Murray and new equipment

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Murray and new equipment

Postby no name on Mon Aug 27, 2018 10:15 am

https://ingoalmag.com/gear/nhl-prepared-for-feedback-as-goalies-get-new-smaller-chest-protectors/

NHL got the companies to make the new gear in time for the season depending on the feedback they should be ready to go. I am sure what ever the effects are will be minimal but wondering how Murray will be effected.
no name
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 7,983
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:19 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby FLPensFan on Mon Aug 27, 2018 10:44 am

no name wrote:https://ingoalmag.com/gear/nhl-prepared-for-feedback-as-goalies-get-new-smaller-chest-protectors/

NHL got the companies to make the new gear in time for the season depending on the feedback they should be ready to go. I am sure what ever the effects are will be minimal but wondering how Murray will be effected.

I had read something over the summer that goalies are not happy with the change. Of course, they'd like the equipment bigger to block more space, but the main concern was safety.

When they were testing the new equipment over the summer, the goalie took several shots where the equipment size had been reduced, most notably the shoulders, where they had to stop play because the goalie was injured or severely "feeling" the shot.

My first guess is, you see a lot more goalie injuries early this season, and they revert to the older pads until they find a happy medium.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,507
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby stonewizard51 on Mon Aug 27, 2018 5:40 pm

If more goalies are injured, even early on, then perhaps they should apply the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle. Want to score more goals? Dump enforcers who get 5 mins TOI tops to fight and replace them with guys who actually have skill. Yeah I'm looking at you Tom "scum of the earth" Wilson.
stonewizard51
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,174
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby FLPensFan on Mon Aug 27, 2018 7:40 pm

stonewizard51 wrote:If more goalies are injured, even early on, then perhaps they should apply the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle. Want to score more goals? Dump enforcers who get 5 mins TOI tops to fight and replace them with guys who actually have skill. Yeah I'm looking at you Tom "scum of the earth" Wilson.

While that would help, it still wouldn't help enough. The goalies, bigger equipment or not, are much better than they were in the 70s and 80s, by a long shot. Add in coaches have devised more defensive systems like the trap, and holding, hooking, & interference are only optional penalties now, and scoring will still remain down.

Find a happy medium between reduced size and safety for the goalie equipment.

Call tighter penalties, including adopting international rules where any hit to the head is a penalty.

I'd go as drastic as making the goals a puck length larger in each direction, roughly 6 inches wider and 3 inches taller.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,507
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby LimerickPensFan on Mon Aug 27, 2018 11:06 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
stonewizard51 wrote:If more goalies are injured, even early on, then perhaps they should apply the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle. Want to score more goals? Dump enforcers who get 5 mins TOI tops to fight and replace them with guys who actually have skill. Yeah I'm looking at you Tom "scum of the earth" Wilson.

While that would help, it still wouldn't help enough. The goalies, bigger equipment or not, are much better than they were in the 70s and 80s, by a long shot. Add in coaches have devised more defensive systems like the trap, and holding, hooking, & interference are only optional penalties now, and scoring will still remain down.

Find a happy medium between reduced size and safety for the goalie equipment.

Call tighter penalties, including adopting international rules where any hit to the head is a penalty.

I'd go as drastic as making the goals a puck length larger in each direction, roughly 6 inches wider and 3 inches taller.

There was even talk of just changing the shape of the pipes so that more of the pucks that hit the pipes go in. Probably would have won us game 6 of the Caps series.

One thing you missed. The goalies themselves are bigger. If the goalie is properly positioned, a skater coming down on a goalie basically has nowhere to shoot unless he can get the goalie to move. It didn't used to be that way. Watch the games even as recently as the '90s and you'll see a lot more space to shoot at.
LimerickPensFan
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 11:04 am
Location: Unfortunately, Philadelphia suburbs

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby pekkasteele on Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:14 am

Just add a 2nd goal to each team and have each team have 2 goalies at the ice all the time, lovers the skill level of all goalies since each team needs more goalies, and more goals to shot at should result in more goals ...

:)

No just joking ..... or do I ;-)
pekkasteele
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:30 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby FLPensFan on Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:43 am

LimerickPensFan wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
stonewizard51 wrote:If more goalies are injured, even early on, then perhaps they should apply the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle. Want to score more goals? Dump enforcers who get 5 mins TOI tops to fight and replace them with guys who actually have skill. Yeah I'm looking at you Tom "scum of the earth" Wilson.

