.

"The biggest epidemic we have in amateur hockey in Canada is the inability of young players to give and receive passes," Serdachny said on my radio show yesterday.

Serdachny teaches hockey camps around the world, and when he compares the average Canadian youth to kids in Europe our skill development is much lower. We aren't teaching the basic skills often enough.

Too many coaches focus on system play, and that is a major problem. It is easier to teach kids where to stand on the ice than it is to teach them how to accept passes from different angles and different body positions. The LA Kings have some elite level players, but the style of game they play doesn't allow those skills to flourish.

It is all about system play. Stay in your lane, pressure the puck carrier and think defence first.

I'd love to see Hockey Canada implement a limit on the amount of time coaches spend on system play until kids are in peewee. Most of practice time should be spent on improving kid's skating and puckhandling skills. What is the point of learning a system, if the kids don't have the skills to make a play when the get the puck?

It is ridiculous to watch kids in novice learning what their coach deems a "system." Teaching kids basic positioning and the rules of the game like icing and offside are imperative, but we are not spending enough time helping the average player improve their passing skills. When a coach like Serdachny, who teaches hockey camps around the world, recognizes that the skill of the average young Canadian hockey player is significantly less than kids in other countries we should take notice.

COLD HARD CASH...

We have finalized our Ultimate Sports Fan Package, and our final prize is $1,000 in cash. AWESOME.

For the third consecutive year we are doing our Ultimate Sports Fan package for charity. On June 8th I am riding in the 190km MS Bike Tour, and I've come up with a pretty good package for the diehard sports fan. Click here and donate $100 and you will get one entry into the draw. If you donate $200 you get two entries and so on.

We only take 100 entries and we will raise $10,000 for MS. We have 72 entries left and the draw is next Thursday, June 6th.

This year's winner will get the following: Valued at over $5,000.00

  1. A pair of tickets to the Oilers home opener in October.
  2. A pair of Edmonton Eskimos season tickets.
  3. A beer fridge and beer for a year from Big Rock Brewery.
  4. A signed Jeremy Roenick stick. It is a brand new, he only used it twice.
  5. $500 at vivo ristorante. Every good sports fan needs a good pregame meal.
  6. 20 tickets to Oil Kings opening night game, and you will get an Oil King of your choice to come to your backyard rink or minor hockey practice for an hour. (Player on the roster on November 1st).
  7. A pair of Edmonton Rush season tickets.
  8. You and five of your friends will tee it up at The Ranch Golf and County Club with Meg Storms and Mark Spector and you'll go in style in a Blue Sky Limo.
  9. $1,000 in cash from The Jason Gregor Show.

Keep in mind this sold out in two weeks last year, so if you want a chance to win and help end MS get in the draw today.

RECENTLY BY JASON GREGOR

 

Ddf3e2ba09069c465299f3c416e43eae
One of Canada's most versatile sports personalities. Jason hosts The Jason Gregor Show, weekdays from 2 to 6 p.m., on TSN 1260, and he writes a column every Monday in the Edmonton Journal. You can follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/JasonGregor
Avatar
#51 Walter Sobchak
May 29 2013, 01:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Jason Gregor

Awesome rant Gregor!

Refreshing to hear that.

I would love for the dirty birds to smoke the Bruins and the Kings just to prove that high end talent playing a fast skilled game trumps everytime.

That being a "huge" team doesn't always add up.

Having said that, I hope the Oilers move up and take that big skilled Barkov fella.

Avatar
#52 VK63
May 29 2013, 01:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I think the playoffs shot it's load with that Leafs collapse and subsequent hilarity that followed.

As for specific games and series... I simply can't get too amped about any of it. Winter was 763.6 days long, the weather has been awesome, CBC gets its choice of games and are the biggest farce in broadcasting.... soooooooo. f them.

as for the Kings specifically, lets hope they get smoked in the next round so the lemmings that run NHL clubs can run in a more intriguing direction.

Avatar
#53 OilClog
May 29 2013, 01:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Who cares none of these teams are the Oilers, nor do any of us know anymore what playoff hockey is sadly.

