[OOT] February 18 with five games.

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Good to see SJ lose. But Vegas looks like they can be taken in the first round. Hmmm...

I'll take Vancouver, Colorado or Minnesota.

Fairly easy pickins as far as first round opponents go. I think the Flames and Sharks are pretty much destined to meet so long as either club doesn't hit an unexpected snag in round one.

That second WC team (if we finish first) will probably only be several games over .500.... Crazy low standard for the cutoff.

On an average year, you'd need to be a dozen games over or more.

[Manhattanboy]

Dallas and Chicago would make me nervous.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

You're giving the team who's net is off essentially a delayed penalty situation where the other team can't take advantage of a bad turnover or giveaway.

except you're not.

Even if they didn't whistle it down, Kane's goal would have never have counted with the net off the mooring.

Boston was allowed to take that possession because the net being off wasn't affecting that play...once possession changed, the play was blown dead

Kane's possession wouldn't have even happened if the play was blown dead at the time of the net being dislodged

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

except you're not.

Even if they didn't whistle it down, Kane's goal would have never have counted with the net off the mooring.

But Kane's net is not off, and he's talking about the team whose net *is* off having the advantage. They could theoretically pull the goalie and have an extra attacker, because nothing gets scored on their net.

[AC]

Originally Posted by YourMother

I'm pretty sure if you pull your goalie in OT, you get your "loser point" taken away if you lose. I don't think this has ever happened but I'm certain that is the repercussion.

Surely only if the other team scores into the empty net.

If the net is off, may as well pull your goalie.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by the2bears

But Kane's net is not off, and he's talking about the team whose net *is* off having the advantage. They could theoretically pull the goalie and have an extra attacker, because nothing gets scored on their net.

the Boston net was off, but the play was happening in the other end, not affecting play at all.

pulling the goalie affects the play.

if calgary was in Boston's position, i'd damn well want the chance to happen because of that exact reason: the play wasn't being affected.

if the the play remained in the Boston end, the play would have been blown dead.

its a subjective call - the refs made that call and in the end, the results of the game were not affected.

if Boston scored, then, SJ might have an argument. But they didn't...

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Dallas and Chicago would make me nervous.

Chicago has allowed 223 goals against this season, or 3.71 per game. Hard to be too concerned with that kind of porous defence/goltending.

Dallas.....yeah, we seem to have issues with solving Ben Bishop.

[fire_starter]

Sharks fans are so cocky. They think that if they had better goaltending then they'd be competing with Tampa for first in the league. Also going as far to say that they are the only team that can do any damage in the playoffs. My god they beat the flames in two flukey games and they think theyre tough s***

[DeluxeMoustache]

18 points in Kucherov’s last 5 games.

When Johnny had back to back 4 pointers this year, that was impressive.

Can’t think of the last time I have seen anyone do this, though, in a while. TB is wicked and the guy is on a tear.

[savemedrzaius]

Why didn't the ref who was right next to the net put the net back in position? He points to it for some reason and then just skates by it. He is already so close.

[savemedrzaius]

Also McAvoy pushes the Sharks player into the net causing the net to come off. If anything the play should have been whistled to a stop right there. Horrible Reffing .

[BlAcKNoVa]

Kucherov is on pace for 135 points I think. The last time anyone had over 130 was Lemieux (161 points) and Jagr (149 points) in the mid 90's

[Tsawwassen]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Good to see SJ lose. But Vegas looks like they can be taken in the first round. Hmmm...

Originally Posted by djsFlames

I'll take Vancouver, Colorado or Minnesota.

Fairly easy pickins as far as first round opponents go. I think the Flames and Sharks are pretty much destined to meet so long as either club doesn't hit an unexpected snag in round one.

That second WC team (if we finish first) will probably only be several games over .500.... Crazy low standard for the cutoff.

On an average year, you'd need to be a dozen games over or more.

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Dallas and Chicago would make me nervous.

I'll put Arizona on the list to see play the Flames in round 1.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

The puck has to be conclusively and completely over the line. It might be in, but that does not look remotely conclusive to me.