While that would help, it still wouldn't help enough. The goalies, bigger equipment or not, are much better than they were in the 70s and 80s, by a long shot. Add in coaches have devised more defensive systems like the trap, and holding, hooking, & interference are only optional penalties now, and scoring will still remain down.

Find a happy medium between reduced size and safety for the goalie equipment.

Call tighter penalties, including adopting international rules where any hit to the head is a penalty.

I'd go as drastic as making the goals a puck length larger in each direction, roughly 6 inches wider and 3 inches taller.

There was even talk of just changing the shape of the pipes so that more of the pucks that hit the pipes go in. Probably would have won us game 6 of the Caps series.

One thing you missed. The goalies themselves are bigger. If the goalie is properly positioned, a skater coming down on a goalie basically has nowhere to shoot unless he can get the goalie to move. It didn't used to be that way. Watch the games even as recently as the '90s and you'll see a lot more space to shoot at.

Yeah, go back and look at the Penguins goalies of the 80's:

- Denis Herron, 5'11"
- Michel Dion, 5'10"
- Greg Millen, 5'9"
- Wendell Young, 5'9"
- Giles Meloche, 5'8"
- Roberto Romano, 5'6"

Now, I'm sure there are several in there that I missed, but those 6 were the Penguins main goalies in the 80's (although, Young was very late 80's and was more of a backup to Barrasso). Barrasso one of the few starting goalies the Penguins had who was over 6 foot tall at 6'3".
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,507
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby no name on Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:31 am

The chest protectors if they are rounded and slightly form fitting should add a few goals, but really nothing that I would think is going to drasticly change the amount of goals. I am not looking for a great rise in scoring. Would just like to see a few 50 goal scores in the regular season and possibly a 120 pt, scoring champ.

Hell the butterfly is still kinda new in the NHL, that alone with the larger equipment and the design of the equipment to take away all the dead space has lowered scoring. But lets face it the goalies are more athletic and can do amazing things in net now. But go back a few years and see how the equipment was just "fitted" to the goalie.
no name
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 7,983
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:19 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby stonewizard51 on Tue Aug 28, 2018 7:36 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
stonewizard51 wrote:If more goalies are injured, even early on, then perhaps they should apply the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle. Want to score more goals? Dump enforcers who get 5 mins TOI tops to fight and replace them with guys who actually have skill. Yeah I'm looking at you Tom "scum of the earth" Wilson.

While that would help, it still wouldn't help enough. The goalies, bigger equipment or not, are much better than they were in the 70s and 80s, by a long shot. Add in coaches have devised more defensive systems like the trap, and holding, hooking, & interference are only optional penalties now, and scoring will still remain down.

Find a happy medium between reduced size and safety for the goalie equipment.

Call tighter penalties, including adopting international rules where any hit to the head is a penalty.

I'd go as drastic as making the goals a puck length larger in each direction, roughly 6 inches wider and 3 inches taller.


All true but the odds of the NHL buying off on it is nil or less. Fans come to a game to watch goals scored at any cost including a head shot which could potentially end someone's career. No one comes to watch a ref call penalties and gawd forbid one team gets more called on them than the other team. Got to even up those calls even if the even up call is iffy at best.

It's kind of like going to a NASCAR event to watch cars racing high speed aroound a track when truth be told a majority of fans go in hopes of seeing a big pile up. Added points if someone is carted then air lifted off the track.

I especially like your idea of making the net larger. Good idea with the exception one of them will try to stretch across the crease and wind up with a groin pull. Then again that's on them.
stonewizard51
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,174
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:26 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby murphydump55 on Tue Aug 28, 2018 9:57 pm

stonewizard51 wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
stonewizard51 wrote:If more goalies are injured, even early on, then perhaps they should apply the "If it ain't broke don't fix it" principle. Want to score more goals? Dump enforcers who get 5 mins TOI tops to fight and replace them with guys who actually have skill. Yeah I'm looking at you Tom "scum of the earth" Wilson.

While that would help, it still wouldn't help enough. The goalies, bigger equipment or not, are much better than they were in the 70s and 80s, by a long shot. Add in coaches have devised more defensive systems like the trap, and holding, hooking, & interference are only optional penalties now, and scoring will still remain down.

Find a happy medium between reduced size and safety for the goalie equipment.

Call tighter penalties, including adopting international rules where any hit to the head is a penalty.