However when it's a debate on what is entertaining hockey.. The score usually doesn't have anything to do with it, nor does that mean Kings hockey is exciting, because it's not. But they work with the team they have. LA has been building this team to look the way it has, since it seen Anaheim do it.

As a fan it's incredibly frustrating to watch the league allow the refs to completely abandon any sort of flow from the start of the season until the end. It's handicapping teams, how do you build your roster if the regular season games are Ref'd differently then the playoffs. You can only have one roster of players, one style of play. We crave to see the superstars put on a show, but we're left with a bunch of stone hands deciding the glory in the end. The clutch and grab antics is going to kill the game again.

DSF, how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood?

Avatar
#54 T__Bone88
May 29 2013, 01:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

It depends on the era of hockey that people grew up in that they determine which style of hockey is better. Personally I prefer the back and forth style with lots of chances with skill typed players. A 2-1 game can be exciting if there is good quality chances and lots of shots which makes the goalies stand on their heads. But most times its just perimeter shots and lots of blocked shots in those 2-1 games and each team is just waiting for the other to make a mistake. I enjoyed the memorial cup final more than the LA/San Jose series since it was more skill and good quality scoring chances than just who out muscled the other team.

Avatar
#55 j
May 29 2013, 01:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

The issue of developing youth sports is a real concern across Canada and in most disciplines. As a culture, we tend to be very passionate when our athletes are on the world stage but would never consider applying tax dollars to developmental programs. Most 'developed' countries have much greater dedication to engaging kids in bona fide sport programs. Many schools offer advanced training, community based programs are top notch etc. In Canada, we just don't have the infrastructure, coaching , programs in place to generate world class athletes. Clearly, there are exceptions - e.g. hockey has some really good districts - but on the whole we don't have the necessary systems in place. It would take a few generations to see a significant change in this respect.

Avatar
#56 StHenriOilBomb
May 29 2013, 01:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@DSF

"Teams like LA and SJ are not going to try and play river hockey when they know that won't be successful."

This is the crux of the issue.

LA plays that way because they can do it as well as anyone - Boston is the same. Pittsburgh plays their game because they can do it as well as anyone - same as Detroit before them. LA would not be as successful if they tried to match skill vs. skill against teams like SJ, Detroit, Vancouver or Chicago. They do what they have to do.

Pittsburgh and Chicago are unique in having an immense amount of skill, and they use it to its fullest when the game is opened up, and they can outclass their opponents.

The Oilers are building their roster around the strengths of their core pieces, and that's probably smart. However, I would rather watch them win stanley cups playing boring hockey than lose year after year of exciting hockey. Against Detroit in 2006 the Oilers played boring hockey, and succeeded doing it - it was the only way. I was ecstatic.

Other than for the few most highly skilled teams, defensive systems are the most effective way to succeed.

Minor hockey should be teaching skill first and foremost though. Winning at most costs at that age is for rep teams, and presumably those kids will have enough ice to work on both skills and systems.

Avatar
#57 StHenriOilBomb
May 29 2013, 02:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Benny Botts wrote:

Everyone that complains about the kings, knows what their going to get but then comes and complains and says they couldn't watch a minute of it... I have an easy fix, dont watch it.

There needs to be these kind of teams in the NHL. Are they predominant in the NHL? I would argue no, but the NHL needs and always will have varied styles of systems in the league thats the bottom line.

Thats what confuses me about people and media complaining about it. There always have been and always will be teams like the kings. Dont watch it if you dont like it...Simple

Throughout the history of the NHL there have been constant changes to the rules of the game in response to new tactics and trends. I think it's fair for one to examine the sport that he loves, isolate the parts that he dislike, and ask if they could be improved.

Different systems have always been around, and IMO make the game more interesting. It is sad though, that after all of the rule changes this past decade to make the game more exciting, all that they've accomplished is to make injuries more severe.

Avatar
#58 The Beaker
May 29 2013, 02:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
SrCain wrote:

So having Kopitar, Carter, Brown, Richards, and Doughty isn't enough to play an up tempo attacking system? I think it's coaching that's killing the excitement level. A coaches job is to win or he won't have a job, since defense is easier to teach and play that's what we get. Sutter is the most boring person in hockey, and his team plays just like it. I wish if teams scored 4 or more goals in a game, they get an extra point in the standings. It would encourage offense. Although in the playoffs it obviously wouldn't work.

