This day on May 14
None

Happy Birthday To: feepa, g2k, Oilfan In UK, Dan86, swany, Oilers000, canoilers, lmaonade, ont_oil_fan81, I'm_Topher, cliffordbaker, headpins

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Oilers » Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4)
Pages (2): [1  2  >  »]
Switch to nested viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832712]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:00 Go to next message
OilFans  is currently offline OilFans
Messages: 1447
Registered: February 2006
Location: Edmonton

1 Cup

1
0
Final

Score Prediction
Login To See Your Results
No one predicted this!
 
Edmonton to win: 86%
Los Angeles to win: 14%
14 entries          View all picks   Leaderboard



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832716 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
g2k is currently online g2k
Messages: 2738
Registered: January 2003
Location: The Hood

2 Cups

http:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/MA_Route_13.svg/480px-MA_Route_13.svg.png


#firebob #screwitjustselltheteam #ownerisacreep

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832717 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NetBOG  is currently offline NetBOG
Messages: 2896
Registered: January 2006
Location: Parts Unknown

2 Cups

In Stu we trust


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832718 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Best team ever. Well deserved win


Just kidding

All Stu tonight.


Horrid effort by almost everyone else. Makes up for game 2. Better have a whale of a game to close it out at home.



"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832719 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim is currently online Skookum Jim
Messages: 3987
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

3 Cups

YEAH!

Suck it Trebeck!! 💥🤛🏻



McDAVID! Oh YEAH Baby!!
Tic-Tac-Tao!
Keep on Rockin' in the Free World
P. Chiarelli math.. T. Hall = A. Larsson, Yak= bag o'pucks (OK he got one right...) K. Russell = $4.1 M+NMC, G. Reinhart= M. Barzal + A. Beauvillier, J. Eberle = R. Spooner,

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832720 is a reply to message #832717 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
watchman  is currently offline watchman
Messages: 1313
Registered: October 2019
Location: River City

1 Cup

well, I didn't predict THAT score. god


...this time, it's for real (isn't it?).

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832721 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Iamheretoday  is currently offline Iamheretoday
Messages: 59
Registered: August 2007

No Cups

That should make the rest of the league take notice. That was a defensive effort like I have not seen from this team. Wave Towel


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832722 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
g2k is currently online g2k
Messages: 2738
Registered: January 2003
Location: The Hood

2 Cups

Vinnie improved as game wore on.

Strong 3rd period by him.



#firebob #screwitjustselltheteam #ownerisacreep

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832723 is a reply to message #832721 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
g2k is currently online g2k
Messages: 2738
Registered: January 2003
Location: The Hood

2 Cups

Iamheretoday wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:12

That should make the rest of the league take notice. That was a defensive effort like I have not seen from this team. Wave Towel

Bit of a fire drill on many occasions.

Got er done though.



#firebob #screwitjustselltheteam #ownerisacreep

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832724 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
inverno76  is currently offline inverno76
Messages: 2184
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

Pretty much everyone and their dog has zero trust in Skinner.

What a game. 1st star, and if he’s not recognized then whatever. Brick wall. Looked unflappable.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832725 is a reply to message #832721 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Iamheretoday wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:12

That should make the rest of the league take notice. That was a defensive effort like I have not seen from this team. Wave Towel


Hehe. I think part of it was LA kinds blows. They were mishandling pucks and messing up their chances, even with them being on the attack most of the game. I think we get destroyed playing like this against a good offensive team.

Oh well though. We are playing LA and who knows if we would play so low energy against a team that actually has a high talent level. We like to play based on the competition.

[Updated on: Sun, 28 April 2024 23:19]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832726 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smyth260  is currently offline smyth260
Messages: 960
Registered: November 2007

No Cups

Skinner has put his mark on the series. Phenomenal game.


Clean house or bust

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832727 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
g2k is currently online g2k
Messages: 2738
Registered: January 2003
Location: The Hood

2 Cups

2 day rest.

Come out hard on Wednesday and get rid of these dirtbags.

They leave a bruise.



#firebob #screwitjustselltheteam #ownerisacreep

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832728 is a reply to message #832726 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
g2k is currently online g2k
Messages: 2738
Registered: January 2003
Location: The Hood

2 Cups

smyth260 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:17

Skinner has put his mark on the series. Phenomenal game.

