I was going to say that, as a Coyotes fan, I totally sympathize. Canes are actually doing worse than Coyotes though.
I was going to say that, as a Coyotes fan, I totally sympathize. Canes are actually doing worse than Coyotes though.
I wrote a four word letter.
The whole thing was stupid - but mostly bizarre that he'd write such a long essay about it.
A couple things in particular that really irked me were:
This is just asinine : luck is somehow superior to skill and team work in terms of determining a hockey game outcome? Ridiculous.although occasionally in hockey and soccer a score is the result of superior strategy, teamwork, or skill, the difference between scoring a goal and just missing one or having one blocked is more a matter of luck than skill
That is based on a fundamental ignorance of how the professional game is played. NHL teams today follow complex coaching systems; he makes it seem as if its just a mob of players bumbling around the ice for the entire game.
Which happens all the time in hockey - ie a defenceman may mishandle the puck which leads to a breakaway for the other team, ect.It seems to me that what makes a sport or a given contest exciting is that at any given time something significant can happen, whether that is a score or the prevention of a score, and that the outcome is in doubt pretty much throughout the contest.
Last edited by jacknife737; 04-06-2013 at 08:42 PM.
Originally Posted by Tom Gabel
Writing high on pot here. Now, I have a feeling that a lot of people have this perception about hockey. Maybe not to the extreme that you describe, but they probably think that the coaching systems are extremely simple and broad, perhaps as simple as saying something like "be more defensive than offensive against these guys". That's because since hockey players are always quickly moving, it makes it difficult for a new fan to make their own observations regarding strategy and positioning.
Which brings me to my next point: I'd say that only the top 20 percent of the most knowledgeable hockey fans can hold a good, in-depth conversation about hockey strategy. I find that when many people discuss hockey, the conservations rarely focus on team strategy points and instead, only focus on the success or shortcomings of individual players. This lack of discussion and understanding of the game just makes it less appealing to talk hockey with others, which makes the whole experience somewhat less fun.
Also, players in hockey are much more low-profile compared to NFL, NBA, and MLB players, and they rarely make the news unless they say or do something outrageous.
When they said "sit down", I stood up.
I can't decide if I like the Coyotes type of scoring by community, or if all I really want is a high scoring superstar. Not Crosby though, but shit, give me a Giroux, Kane, or even a Kopitar.
I wrote a four word letter.
Oilers :facepalm:
Here's a Statue of Liberty too, how you shouldn't do it, though you probably meant something different.
I like Kopitar and Toews as better all-around players than Giroux and Kane, but if you want goal scoring I'd understand if you go with latter two.I can't decide if I like the Coyotes type of scoring by community, or if all I really want is a high scoring superstar. Not Crosby though, but shit, give me a Giroux, Kane, or even a Kopitar.
I like Coyotes, I hope they'll make through these grueling days as a franchise and stay in Phoenix. I think they have the best captain in the entire league and a top 3 coach. And I also think they have a chance to finish the season above Detroit, and take down Hawks in first round.