I'm saying there are very few teams that can just run horses all game long and no matter what they do or what system they play they'll win. I don't believe LA is one of them. This year Pittsburgh and Chicago where two... doubt anyone else would fit.

Avatar
#59 Rocket
May 29 2013, 02:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
wiseguy wrote:

Their fans seemed to be having a blast! Is a sports team supposed to make it exciting for THEIR fans. Especially in the playoffs, I don't think the LA Kings gives a damn whether fans everywhere else around the league find them entertaining. When they were marching down the street on their Stanley Cup parade in front of thousands of their cheering fans, I'm sure management doesn't think much about what everyone else thinks.

Pretty sure too when the Oilers were winning their cups in the 80's, every other fanbase hated them. Fans green with envy always find something to complain about successful teams yet if we had the LA Kings here in town and they were the defending cup champs and making another run to repeat this year, we would be beside ourselves in how AWESOME the team is. DSF of course would break down the advanced statistics to show how the team is really not as good as they seem and it's just a matter of time before they crash and suck. All this negativity toward winning hockey is just his attitude rubbing off on the rest of us. Be better!

Fair enough. I was trying to point out how hockey should be fun to watch for fans of any team or for the casual fan.

For example: I am a casual fan of the NBA. I rarely watch the regular season and usually watch the playoffs. If the ref's decided to call fouls quite differently in the playoffs resulting in more boring play (I'm not knowledgeable enough to know how), then I might not tune in as often.

Yes, I would be happy if The Oilers played boring & won championships. But I would be happier if they won and the game itself wasn't so much of smothering systems play; kind of like the 80's Oilers.

Either way, I'm still a sucker for pro hockey. BTW good crack about DSF.

Avatar
#60 Rocket
May 29 2013, 02:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Romulus' Apotheosis

^ You beat me to it. Again.

Avatar
#61 Romulus' Apotheosis
May 29 2013, 02:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Rocket wrote:

Fair enough. I was trying to point out how hockey should be fun to watch for fans of any team or for the casual fan.

For example: I am a casual fan of the NBA. I rarely watch the regular season and usually watch the playoffs. If the ref's decided to call fouls quite differently in the playoffs resulting in more boring play (I'm not knowledgeable enough to know how), then I might not tune in as often.

Yes, I would be happy if The Oilers played boring & won championships. But I would be happier if they won and the game itself wasn't so much of smothering systems play; kind of like the 80's Oilers.

Either way, I'm still a sucker for pro hockey. BTW good crack about DSF.

your NBA reference is spot on.

Playoffs are supposed to attract viewers well beyond the fans of the teams actually taking part and ideally attract viewers not even particularly interested in the sport at hand.

Hello! that is why they are nationally televised! and not just to the specific fan markets of the teams involved

If you're not inclined to watch, even casually, the NBA playoffs because you don't find it entertaining anymore, most likely you represent a non-trivial portion of the viewing public.

If anyone thinks David Stern isn't concerned about that, they are deluded.

Avatar
#62 etownman
May 29 2013, 03:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Boring hockey, LA/SJ! Clutching, grabbing, hooking, interference etc & the occasional penalty call when the refs determine it has been a flagrant!

Avatar
#63 Spurzey
May 29 2013, 03:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Why hasn't NewAgeSys chimed in about the Serdachny comment? Let's hope he is sleeping.

Avatar
#64 Spydyr
May 29 2013, 03:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

*WISERHOOD SLOW CLAP*

Joins in

Avatar
#65 LoweBlow
May 29 2013, 03:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

What a foolish article. If the Oilers were winning Stanley Cups in a tonne of 2-1 games, I'd be at the front of the riot cheering them on and braking whisky bottles. Criticize development and coaches neglecting basic skills but at the current NHL level, there is no lack of skill on the Kings squad. I had much enjoyment watching the game last night where a bounce could change nearly the entire outcome of a close 2-1 game. Simply because you aren't engaged in watching two teams of whom you aren't a fan, don't cry about the way they play. Let their fans do that.