I'd go as drastic as making the goals a puck length larger in each direction, roughly 6 inches wider and 3 inches taller.


All true but the odds of the NHL buying off on it is nil or less. Fans come to a game to watch goals scored at any cost including a head shot which could potentially end someone's career. No one comes to watch a ref call penalties and gawd forbid one team gets more called on them than the other team. Got to even up those calls even if the even up call is iffy at best.

It's kind of like going to a NASCAR event to watch cars racing high speed aroound a track when truth be told a majority of fans go in hopes of seeing a big pile up. Added points if someone is carted then air lifted off the track.

I especially like your idea of making the net larger. Good idea with the exception one of them will try to stretch across the crease and wind up with a groin pull. Then again that's on them.


Call the game tighter = more power plays = more goals = players adjusting and adapting = game opening up more and allowing the skilled players to use said skill = more goals and better product.

I’d rather see what Gaudreau, Seguin, and Panarin can actually do when they aren’t being abused or held by a ham and egg 4th liner.
murphydump55
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 11,590
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:06 pm
Location: the real hockeyville and apparently a janitor from Eastern Canada LOL

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby pcmforless on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:02 am

Agreed, I go to the games for the goals and the skill. I like a good hit, I will watch a good fight, but I'm really there for the goals, the crisp passes, a great looking play and even a great save on a great chance. I definitely don't go wanting to see a slowed up game where everyone slogs along (like most games in the past vs the Devils).
pcmforless
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 588
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:24 am
Location: RENO, NV

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Tonythepenguin on Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:51 am

I agree with u pcmforless...
Tonythepenguin
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:13 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Jim on Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:17 am

Yeah, because replacing a fighter like Reaves with a more skilled guy like Sundqvist really upped the goal scoring for the Blues.
Jim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,420
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Cow_Master66 on Wed Aug 29, 2018 9:29 am

I never understood why people wanted "more goals". To me the goal should always be "more scoring chances" and that's certainly improved greatly since the dark days of the 90's. There's still room for improvement but all they need is for the refs to call the penalties they should and everything should be good to go. I personally don't really want to see games that are 8-6 but I want to see scoring chances develop based on speed and skill, but it's the refs job to ensure that speed and skill isn't impeded illegally.
Cow_Master66
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 9:41 am

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby FLPensFan on Wed Aug 29, 2018 9:54 am

Jim wrote:Yeah, because replacing a fighter like Reaves with a more skilled guy like Sundqvist really upped the goal scoring for the Blues.

Sundqvist being "more skilled" is pretty subjective. Sundqvist was always going to be a 4th liner. In the very beginning, it was a stretch for him to be a 3rd line center. Although he got hot in the AHL the season before he was dealt, he was never going to put up numbers....which is why Pittsburgh soured on him. As you recall, Sundqvist was often a guy that I had on my "must be protected in expansion draft" list. Even though his "skill" at the AHL level increased, he fell off a cliff in terms of his value by Penguins management.

So, if you are saying Reaves has a skill level of 8000, Sundqvist might be at 8002. They were both 4th line players, and neither of them known for their offensive skills. Reaves is a hitter and fighter. Sundqvist is a defensive specialist. I don't think STL end goal was to put Sundqvist in Reaves spot. Sundqvist was more a replacement for Lehtera, who STL traded to Philly earlier in the day.

Not a good comparison.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,507
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby longtimefan on Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:10 am

Scoring started to go down when the Devils started winning cups with the trap. The last team that averaged four goals a game was the 95-96 Pens, and they were the only ones. The Devils first won the cup in '95, beating a much more talented Red Wing team. In 2000, the league expanded, and Jacques Lemaire introduced the trap to the Wild. It allowed them to be competitive. Lemieux was incensed when he first played them, saying simply that it wasn't how hockey was meant to be played.

There was some thought about outlawing the trap, much like the NBA did with the zone for several years, or what baseball has toyed with in terms f outlawing shifts. But if you want to see where the game changed, look at the Devils perfecting the trap. All the expansion around then just threw gasoline on the fire with lesser teams trying to compete.
longtimefan
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,491
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:33 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby FLPensFan on Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:16 am

Cow_Master66 wrote:I never understood why people wanted "more goals". To me the goal should always be "more scoring chances" and that's certainly improved greatly since the dark days of the 90's. There's still room for improvement but all they need is for the refs to call the penalties they should and everything should be good to go. I personally don't really want to see games that are 8-6 but I want to see scoring chances develop based on speed and skill, but it's the refs job to ensure that speed and skill isn't impeded illegally.