*EDIT* I hate the Sharks. So much.

Well we know why you are a literature majour. You obviously couldn't do AV because your blind. At least books come in braille

[PugnaciousIntern]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

Well we know why you are a literature majour. You obviously couldn't do AV because your blind. At least books come in braille

Haha, usually not a fan of personal attacks but this was funny.

But I do agree with TextCritic on this one.

[Tsawwassen]

Final scores
http://sportsstats.cbc.ca/news/NHL-R...ate=02-18-2019
https://scores.nbcsports.com/nhl/pre...&home=18&vis=1
______________________________________


5 at 1

The BJs doubled the amount of shots over Tampa Bay, 40-20. That didn't matter. Point and Kucherov teamed up twice in the first 46 seconds of the 3rd period. Sedlak spoiled Vasilevskiy's shutout bid with 1:45 left in the game.
______________________________________


6 at 5

That was a crazy game from start to finish. Controversy everywhere, did the officials smoke up before the game? That puck crossed the goal line, just like in 2004 and 2015.
______________________________________

Senators 7 at Blackhawks 8 in reg time
Forget about defence, all out offense going for broke. Wow. Debrincat with the hat trick and 2 assists. Kane may break a Gretzky record. He has had an assist in 17 straight games, Oates went 18 games, and Gretzky went 23 games. The Bhawks are 1 point back of the 8th place Wild.

Knights 0 at Avalanche 3
Varlamov with the 40 save SHUTOUT. Subban played well in the loss making 35 saves. Neither team could score a PPG. The Knights have lost 4 out 5 games. The Avs scored a goal per period and are now 1 point back of the Wild.

Capitals 3 at Kings 2 in reg time
The Caps played hang on and they did as they had a 3-0 lead. OV with 2 PPGs and Carlson assisted on both of them. The win puts the Capitals 5 points up on the 9th place Hurricanes in the eastern conf.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

If your net's off in OT you may as well pull your goalie then.

If you have time to do so, sure. Though you do run the risk of the referee being able to put the net back on both quickly and as a courtesy.

Ultimately, it was the Sharks who took Boston's net off, as the puck was moving up the ice. Blowing the whistle rewards Evander Kane for losing a puck battle. Letting play continue to its natural conclusion is the proper call there.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

If you have time to do so, sure. Though you do run the risk of the referee being able to put the net back on both quickly and as a courtesy.

Ultimately, it was the Sharks who took Boston's net off, as the puck was moving up the ice. Blowing the whistle rewards Evander Kane for losing a puck battle. Letting play continue to its natural conclusion is the proper call there.

Yup, the ref might be able to quickly put the net back on, but it’s not always easy. 3 on 3 is fast, if he stops to put the net on, he might miss something important at the other end of the ice.

Since it’s clearly Kane who takes the net off (under NHL rules it doesn’t matter that he was pushed into the net or not), the ref is fine to let play continue until San Jose gains control of the puck, which he did. There is nothing controversial on this play.

On the late tying goal, Wagner hits the puck down with his stick up - but since he touches the puck again prior to the puck crossing the goal line, the standard to being too high is “above his shoulder”, not “above the crossbar”. Also, this extra touch does make this play non reviewable, according to the rules.

None of the officials had their hands up for “puck being played with a high stick”. On review, it looks possible (perhaps even likely) that it was above his shoulders, but IMO, it’s inconclusive at best.

So, the play was correctly not reviewable, and likely doesn’t get overturned even if it was. This play is only controversial because a judgement call had to be made on a close play, but it is in fact a close play that happened to not be called, and after the play is made, the refs were correct.

[Resolute 14]

I think they completely got the high stick goal wrong, myself. That looked safely over his shoulders. But yeah, once the officials made the call, it wasn't reviewable.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by PugnaciousIntern

Haha, usually not a fan of personal attacks but this was funny.

But I do agree with TextCritic on this one.

Especially with the choice of “your” and “majour” used in a Textcritic insult.