Avatar
#66 Jesse
May 29 2013, 03:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Jason Gregor

"I hope most fans realize that the Kings' style of play is not exciting or entertaining. They win, but unless you are diehard Kings' fan I'd hope you don't appreciate it or enjoy their games."

This sounds a lot like you telling people what they should be entertained by. People like different sports for different reasons, and people can like different kinds of hockey for different reasons. Pigeonholing the sport as only being acceptable in the fashion in which you appreciate it is an asinine and ignorant pursuit.

Avatar
#67 Rocket
May 29 2013, 03:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Big Perm wrote:

Bigger ice-surface would solve more of the game's current downfalls than most people think.

Imagine the young Oilers on a larger surface. Get the NHL to approve this if any team wishes to play on an Olympic, or at least a larger ice-surface.

Baseball has different sized fields everywhere. Adds to home field advantages...

Main obstacle, of course, is Owners unwilling to sacrifice seats.

Mr. katz, maybe it would be worth it for a shot at a few cups before other teams adapt.

Good point about baseball fields. I would be interested to see the NHL play on bigger ice as well. Too bad it probably won't happen.

Avatar
#68 wiseguy
May 29 2013, 04:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Romulus' Apotheosis wrote:

I think you are missing the point wildly here.

Fans of a particular team will most likely cheer for wins at any costs (foot in the crease? who cares! hand ball? who cares! etc.).

JG is pretty upfront about that. It's an obvious observation.

However, fans of a particular sport have a vested interest in how the game functions, i.e., that's why we debate about rule changes and efforts to increase offence.

Moreover, the sport itself has a vested interest in how the game operates as entertainment and how its audience experiences it.

If a substantial portion of already committed fans of a given sport find the product inferior, boring, etc. and turn away, that is a huge problem for the sport.

This isn't about jealousy. That doesn't even make sense. The same people complaining about one team's style of play are extolling the style of play of other teams.

The NHL All-Star game is free wheeling with chances galore traded on both sides, yet we have very little interest in the game. The game ends 10-8, yet we all agree that without the intensity and physical play, it is just a scrimmage game. As a fan of the Oilers, our goal is to cheer for our team in their quest for the Stanley Cup. I'd string up management/coaching if they changed a winning style just to be more entertaining. My response is to the number of people who agree with Jason's "I don't buy the argument that the Kings can't play more offensive. They have plenty of skilled players in Anze Kopitar, Dustin Brown, Justin Williams, Jeff Carter and Mike Richards, yet they rarely attack" More importantly, it is the coach's ability to be able to get their offensively talented stars to buy into a system that results in winning the cup that is most impressive to me. Isn't that what we've all complained about this year about Taylor Hall dipsy-doodling on solo sorties only to turn the puck over and getting scored on? We bemoan that our players aren't buying into the system. Are we that addicted to ELPH that we've lost track of how to build a good team? Are we going to tell fans of other teams that we should know a little about "good hockey" because we have 5 cups, just in case that was in question?

Avatar
#69 106 and 106
May 29 2013, 04:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Hey Gregor,

Good food for thought - If the goal is a Stanley Cup, the Kings have got a recipe for success. Just because they've adapted to zone play doesn't mean they don't know hot to take or give passes - the correlation seems pretty weak. And if your wanting to win as a coach, the best way to win minor hockey is to coach with a system. Teaching it later would be better, true, but implementation a "no-zone" style of hockey is ridic.

Avatar
#70 Kev
May 29 2013, 05:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I would not be surprised if there was a shake up in the coaches assistant coaches this summer.

It was all of them that could not pull the trigger n trades . I think this summer there are going to be a lot of changes.

They are not firing Lowe so the next in line are the coaches , would not be surprised to see Krueger in a lessor role ie assistant coach.

All this to win.