I think most people would agree with you, that it isn't necessarily about more goals, but more scoring chances.

I think most major sports, the way the games have evolved, have backed themselves in a hole. In almost every major sport, nobody can challenge for the top records in the league
--In the NFL, most running backs last maybe 5 years in the league. By 28-30 years old they are deemed too old and cheaply replaced. Can any new, young RB last in the league long enough to even break into the NFL top 10 in Rushing Yards or TDs?
--In MLB, last major excitement in the sport was Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds all chasing HR record. Juiced or not, that brought tons of excitement back to the game. Now there are defensive shifts, and it is getting to the point where strikeouts are soaring. The game has gotten stale.
--In the NBA....um....I don't really watch, but all they seem to be doing is shuffling around big name players for teams to win championships. No loyalty at all.
--In the NHL, all these defensive systems, better coaching, better training, better equipment, and poor officiating have led to a reduction in scoring. Nobody has a chance to break Gretzky's offensive records, Lemieux's short handed goals mark, goals in a season, etc. NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.


In 1993-1994 NHL season, 23 players scored 40 or more goals....with 9 players scoring 50 or more. 8 players had 100 or more points. Half had more than 110 pts.
In 2017-2018 NHL season, 8 players scored 40 or more goals.....nobody hit 50. 3 players had 100 or more points. Nobody more than 110.

Unlike the 80's, where scoring was high and the goalies were horrible, in the 90's there was a good balance between high scoring and solid goaltending. In 1993-1994, with 23 players scoring 40 or more goals, Dominik Hasek led the league with a 1.95 GAA and .930 save percentage. Broduer was next closest in GAA with almost half a goal per game more, 2.40 GAA. Vanbiesbrouck was the only other goalie above a .920 save percentage, at .924. Everyone else was in the teens or lower. Darren Puppa, for example, was 9th best in GAA with a 2.74, but had a sub-900 save percentage.

In 2017-2018, 9 goalies had a better GAA than Broduer's 2nd place 2.40 in 93-94. In 2016-2017, 16 goalies were better than the 2.40 mark. In 2017-2018, out of the top 50 goalies in GAA, only the 49th ranked GAA goalie, Scott Darling, had a sub-900 save percentage. In 1993-1994, TWENTY NINE of the top 50 ranked GAA goalies had sub-900 save percentages.

Goalies and defense have gotten too good. We don't need 80's level offense and bad goaltending, but the NHL needs 90's level offense and slight worse goaltending, where anything above .900 save percentage is good, whereas now, we really look for .920 and above as good save percentage.

This is long. I smell an expanded blog post coming on this topic. :D
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,507
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Cow_Master66 on Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:21 am

longtimefan wrote:Scoring started to go down when the Devils started winning cups with the trap. The last team that averaged four goals a game was the 95-96 Pens, and they were the only ones. The Devils first won the cup in '95, beating a much more talented Red Wing team. In 2000, the league expanded, and Jacques Lemaire introduced the trap to the Wild. It allowed them to be competitive. Lemieux was incensed when he first played them, saying simply that it wasn't how hockey was meant to be played.

There was some thought about outlawing the trap, much like the NBA did with the zone for several years, or what baseball has toyed with in terms f outlawing shifts. But if you want to see where the game changed, look at the Devils perfecting the trap. All the expansion around then just threw gasoline on the fire with lesser teams trying to compete.


While I definitely agree, there was never a need to outlaw the trap. The only thing that had to be done was enforce obstruction. Without obstruction, the Red Wings would have destroyed the Devils trap in 95 but they weren't able to move their feet.
Cow_Master66
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 9:41 am

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby longtimefan on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:00 pm

Cow_Master66 wrote:
longtimefan wrote:Scoring started to go down when the Devils started winning cups with the trap. The last team that averaged four goals a game was the 95-96 Pens, and they were the only ones. The Devils first won the cup in '95, beating a much more talented Red Wing team. In 2000, the league expanded, and Jacques Lemaire introduced the trap to the Wild. It allowed them to be competitive. Lemieux was incensed when he first played them, saying simply that it wasn't how hockey was meant to be played.