Yes.

Only 1 goal against on Friday too.



#firebob #screwitjustselltheteam #ownerisacreep

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832729 is a reply to message #832726 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NZ Oiler Fan is currently online NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 983
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

No Cups

That PP we scored on was one of the most BS calls I've seen, but they missed some blatant ones later on, so whatever.

Lucky to get away with that one. I thought Nurse & Vinny had huge games defensively. Ekholm too.

I can't remember the last time we goalied a team. Happened against us plenty of times though. Thanks for the win Stu!



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832730 is a reply to message #832729 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:22

That PP we scored on was one of the most BS calls I've seen, but they missed some blatant ones later on, so whatever.

Lucky to get away with that one. I thought Nurse & Vinny had huge games defensively. Ekholm too.

I can't remember the last time we goalied a team. Happened against us plenty of times though. Thanks for the win Stu!


Phantom high stick call was a nice even up, hehe.

Refs just can't help but get themselves involved.

Agree about the D. Garbage game offensively but lots of good plays by D in our end, and some forwards. We somehow were experts at just getting pucks out over our blue line tonight. Our completely inept offense demanded a lot of defensive play tonight. Was good enough to survive against the Kings and their 1 line team. Somehow Mikey Anderson one of the most dangerous Kings tonight.

[Updated on: Sun, 28 April 2024 23:25]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832731 is a reply to message #832730 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Leia  is currently offline Leia
Messages: 340
Registered: May 2003
Location: England

No Cups

They came and played the 1-3-1, we saw it and we conquered it.....
We've won playing pretty, we've battled and now badly and still won...
All bodes well going forward.



If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832732 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oilfan94  is currently offline oilfan94
Messages: 350
Registered: June 2006
Location: USA

No Cups

I think I read a quote from Ekholm where he said that in the playoffs to have success you have to win some games you don't deserve. This was one of those tonight. When was the last time the Oilers won a Gane 1-0, or even lost a game 1-0?


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832733 is a reply to message #832712 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Hot damn

https://forums.hfboards.com/attachments/img_3339-jpeg.861638/

Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well.

[Updated on: Sun, 28 April 2024 23:47]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832734 is a reply to message #832725 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
inverno76  is currently offline inverno76
Messages: 2184
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:16

Iamheretoday wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:12

That should make the rest of the league take notice. That was a defensive effort like I have not seen from this team. Wave Towel


Hehe. I think part of it was LA kinds blows. They were mishandling pucks and messing up their chances, even with them being on the attack most of the game. I think we get destroyed playing like this against a good offensive team.

Oh well though. We are playing LA and who knows if we would play so low energy against a team that actually has a high talent level. We like to play based on the competition.



Some times you need to give credit where credit is due. LA heavily outshot Edmonton. LA had very few scoring chances and when they did Skinner stood tall.

That was a gutsy playoff win. Can’t always be domination. To win the Cup, you need to win games in Ms y different ways.

Enjoy the Dub. Well deserved and that game translates.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832735 is a reply to message #832733 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
inverno76  is currently offline inverno76
Messages: 2184
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

Disturbing stat, but it felt like the high scoring chances weren’t far off. Can you bring up that stat? Not being a jerk. It just seems like you have your ear to the grindstone and I’m lazy.

Seemed like many of LA’s chances were perimeter plays.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832736 is a reply to message #832735 ]
Sun, 28 April 2024 23:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:47

Disturbing stat, but it felt like the high scoring chances weren’t far off. Can you bring up that stat? Not being a jerk. It just seems like you have your ear to the grindstone and I’m lazy.

Seemed like many of LA’s chances were perimeter plays.



14 to 4 high danger chances. Ceci was on for 11 of them against. 8 against the danault line.

Kopitar line mostly against bouch/Ek and only got 1 high danger chance with that matchup.

[Updated on: Sun, 28 April 2024 23:50]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832738 is a reply to message #832735 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 00:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

inverno76 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:47

Disturbing stat, but it felt like the high scoring chances weren’t far off. Can you bring up that stat? Not being a jerk. It just seems like you have your ear to the grindstone and I’m lazy.

Seemed like many of LA’s chances were perimeter plays.