Avatar
#71 Truth
May 29 2013, 05:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Way back I was in Serdachny's power skating classes twice a week. Hated every minute of every one for the simple reason that he really made you work, except the camp he put on for first year peewee players. He taught how to hit, how to take a hit, and how to play with contact in the game. Lots of drills in which a pass would be made with pressure of being hit and receiving passes with a player bearing down for a hit. It was heavy contact. My favourite was the horseshoe drill with a puck placed directly at center ice on the blue line. Players would go after eachother full speed for an open ice hit. You learned to give and take a hit pretty fast or else. You could tell who the scared kids were as they'd be permanently at the back of the line.

I wasn't a big kid by any stretch, but the most valuable lesson I learned is that for the great majority when you got hit hard it didn't hurt. You just pick yourself up off the ground, get in line and try to be on the right side of the next one. Funny how things have changed.

Avatar
#72 Truth
May 29 2013, 05:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Back on topic, I don't see how the "boring" defensive brand of hockey is going to be phased out. Unless teams have the guns to play high skill puck possession hockey they will resort to whatever style wins them the most games. Tippet and Lemaire have made a living off of it. There is no way Phoenix gets away with playing Pittsburgh's style of play.

I fully agree that skill needs to be emphasized at all levels of coaching. Systems play is great and necessary, but individual ability is paramount in becoming a good hockey player. I think there is external factors playing into it as well. When I was young I would be out playing street hockey practically every evening in the summer and out on the outdoor rink in the winter. I make myself sound like an old man, but nowadays kids are in the basement playing video games or on their ipods/ipads all the time. Get outside!

Avatar
#73 madjam
May 29 2013, 05:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Playoffs are as they should be , and basically always have been - A Battle Royale "! Regular season not near as intense as most would like it to be . Hockey hasn't changed that much over the last few decades in that regard . Why would the NHL change a winning formula ? Bigger ice surface not going to help other than probably make it more boring . I don't see a massive outcry to watch international ice hockey here in N.America .

Avatar
#74 wiseguy
May 29 2013, 06:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Romulus' Apotheosis wrote:

Taylor Hall??

you think we're losing because of him?

That is literally insane.

Also, if anyone seemed to have trouble implementing RK's "up pressure" system is wasn't him. Not by a long shot.

Who is advocating the Oilers post 06 as a model for anything?

This is a complete straw man. The "models" such as they are, aren't LAK vs. Oilers.

Re-read the damn article.

Also...

The All-Star game? what?

What's with the straw men?

The alternatives at hand are PIT and CHI. Address them. They manage to play with "intensity" and "physical play" without being more boring than watching paint dry.

We can both play this game.

What????

You're missing the point!!!!

I thought I was only being figuratively insane, but people always take me too literally.

You don't know what you're talking about! !! How dare anyone disagree with an article!!!

What's with trying to copy other teams?? Be an original... have an original thought instead of just nodding when you read something.

Stop trying to be a white knight. JG is a big boy and can handle disagreement and discussion.

Your opinion isn't any more important or any more correct than anyone else's. It's a fricking game you're arguing and getting all worked up about!!!

The LA Kings won the last cup playing exactly how they play. Why should they change a thing??? Just because you don't like watching it??? Call Dean Lombardi and tell him and we'll see tickets to watch what his reaction will be.

Avatar
#75 madjam
May 29 2013, 06:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

What separates Canadians from most other countries is are emphasis on physical play . Not many if any countries could beat Canada in a seven game series , only in tournaments where they only have to face us once or twice on bigger ice surfaces so they don't want to play our game . That's why the Stanley Cup is the ultimate . You earn it the hard way .

Avatar
#76 NewAgeSys
May 29 2013, 06:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Spurzey wrote:

Why hasn't NewAgeSys chimed in about the Serdachny comment? Let's hope he is sleeping.

@Spurzey

There is really no reply to a baseless echo.I refuse to trade words with an inferior opponent they dont deserve it.

Just for spits and jiggles, Serdachny needs to reboot his hardhead drive and take a look at history,the way I see it a Canadian team named the Edmonton Oilers not only scalped the best european players but also scalped the best european hockey innovations,and but they also made both of those assets exponentially better and of higher value than could have ever been done in their Homeland or anywhere else,I in fact am thankfull that Canada was able to reach down and lend a hand to its fellow hockey brethren from around the world and bring those small semmingly insignificant assets into the light of the real Hockey World and not allow them to remain hidden and underutilised in Europe.Thats what proactive charity and adoption and betterment,integration and possesion are all about afer all,right??Man,that was fun.

