i was getting impatient so I won’t judge people for calling him a bust. but I think it’s fair to say that he will always be underestimated he plays a very smart but not flashy game. He is not dynamic, he is not explosive, he doesn’t have the huge shot. But he is a plus player all over my comp was always mark stone but with a different skill set. I just see a similar career path it would not surprise me if lafreniere is the captain of the rangers in 8-10 years
i did not realize trouba was it lol, ouff. fox and kreider come to mind before lafreniere but I have no insight in this team so maybe they are just not the captain types
It’s not working but the guys trimming that are not to blame imho. That is solid work. Maybe they are bruins fans
If you are in a state with legal betting you should have an alert for when the sharks score the first goal to get whatever odds get thrown out there
Not gonna lie, I expected the womens hockey in STL to be better. They are usually ahead of the curve when it comes to expanding the game. Either way, it's freaking incredible that she's playing.
season on the line, Torts is about to scratch his newly named captain (fwiw I don't disagree with scratching him, his game has fallen off a cliff). should have made Konecny captain though.
Left out of that tweet: if you lose the challenge an additional penalty is assessed, and it's now a 5 on 3.
Im torn. I dont think it should be a penalty if it's unintentional. But if you do that, now you have refs making judgement calls on intention - which will be just as awful.
We let refs use intent on half the calls they make. Linemen too. No problem judging intent on pucks over glass.
What calls do they judge intent? Im drawing a huge blank here because every call is based on the action that I can think of .
Closest parallel to puck over the glass would be offsides, intentional vs not intentional. No one has ever made a fuss about that judgement call.
Yeah I would assume review on pucks over glass would only be for where the puck went over or whether or not it was deflected.
They're not judging intent on offside. They're judging the action of the skate being past the line, regardless of the skater's intent.
he means intentional offsides which moves the faceoff down into the defensive zone. much lower stakes than a minor penalty and happens pretty rarely so I wouldn't expect it to ever be a hot button issue.
I didnt realize you were talking about intentional offside. I'll give you that one. But also that's just one, not half. And something that's called maybe once every 3 games ?
I’d say intentional offsides happens more often than players intentionally putting the puck over the glass, the punishment obviously being the difference in frequency here.
See my edit. No one is putting it over the glass intentionally. Because it's a penalty. Remove the penalty and it will happen several times a game.
You think there are 2 over the glass penalties a game? That seems like a lot. But if they remove the penalty - it will happen with much more frequency imo.
We should have the numbers behind this, the frequency of puck out of play before the currently rules vs now.
Do we? Did they track how often the puck was lifted over the glass without being deflected prior to the rule?
no, but it absolutely was getting done all the time. The rule is honestly fine. The biggest reason people don't like it is because late in games and especially the playoffs, the refs swallow the whistle on the most egregious infractions but still call delay of game and broken stick slashing. Call the book as written and the complaints about delay of game go away.