Gregor says sportlogiq stats say high danger chances were 7 to 4 for the Oilers. I'm not sure if that makes sense to me. I hope the Oilers don't see that stat.



"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832739 is a reply to message #832736 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 00:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam is currently online Adam
Messages: 6908
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:48

inverno76 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:47

Disturbing stat, but it felt like the high scoring chances weren’t far off. Can you bring up that stat? Not being a jerk. It just seems like you have your ear to the grindstone and I’m lazy.

Seemed like many of LA’s chances were perimeter plays.



14 to 4 high danger chances. Ceci was on for 11 of them against. 8 against the danault line.

Kopitar line mostly against bouch/Ek and only got 1 high danger chance with that matchup.


Really ugly game. Nice to pull it out, but there's a few things they were doing tonight that I'd rather not see them do anymore.

They were pretty passive in their forecheck all night, and they just never seemed to have a lot of urgency for the other team's net, despite facing a crappy back-up goalie. Lots of talk in the game thread about McDavid trying to dangle their whole team, but he's not getting the support to do much else. We weren't attacking in numbers tonight.

LA is a much worse team, so you'd ideally like to see them just put the throttle down and dominate. This game seemed like we were trying to play the same defensive shut down game that the Kings did, and I'm not a fan. We were one shot away from overtime with that inferior team all night.

Also, Knoblauch occasionally makes some just head-scratching decisions. Derek Ryan isn't good enough to be on the ice in the first three games, left off for Sam Carrick, who's as just-a-guy as they come. So why is he on the ice in the final minute of the game? He's not in my top 8 or 9 picks for who should have got that push.

Oh well, the main thing is that we won and we're now maybe just 60 minutes of hockey away from the second round...



"Thinking that a bad team's best players are the reason the team is bad is the "Tambellini re-signing Lennart Petrell" of sports opinions." @Woodguy55
#FireLowe #FireBobbyNicks #FireKenHolland #FireKeithGretzky

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832740 is a reply to message #832738 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 06:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
tardigrade81 is currently online tardigrade81
Messages: 1967
Registered: November 2022
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan

1 Cup

Thank you skinner!!


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832741 is a reply to message #832738 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 08:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 00:22

inverno76 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:47

Disturbing stat, but it felt like the high scoring chances weren’t far off. Can you bring up that stat? Not being a jerk. It just seems like you have your ear to the grindstone and I’m lazy.

Seemed like many of LA’s chances were perimeter plays.



Gregor says sportlogiq stats say high danger chances were 7 to 4 for the Oilers. I'm not sure if that makes sense to me. I hope the Oilers don't see that stat.


I can't confirm if that stat is correct but watching the whole game.
- The Kings definitely were pressing more and were by far the more desperate team.
- The Kings had the puck in the Oilers zone more.
- I saw the Kings doing a ton of twirls around the net, going up and down the wall and battles in the corner.
- They did grossly outshoot the Oilers but there was a ton of long range shots and shots from the side boards that Skinner had to make routine saves on.
- They were trying to direct the puck towards the goal from the point a lot but I saw a ton of pucks getting blocked, hitting bodies or just laying in the area between the blue line and hash marks and the Oilers just gobbled them up and got the puck out.
- They were clearing trying to throw pucks into the scrum in front and hoping a guy got a stick on it or it hit someone and went in.

I can remember Skinner having to make 4 for sure really good saves (I would assume those were the high dangers scored) but I don't remember him looking like he's standing on his head all game and the only reason they won. He was no doubt good and if someone just looked at the game shots, they would think he stole one but the Kings at least to me, they were sure intent on just throwing it on goal hoping for a rebound. I saw lots of shots where rather than try to challenge the Oilers and taking it to the goal, they fired it long range with no screen.

It begs the question to me. Is how the Kings played a good idea, meaning throwing it on goal no matter from where or is it better to try and make plays like the Oilers did? I thought last night, the Oilers were clearly trying to make plays and weren't interested in just throwing it on goal. I would have liked them to play that style mostly as I see just firing a shot on goal that has no chance of going in unless the goalie misses it as losing possession but maybe not passing up as many shots as they did would be better and maybe taking a little more of what the Kings were giving them.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832742 is a reply to message #832733 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42

Hot damn

https://forums.hfboards.com/attachments/img_3339-jpeg.861638/

Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well.

Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt?

In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots.

So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against.

So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against.

I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832743 is a reply to message #832742 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 08:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

How are some who were worried about Skinner after game 2 feeling now?

A poster in here said after his 14 career playoff games, he was almost the worst playoff goalie in the NHL since the early 2000's.

After the 2 games in LA where he gave up 1 goal, 2.48 and .919. So that's good right?



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832744 is a reply to message #832742 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 08:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42

Hot damn

https://forums.hfboards.com/attachments/img_3339-jpeg.861638/

Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well.

Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt?

In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots.

So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against.

So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against.

I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD.


The matchups were actually the opposite of that. Bouch and Ek were mostly against kopitars line and gave up 1 high danger chance. Ceci and Nurse gave up 8 high danger chances against the Danault line.

I'm not sure what the spotlogiq data excludes to reduce LA's high danger chances from 14 (based just on shot location/timing data), to 4, but just going by shot locations, the nurse/Ceci pair was on for 11 out of LA's 14 high danger shot attempts.

To me this matches the eye test, because I felt Ceci was kind of alone as a D that was lost in our end most of the night. Most of our D looked like wizards shutting down plays, but Ceci really didnt. I know I am not the biggest Ceci fan :)

We survived though. I still would not expect our game plan last night to cut it against a team like the Avs or Vegas, or even the Canucks. but It was good enough against LA. The ice was total trash too, which worked to our advantage favoring defense.

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 08:58]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832745 is a reply to message #832743 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 09:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike is currently online Mike
Messages: 1123
Registered: August 2005
Location: Moncton, New Brunswick

1 Cup

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 11:51

How are some who were worried about Skinner after game 2 feeling now?

A poster in here said after his 14 career playoff games, he was almost the worst playoff goalie in the NHL since the early 2000's.

After the 2 games in LA where he gave up 1 goal, 2.48 and .919. So that's good right?



icon_lol

I stated a fact. The fact has now changed slightly - he was worst in both save % and GAA on the cap era. On the strength of the last 2 games he has now moved ahead of Kari Lehtonen for the 2nd worst save % i(still last for GAA). No spin - just facts. Don't let them hurt your feelings too much.

Let me remind you that I am the founding member of the Skinner booster club here. Nobody wants to see him succeed more than me. But he sucked for the most part in the playoffs last year, and he wasn't great the first 2 games here. And I don't want the team (and certain "fans") to get stuck in this mindset that the starter's role is set for the playoffs regardless of performance, as it obviously was last year.

As for this game - Skinner maybe didn't need to be prime Hasek last night, but he was solid. Made all the stops we expect him to make, plus a few very good ones. Certainly has looked better the last 2 games. Let's hope he keep it up. Another 15 game win streak would be perfect.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832746 is a reply to message #832745 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 09:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mike is currently online Mike
Messages: 1123
Registered: August 2005
Location: Moncton, New Brunswick

1 Cup

So was that one of the shortest games ever? Puck drop was close to midnight here, but it was over at around 2:00, or shortly after.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832747 is a reply to message #832746 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 09:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NZ Oiler Fan is currently online NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 983
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

No Cups

Mike wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 12:42

So was that one of the shortest games ever? Puck drop was close to midnight here, but it was over at around 2:00, or shortly after.

Yeah, not many stoppages or scrums after the whistle at all. I think I was in bed by 2:30.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832748 is a reply to message #832744 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:55

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42

Hot damn

https://forums.hfboards.com/attachments/img_3339-jpeg.861638/

Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well.

Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt?

In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots.

So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against.

So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against.

I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD.


The matchups were actually the opposite of that. Bouch and Ek were mostly against kopitars line and gave up 1 high danger chance. Ceci and Nurse gave up 8 high danger chances against the Danault line.

I'm not sure what the spotlogiq data excludes to reduce LA's high danger chances from 14 (based just on shot location/timing data), to 4, but just going by shot locations, the nurse/Ceci pair was on for 11 out of LA's 14 high danger shot attempts.

To me this matches the eye test, because I felt Ceci was kind of alone as a D that was lost in our end most of the night. Most of our D looked like wizards shutting down plays, but Ceci really didnt. I know I am not the biggest Ceci fan :)

We survived though. I still would not expect our game plan last night to cut it against a team like the Avs or Vegas, or even the Canucks. but It was good enough against LA. The ice was total trash too, which worked to our advantage favoring defense.