There was so much good stuff in this article and so many excellent balanced posts discussing it I didnt see much I could add without disrupting the dynamic.I am reading things I have waited years to hear from some of the smartest fans in the NHL,it is satisfying to say the least.mac-T rung my bell earlier by committing to a systematic mission statement when he boldly went where no Oiler manager has gone before,"we are a skill driven possesion team" was the first step in the right direction from the right place the foundation,exactly where he needs to start.This aint no makeover kids this is surgery,buckle up.

Mac-T is very cerebral and he knows what he is doing.This franchise has turned a very important corner in a short time,the Edmonton Oilers have officially entered into a new era of integrity and accountability.

[Edited at 300 words. Let's keep the comments to a manageable length, please.]

Avatar
#77 Butters
May 29 2013, 06:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

If Wanye ever does a "Best of Oilersnation Comments" article, I would submit this one;

Chuck had one good year, but his wood to wood chucked ratio was unsustainable. Not to mention he was chucking softer wood than most other woodchucks. Finally, other bigger woodchucks were able to push him around and keep him from the highest percentage wood-chucking conversion spots. I don't think Chuck is fit to even chuck garbage into a truck, and if he was playing for any other organization, he'd be a call up chucking option at best.

classic

Avatar
#78 BURROWSHASCRABS
May 29 2013, 07:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Will wrote:

Huh,

This just couldn't be further from what I've been watching. The LA St. Louis series was war. The San Jose series went to game seven, with Quick and Niemmi making spectacular saves. That's why it was a low scoring series. Punishing hits on every play, constant pressure. If that is boring hockey then what on earth is exciting hockey? The 9 - 5 Pens Philly games form last year? Please. Why not just go watch a game of shinny.

LA has had some of the most complete hockey series I've seen with amazing offence, defence, and incredible gaol tending. What are you asking the coach to do? Open up his seems for the sake of making the game more exciting?

Don't get me wrong Gregor I love the way the Oilers play and an Oilers Hawks game is about as good as it gets for my money, but I have to disagree that the LA playoffs have been boring hockey. Nashville, Detroit last year was boring hockey.

I agree with Will 100%!

JG what are you talking about? You've got to be kidding me! I love the Oilers as much as any but, you can't tell if the Oilers were as good as LA and in headed into the 3rd rd. Like LA is you wouldn't even think of writing this crazy post.

Avatar
#79 David S
May 29 2013, 08:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
NewAgeSys wrote:

@Spurzey

There is really no reply to a baseless echo.I refuse to trade words with an inferior opponent they dont deserve it.

Just for spits and jiggles, Serdachny needs to reboot his hardhead drive and take a look at history,the way I see it a Canadian team named the Edmonton Oilers not only scalped the best european players but also scalped the best european hockey innovations,and but they also made both of those assets exponentially better and of higher value than could have ever been done in their Homeland or anywhere else,I in fact am thankfull that Canada was able to reach down and lend a hand to its fellow hockey brethren from around the world and bring those small semmingly insignificant assets into the light of the real Hockey World and not allow them to remain hidden and underutilised in Europe.Thats what proactive charity and adoption and betterment,integration and possesion are all about afer all,right??Man,that was fun.

There was so much good stuff in this article and so many excellent balanced posts discussing it I didnt see much I could add without disrupting the dynamic.I am reading things I have waited years to hear from some of the smartest fans in the NHL,it is satisfying to say the least.mac-T rung my bell earlier by committing to a systematic mission statement when he boldly went where no Oiler manager has gone before,"we are a skill driven possesion team" was the first step in the right direction from the right place the foundation,exactly where he needs to start.This aint no makeover kids this is surgery,buckle up.

Mac-T is very cerebral and he knows what he is doing.This franchise has turned a very important corner in a short time,the Edmonton Oilers have officially entered into a new era of integrity and accountability.

[Edited at 300 words. Let's keep the comments to a manageable length, please.]

Only 300 words? Buddy. You're screwed.