There was some thought about outlawing the trap, much like the NBA did with the zone for several years, or what baseball has toyed with in terms f outlawing shifts. But if you want to see where the game changed, look at the Devils perfecting the trap. All the expansion around then just threw gasoline on the fire with lesser teams trying to compete.


While I definitely agree, there was never a need to outlaw the trap. The only thing that had to be done was enforce obstruction. Without obstruction, the Red Wings would have destroyed the Devils trap in 95 but they weren't able to move their feet.


You are correct. It was a major reason Mario retired after 1997. The clutching and grabbing, and not allowing the best players to shine. It really hasn't been the same game since those Devils won.
longtimefan
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,491
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:33 pm

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Cow_Master66 on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:04 pm

longtimefan wrote:
Cow_Master66 wrote:
longtimefan wrote:Scoring started to go down when the Devils started winning cups with the trap. The last team that averaged four goals a game was the 95-96 Pens, and they were the only ones. The Devils first won the cup in '95, beating a much more talented Red Wing team. In 2000, the league expanded, and Jacques Lemaire introduced the trap to the Wild. It allowed them to be competitive. Lemieux was incensed when he first played them, saying simply that it wasn't how hockey was meant to be played.

There was some thought about outlawing the trap, much like the NBA did with the zone for several years, or what baseball has toyed with in terms f outlawing shifts. But if you want to see where the game changed, look at the Devils perfecting the trap. All the expansion around then just threw gasoline on the fire with lesser teams trying to compete.


While I definitely agree, there was never a need to outlaw the trap. The only thing that had to be done was enforce obstruction. Without obstruction, the Red Wings would have destroyed the Devils trap in 95 but they weren't able to move their feet.


You are correct. It was a major reason Mario retired after 1997. The clutching and grabbing, and not allowing the best players to shine. It really hasn't been the same game since those Devils won.


It's drastically improved since the mid-90's but has gone downhill again since the recent emphasis on obstruction...All they need is the refs to call the penalties and the players will adjust, they just refuse to do it...
Cow_Master66
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 9:41 am

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Jim on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:39 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
Jim wrote:Yeah, because replacing a fighter like Reaves with a more skilled guy like Sundqvist really upped the goal scoring for the Blues.

Sundqvist being "more skilled" is pretty subjective. Sundqvist was always going to be a 4th liner. In the very beginning, it was a stretch for him to be a 3rd line center. Although he got hot in the AHL the season before he was dealt, he was never going to put up numbers....which is why Pittsburgh soured on him. As you recall, Sundqvist was often a guy that I had on my "must be protected in expansion draft" list. Even though his "skill" at the AHL level increased, he fell off a cliff in terms of his value by Penguins management.

So, if you are saying Reaves has a skill level of 8000, Sundqvist might be at 8002. They were both 4th line players, and neither of them known for their offensive skills. Reaves is a hitter and fighter. Sundqvist is a defensive specialist. I don't think STL end goal was to put Sundqvist in Reaves spot. Sundqvist was more a replacement for Lehtera, who STL traded to Philly earlier in the day.

Not a good comparison.


It's not only a good comparison, it is an excellent comparison.

First, because in reality it is what happened (directly or not). Second because is you are replacing a low minute 4th liner, you are going to do it with a low minute 4th liner. You are not going to replace a goon with a top-6 guy. Anti-fighter people act like teams are going to release a Haley and replace him with a McDavid. In reality they will be replaced with other 4th liner/13th forward types like Sundqvist or Rowney. If the argument is that Sundqvists and Rowneys are not skilled enough compared to the fighter getting replaced, then it simply shows the folly of the paper argument being presented.
Jim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,420
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby LimerickPensFan on Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:13 pm

Jim wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Jim wrote:Yeah, because replacing a fighter like Reaves with a more skilled guy like Sundqvist really upped the goal scoring for the Blues.

Sundqvist being "more skilled" is pretty subjective. Sundqvist was always going to be a 4th liner. In the very beginning, it was a stretch for him to be a 3rd line center. Although he got hot in the AHL the season before he was dealt, he was never going to put up numbers....which is why Pittsburgh soured on him. As you recall, Sundqvist was often a guy that I had on my "must be protected in expansion draft" list. Even though his "skill" at the AHL level increased, he fell off a cliff in terms of his value by Penguins management.

So, if you are saying Reaves has a skill level of 8000, Sundqvist might be at 8002. They were both 4th line players, and neither of them known for their offensive skills. Reaves is a hitter and fighter. Sundqvist is a defensive specialist. I don't think STL end goal was to put Sundqvist in Reaves spot. Sundqvist was more a replacement for Lehtera, who STL traded to Philly earlier in the day.