Your comment at the end of your 3rd paragraph in my opinion will skew someone's perception of the game. You don't like Ceci so unless he plays perfect, you will find fault in his game. Which isn't meant as a shot. Most people have players they don't care for on their teams.

When I watched the game, the Kings didn't get a lot of quality looks even when Ceci was on the ice.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832749 is a reply to message #832748 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 10:14

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:55

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42

Hot damn

https://forums.hfboards.com/attachments/img_3339-jpeg.861638/

Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well.

Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt?

In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots.

So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against.

So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against.

I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD.


The matchups were actually the opposite of that. Bouch and Ek were mostly against kopitars line and gave up 1 high danger chance. Ceci and Nurse gave up 8 high danger chances against the Danault line.

I'm not sure what the spotlogiq data excludes to reduce LA's high danger chances from 14 (based just on shot location/timing data), to 4, but just going by shot locations, the nurse/Ceci pair was on for 11 out of LA's 14 high danger shot attempts.

To me this matches the eye test, because I felt Ceci was kind of alone as a D that was lost in our end most of the night. Most of our D looked like wizards shutting down plays, but Ceci really didnt. I know I am not the biggest Ceci fan :)

We survived though. I still would not expect our game plan last night to cut it against a team like the Avs or Vegas, or even the Canucks. but It was good enough against LA. The ice was total trash too, which worked to our advantage favoring defense.

Your comment at the end of your 3rd paragraph in my opinion will skew someone's perception of the game. You don't like Ceci so unless he plays perfect, you will find fault in his game. Which isn't meant as a shot. Most people have players they don't care for on their teams.

When I watched the game, the Kings didn't get a lot of quality looks even when Ceci was on the ice.


Your Ceci comment history suggests biased viewing as well :)

So, maybe stats can fill the gap.

The real test comes in the next rounds in any case. LA are just a warmup round for these playoffs.

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 10:24]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832750 is a reply to message #832745 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Mike wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 09:22

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 11:51

How are some who were worried about Skinner after game 2 feeling now?

A poster in here said after his 14 career playoff games, he was almost the worst playoff goalie in the NHL since the early 2000's.

After the 2 games in LA where he gave up 1 goal, 2.48 and .919. So that's good right?



icon_lol

I stated a fact. The fact has now changed slightly - he was worst in both save % and GAA on the cap era. On the strength of the last 2 games he has now moved ahead of Kari Lehtonen for the 2nd worst save % i(still last for GAA). No spin - just facts. Don't let them hurt your feelings too much.

Let me remind you that I am the founding member of the Skinner booster club here. Nobody wants to see him succeed more than me. But he sucked for the most part in the playoffs last year, and he wasn't great the first 2 games here. And I don't want the team (and certain "fans") to get stuck in this mindset that the starter's role is set for the playoffs regardless of performance, as it obviously was last year.

As for this game - Skinner maybe didn't need to be prime Hasek last night, but he was solid. Made all the stops we expect him to make, plus a few very good ones. Certainly has looked better the last 2 games. Let's hope he keep it up. Another 15 game win streak would be perfect.


We can agree to disagree if you like but I think basing your opinion on if a goalie can or can't do it in the playoffs when at the time of your post, he only had 14 career playoffs games ever and 12 of them were from his first year as an NHL start, in my opinion is kind of short sighted.

1 year in the playoffs isn't a ton of experience in my opinion. So I felt he deserved the benefit of the doubt longer than 2 games this year before throwing up the red flag of having a problem. He played extremely well in the next 2 games. Does that mean he's going to win the Conn Smyth? No but it indicates to me, he has the ability to play very well in the playoffs. The big thing now is he needs to show he can keep doing it. We shall see.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832752 is a reply to message #832749 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 10:18

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 10:14

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:55

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 08:49

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 28 April 2024 23:42

Hot damn

https://forums.hfboards.com/attachments/img_3339-jpeg.861638/

Ceci was one of the D that was in just pure panic mode from start to finish. Desharnais took over the key defensive responsibilities on the right and did well.