Avatar
#80 David S
May 29 2013, 08:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Butters wrote:

If Wanye ever does a "Best of Oilersnation Comments" article, I would submit this one;

Chuck had one good year, but his wood to wood chucked ratio was unsustainable. Not to mention he was chucking softer wood than most other woodchucks. Finally, other bigger woodchucks were able to push him around and keep him from the highest percentage wood-chucking conversion spots. I don't think Chuck is fit to even chuck garbage into a truck, and if he was playing for any other organization, he'd be a call up chucking option at best.

classic

Comment hi-lite reel stuff that one for sure.

Avatar
#81 Romulus' Apotheosis
May 29 2013, 09:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
wiseguy wrote:

We can both play this game.

What????

You're missing the point!!!!

I thought I was only being figuratively insane, but people always take me too literally.

You don't know what you're talking about! !! How dare anyone disagree with an article!!!

What's with trying to copy other teams?? Be an original... have an original thought instead of just nodding when you read something.

Stop trying to be a white knight. JG is a big boy and can handle disagreement and discussion.

Your opinion isn't any more important or any more correct than anyone else's. It's a fricking game you're arguing and getting all worked up about!!!

The LA Kings won the last cup playing exactly how they play. Why should they change a thing??? Just because you don't like watching it??? Call Dean Lombardi and tell him and we'll see tickets to watch what his reaction will be.

It takes a rare kind of delusion to disagree with an article by failing to address any of the actual arguments presented in it.

Avatar
#82 NewAgeSys
May 30 2013, 08:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

Only 300 words? Buddy. You're screwed.

No pal,people other than you and I are because dynamic communication templates use less words that Tweeters do,I have been purposefully expanding and aiming for a generic presentation to hit a larger number of perspectives effectively,this means with less words I simply focus to fewer perspectives being included.All you do by insisting on brevity is create a dynamic that hinders others learning abilities by limiting the scope of presentation,I hope you arent going down the less is more road,because there is a really funny catalyst behind the origin of that mindset.

A double standard defined and supported by a protectionist input focusing an elitist attitude is not exactly something new.

I dont mind if my posts are edited ,I cut and paste all posts and put them on another site before posting to the site I am on,look for Moma2s NewAge Hockey System.I try to show a clear path of posting in a specific site prior to posting the exact data on a hockey site for dynamic reasons.No I dont Blog,why when these guys are so good at it?I couldnt manifest their wide range of ideas and their writing ability,I am to ultra-focused and task orientated.

Its not really that big of a deal.Ideas are free,its not like I have overhead.If the owners of this Blog feel they want shorter posts thats fine with me,and if on occasion a good post comes along and they let it slide,thats ok as well,this isnt a battle.You dont hear me saying the word censorship do you?If my posts are deleted or edited,no harm no foul there is a functional catalyst,the Blog owner and I lose nothing,if you want to look at it that way.According to the status quo more is gained by other visitors if posts are kept shorter and this Blog is someones office so to speak.

If I had issues with editing I would be complaining,I dont have any issues,I dont ever feel censored here ,there is a free and creative exchange of ideas here,thats why i visit.Suppressionist actions arent censorship actions in my books.If I was told "what" to say in any way I wouldnt bother coming back here.As you know if you are a regular,I dont waste a lot of time on skirmishes and argueing,I post my hockey stuff and move along.

In my opinion the Status Quo is acceptable.

Avatar
#85 wiseguy
May 30 2013, 01:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Romulus' Apotheosis wrote:

It takes a rare kind of delusion to disagree with an article by failing to address any of the actual arguments presented in it.

The article is the premise and makes the point. The comment made is the counterpoint. Only a fool would come to a discussion board expecting all comments to support an article.

Avatar
#86 Romulus' Apotheosis
May 31 2013, 07:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
wiseguy wrote:

The article is the premise and makes the point. The comment made is the counterpoint. Only a fool would come to a discussion board expecting all comments to support an article.

Disagreeing with the article would entail arguing defensive-system hockey is entertaining.

You haven't done that.

Disagreeing with the article does not entail arguing against a series of straw men.

Comments are closed for this article.