Not a good comparison.


It's not only a good comparison, it is an excellent comparison.

First, because in reality it is what happened (directly or not). Second because is you are replacing a low minute 4th liner, you are going to do it with a low minute 4th liner. You are not going to replace a goon with a top-6 guy. Anti-fighter people act like teams are going to release a Haley and replace him with a McDavid. In reality they will be replaced with other 4th liner/13th forward types like Sundqvist or Rowney. If the argument is that Sundqvists and Rowneys are not skilled enough compared to the fighter getting replaced, then it simply shows the folly of the paper argument being presented.

And yet, goon-in-chief Tom Wilson played on the first line. I'd bet the Caps could get a top-6 winger for him.
LimerickPensFan
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 11:04 am
Location: Unfortunately, Philadelphia suburbs

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby FLPensFan on Wed Aug 29, 2018 1:37 pm

Jim wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Jim wrote:Yeah, because replacing a fighter like Reaves with a more skilled guy like Sundqvist really upped the goal scoring for the Blues.

Sundqvist being "more skilled" is pretty subjective. Sundqvist was always going to be a 4th liner. In the very beginning, it was a stretch for him to be a 3rd line center. Although he got hot in the AHL the season before he was dealt, he was never going to put up numbers....which is why Pittsburgh soured on him. As you recall, Sundqvist was often a guy that I had on my "must be protected in expansion draft" list. Even though his "skill" at the AHL level increased, he fell off a cliff in terms of his value by Penguins management.

So, if you are saying Reaves has a skill level of 8000, Sundqvist might be at 8002. They were both 4th line players, and neither of them known for their offensive skills. Reaves is a hitter and fighter. Sundqvist is a defensive specialist. I don't think STL end goal was to put Sundqvist in Reaves spot. Sundqvist was more a replacement for Lehtera, who STL traded to Philly earlier in the day.

Not a good comparison.


It's not only a good comparison, it is an excellent comparison.

First, because in reality it is what happened (directly or not). Second because is you are replacing a low minute 4th liner, you are going to do it with a low minute 4th liner. You are not going to replace a goon with a top-6 guy. Anti-fighter people act like teams are going to release a Haley and replace him with a McDavid. In reality they will be replaced with other 4th liner/13th forward types like Sundqvist or Rowney. If the argument is that Sundqvists and Rowneys are not skilled enough compared to the fighter getting replaced, then it simply shows the folly of the paper argument being presented.

Ah, Confucious see your point now. Very good, grasshoppa. You point is indeed a good one.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,507
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Jim on Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:00 am

LimerickPensFan wrote:And yet, goon-in-chief Tom Wilson played on the first line. I'd bet the Caps could get a top-6 winger for him.


He played top 6 time because the Caps only have 2 actual top-6 wingers.

But, if the point is to not have players like Wilson play in the league anymore, who is going to give a top-6 skill winger for Wilson simply to then not play Wilson...?
Jim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,420
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:18 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Murray and new equipment

Postby Pitt87 on Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:25 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
no name wrote:https://ingoalmag.com/gear/nhl-prepared-for-feedback-as-goalies-get-new-smaller-chest-protectors/

NHL got the companies to make the new gear in time for the season depending on the feedback they should be ready to go. I am sure what ever the effects are will be minimal but wondering how Murray will be effected.

I had read something over the summer that goalies are not happy with the change. Of course, they'd like the equipment bigger to block more space, but the main concern was safety.

When they were testing the new equipment over the summer, the goalie took several shots where the equipment size had been reduced, most notably the shoulders, where they had to stop play because the goalie was injured or severely "feeling" the shot.

My first guess is, you see a lot more goalie injuries early this season, and they revert to the older pads until they find a happy medium.


Not buying that goalies are worried about getting hurt. Goalies don't like getting scored on and have been willing to give up feeling pucks -- which some goaltenders prefer -- in favor of size & coverage. They are also almost all headcases and giving up more goals will literally keep them up at night.

League needs more scoring, so if the guy who gets paid millions to stand in front of the place where everyone is firing pucks gets hurt by a puck, that guy is not cut out for the league anymore. 99.9% of them will adjust and be fine.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,948
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Next

Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kharlamov and 15 guests


e-mail