Not sure where you got that stat from but does that stat single out quality shot attempts vs just any shot attempt?

In my opinion, while in a perfect world, your defense is so good, the other team doesn't even cross the blueline. But in reality, the job of the Dman is to make it so the opposition doesn't get uncontested shots from great scoring spots.

So if the Kings are driving the zone and Nurse - Ceci defend it so the Kings can barely get over the blueline and all he can do (which the Kings players were doing) is fling the puck on goal from distance with no screen, that would count as a shot attempt against. Or I saw Nurse - Ceci pairing keeping the Kings player against the boards, not allowing much inside and the King player as they were going into the corner would fling the puck on Skinner which he would scoop up for an easy save. That's a shot attempt against.

So I am just asking if that stat indicates quality shots against vs just a shot because there is a big difference. If a dman gives the forward nothing but long range/ no scoring angle, no chance of scoring shot all game, he's done his job. But if you dislike Nurse - Ceci, a person will ignore that stat and just focus on shot against.

I also believe that the Leon line with Nurse and Ceci were typically up against the the Kopitar line who seemed to be the only liine that was actually trying to score most shifts. McD's line who I think Ekholm - Bouch play with mostly, had the Danault line who in my opinion seemed pretty focused on just stopping McD.


The matchups were actually the opposite of that. Bouch and Ek were mostly against kopitars line and gave up 1 high danger chance. Ceci and Nurse gave up 8 high danger chances against the Danault line.

I'm not sure what the spotlogiq data excludes to reduce LA's high danger chances from 14 (based just on shot location/timing data), to 4, but just going by shot locations, the nurse/Ceci pair was on for 11 out of LA's 14 high danger shot attempts.

To me this matches the eye test, because I felt Ceci was kind of alone as a D that was lost in our end most of the night. Most of our D looked like wizards shutting down plays, but Ceci really didnt. I know I am not the biggest Ceci fan :)

We survived though. I still would not expect our game plan last night to cut it against a team like the Avs or Vegas, or even the Canucks. but It was good enough against LA. The ice was total trash too, which worked to our advantage favoring defense.

Your comment at the end of your 3rd paragraph in my opinion will skew someone's perception of the game. You don't like Ceci so unless he plays perfect, you will find fault in his game. Which isn't meant as a shot. Most people have players they don't care for on their teams.

When I watched the game, the Kings didn't get a lot of quality looks even when Ceci was on the ice.


Your Ceci comment history suggests biased viewing as well :)

So, maybe stats can fill the gap.

The real test comes in the next rounds in any case. LA are just a warmup round for these playoffs.

I would disagree on your comment on being bias towards Ceci.

I have maintained all along and go ahead and look back. I don't see Ceci as I high end dman but I also don't think he's a 3rd pairing/ one of the worst dmen in the NHL like his haters think.

I think he is capable of being in the top 4 of many teams in the NHL as a #4. I have felt all along that if you can find an upgrade on Ceci, the Oilers should do it but it will be difficult to find a clear upgrade at his price point of 3.25 mill. He is capable of giving you for the most part, solid minutes with a good partner and for 3.25 mill, I think it is very unlikely to find an upgrade for that money on the open market or via trade.

If you feel that my opinion of him is me saying I am a Ceci lover, then we will never agree on much.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832753 is a reply to message #832750 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 10:30

Mike wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 09:22

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 11:51

How are some who were worried about Skinner after game 2 feeling now?

A poster in here said after his 14 career playoff games, he was almost the worst playoff goalie in the NHL since the early 2000's.

After the 2 games in LA where he gave up 1 goal, 2.48 and .919. So that's good right?



icon_lol

I stated a fact. The fact has now changed slightly - he was worst in both save % and GAA on the cap era. On the strength of the last 2 games he has now moved ahead of Kari Lehtonen for the 2nd worst save % i(still last for GAA). No spin - just facts. Don't let them hurt your feelings too much.

Let me remind you that I am the founding member of the Skinner booster club here. Nobody wants to see him succeed more than me. But he sucked for the most part in the playoffs last year, and he wasn't great the first 2 games here. And I don't want the team (and certain "fans") to get stuck in this mindset that the starter's role is set for the playoffs regardless of performance, as it obviously was last year.

As for this game - Skinner maybe didn't need to be prime Hasek last night, but he was solid. Made all the stops we expect him to make, plus a few very good ones. Certainly has looked better the last 2 games. Let's hope he keep it up. Another 15 game win streak would be perfect.


We can agree to disagree if you like but I think basing your opinion on if a goalie can or can't do it in the playoffs when at the time of your post, he only had 14 career playoffs games ever and 12 of them were from his first year as an NHL start, in my opinion is kind of short sighted.

1 year in the playoffs isn't a ton of experience in my opinion. So I felt he deserved the benefit of the doubt longer than 2 games this year before throwing up the red flag of having a problem. He played extremely well in the next 2 games. Does that mean he's going to win the Conn Smyth? No but it indicates to me, he has the ability to play very well in the playoffs. The big thing now is he needs to show he can keep doing it. We shall see.


Can't go crazy giving a final say on what players are or will do with our play against LA. This should be the 3rd time we outclass this team. We had adjustment issues each time we faced them, but in the end, we beat them pretty convincingly each time when we actually played like we can, and hopefully we do it again in game 5.

Where all our team issues come up and where we see if we fixed them come later against the really good playoff teams. No luck coming like we had in 2006. It looks likely we will have to play 3 very very good teams this year for a chance to win it all. Likely round 2, a team that owned us in the regular season. Round 3, one of 2 teams that beat us and really picked us apart and exposed our weaknesses last 2 playoffs, then went on to win a cup. Don't even want to think about finals lol.

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 10:49]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832754 is a reply to message #832752 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 10:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

The Oilers need to prioritize resigning Desharnais. He gets better and better by the game. They had him out there protecting a 1-0 lead with 2 mins left last night.

I said in my comment to KR55. I don't love Ceci but I don't see a viable upgrade available via UFA or trade at Ceci's price point. Maybe the upgrade is Desharnais?

He's not going to score you a lot of points but for a big man, he moves really well. His reach is unreal, he gets his stick in the way of passes a ton, blocks shots, has an edge, can be physical and his puck moving continues to improve. He's needs more growth but he works his ass off, he's hungry and wants to improve, the amount he's improved from last year to this year is pretty impressive. They need to get him signed as this guy has the makings of a real gem.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832755 is a reply to message #832754 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 11:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3794
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

Game 5 would be a great game for McLeod too set up offensively some. He's been rock solid defensively, I like his line but I would love to see him using his speed to take the puck more into the zone and get some shots. 4 shots in 4 games is not much in my opinion, especially when he averages over 15 mins a night.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Review: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4) [message #832756 is a reply to message #832754 ]
Mon, 29 April 2024 11:05 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 9876
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 29 April 2024 10:55

The Oilers need to prioritize resigning Desharnais. He gets better and better by the game. They had him out there protecting a 1-0 lead with 2 mins left last night.

I said in my comment to KR55. I don't love Ceci but I don't see a viable upgrade available via UFA or trade at Ceci's price point. Maybe the upgrade is Desharnais?

He's not going to score you a lot of points but for a big man, he moves really well. His reach is unreal, he gets his stick in the way of passes a ton, blocks shots, has an edge, can be physical and his puck moving continues to improve. He's needs more growth but he works his ass off, he's hungry and wants to improve, the amount he's improved from last year to this year is pretty impressive. They need to get him signed as this guy has the makings of a real gem.


Vinny was spectacular defensively in that game. Might have been the best I've ever seen him play. Would be very convenient if he took another step and could be a solid defender playing with Nurse. Not sure if it quite worked out this year, but would be pretty useful of he has another level he can sustain next season.

Just remembered last night watching these guys, Chia actually drafted is an elite top pair offensive D, a #1 goalie and little bonus with Vinny.

Too bad Chia sucked so bad at trading, and maybe his impatience would have gave these players away if we let him GM longer. Do appreciate the lagging draft results though. Wonder if Holland will leave any gems behind. Not sure if anyone is tracking that similar. Holloway and Broberg need to take some huge steps.

[Updated on: Mon, 29 April 2024 11:08]


"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

Pages (2): [1  2  >  »]  
Previous Topic:OilFans Bracket Challenge (2024 Playoffs)
Next Topic:GDT: Edmonton @ Los Angeles (Game #4)
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2022.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement


Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca