Thrashers

By Ryan

February 20, 2007 01:57 PM | Link to this

yeah, let Hedberg start… sounds good to me… Anything to spark the team sounds like a good idea now. Glad to see JP Vigier is back. That will be one Thrasher other than Kovy that actually hussles.

By doc

February 20, 2007 02:16 PM | Link to this

Come on Moose! Is it a good move? I think so, if anything it needs to sink in with Kari that he needs to be getting better near the playoffs rather than falling apart. The Thrash have played the Canes well this season so heres hoping for a good one tonight.
Moose needs a SO!

By Shane

February 20, 2007 02:21 PM | Link to this

Thanks Craig, Any chance this goes beyond tonight? If Moose wins, that could make some things interesting. I know some folks are not fans of VJ. Personally, I like his play. Probably not good for Hamel that he is a healthy scratch in his 3rd game.

By Bob

February 20, 2007 02:23 PM | Link to this

So Hartley calls out Lehtonen in the paper today and says we don’t turn this around until Kari plays better, then yanks him for tonight’s game? I don’t blame Kari for knocking sticks around, good for the kid not to rip Hartley back in the press, but man, he must be p** off.

Ok Coach, you wore him out, broke him down, call him out in the paper, then yank him without giving him the shot to respond in the game.

This is a complete meltdown by our Coach.

CC, do us a favor and call Hartley on the carpet and ask him if he feels responsible for not working Hedberg in every 7th start of so all year so we didn’t wind up in this mess.

It’s not Kari’s fault he wore down. It’s not Hedberg’s fault he’s rusty. That situation is all on Coach.

Oh man, please let the boys play out their rear and get Hedberg a win here tonight.

By Ryan

February 20, 2007 02:29 PM | Link to this

The time is now for the Moose to get into game shape. I like this move. We’re gonna need the Moose to be at his best when the time comes. Hopefully the boys help him out tonight.

By doc

February 20, 2007 02:35 PM | Link to this

CC, read the Burnside article. The two things that jump out at me are: Waddell passing on a list of players that could have really helped this team. And the comment….its probably too late or something to that effect. Other than that you’re right interesting read. I wonder if the other GMs are laughing at him this week.

Shane I agree with you concerning Hamel, healthy scratch in third game. It make Waddell look more foolish.

By Craig Custance

February 20, 2007 02:48 PM | Link to this

Bob — I wouldn’t say Hartley called out Kari in today’s story, I think it was more a reflection of the way he feels the team is built. His comments basically said, this isn’t a good team without good goaltending. Lately, the team hasn’t gotten good goaltending (from either goalie, for that matter). I think he views the goaltender position, despite the flaws among the rest of the team, as the one area that can lift this team back up to the level it was earlier. Think less — “Kari’s the problem” and more “Kari could be the solution.”

But I think you can certainly question his goalie rotation strategy.

By Rawhide

February 20, 2007 02:50 PM | Link to this

I have to agree with the move. Moose needs the start and Kari needs a night off, if not two.

Bob did this earlier in the year and it seemed to have gotten Kari’s attention.

Bob, I would also have to agree that Moose needs to stand in the pipes every 6-8th game….this needs to be the case from here out…

By Craig Custance

February 20, 2007 02:52 PM | Link to this

doc — I’ve got to be careful about giving my opinion about too much stuff (it’s the burden of the beat writer), but I will say I slightly disagree with Burnside saying that it’s too late to make an impact move. It’s a fine line between paying a premium early, and waiting for the price to go down - but Waddell kind of has that luxury because of the Thrashers’ strong start. As long as they are within a couple points of first place, it’s not too late. Now if they were in 9th or 10th, it’d be a different story.

By michael

February 20, 2007 03:08 PM | Link to this

Hedburg starting doesn’t suprise me. Kari only has two wins against the canes in his career.

By Thrasher_Ed

February 20, 2007 03:08 PM | Link to this

Hey Guys, Remember Kari does not exactly set the world on fire against Carolina. Last game out might have been his best, but for whatever reason he has struggled against them. Good move in my opinion! What about tonights lines CC?

By Bob

February 20, 2007 03:16 PM | Link to this

Thanks, CC. I’ve been questioning his goalie rotation strategery all year, it’s very frustrating. Let’s hope Moose can shake that rust off for tonight, we need 2 points and none for Carolina.

This is a good point you guys are making about Lehtonen struggling against Carolina.

Anyone think Belanger could be a factor tonight? It’s seemed that ex-Thrashers always have big games against us, Stefan earlier this year. It’d be nice for Belanger to get something going tonight. We need a big games out of Hossa and Kovy. Our best players need to be exactly that.

By Thrashy Thrashy

February 20, 2007 03:24 PM | Link to this

Hartley is trying to “toughen” Kari up by starting him all the time. Unfortunately, the defense is so awful that Kari has to be on his game every night. He can’t afford to let up at all. That’s why Hartley should have been playing Hedberg more. It’s not as if Moose is Berkhoel, right? Jesus, Hartley. You do want to keep your job, right?

As far as trades, the Thrashers can definitely make a move (read: DEFENSE, DEFENSE, DEFENSE…because I’m not as worried about the offense) or two to help the team, but the ultimate responsibility for turning this b*** around lies with the 20+ guys who won’t get traded. It’s inconceivable to me that the Thrashers can make the playoffs with a dead-last penalty kill and a power play unit sinking into the mid-20s of the league. The Thrashers have to play better D, period. They’ve been pathetic for a few months now. Win some games in regulation, guys. Stop giving up goals late in periods. Stand guys up at the blueline on the PK. Shoot the damn puck on the power play. Get some rebounds. Force the goalie to make plays. Play physical with a purpose.

Above all, compete.

By ranallo10

February 20, 2007 03:27 PM | Link to this

I don’t see why everyone is so worried about goaltending…JP VIGIER IS COMING BACK!

(note the sarcasm)

By michael

February 20, 2007 03:27 PM | Link to this

I predict Belanger will do what he has done so far nothing. How about Rucchin, did he just decide he needed a vacation. Not that I want to see his sorry @ss back on the ice, I just think it’s absurd how far he has taken this head thing.

By Craig Custance

February 20, 2007 03:39 PM | Link to this

Thrasher_Ed - Slater is centering Kovalchuk and Metro; Belanger centers Hoss and Kozlov; Holik centers Vigier and Boulton; Kapanen centers Mellanby and Sim.

By Chris

February 20, 2007 03:50 PM | Link to this

I like the move, unorthodox but rational given Kari’s play lately and his normal struggles vs. the Canes.

By Thrashers27

February 20, 2007 03:55 PM | Link to this

GOTTA GET A WIN TONIGHT, BOYS!!!

MOOOOOOOOOOSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By doc

February 20, 2007 04:21 PM | Link to this

CC, yes you are right not to jump to conclusions. I will say this, they could very well be in 9th or 10th place very very quickly so somethings gotta give. From third in the east to 6th and only a few points from being out. I’m not so sure. But I do see it both ways. DW needs to be smart with any deal he can get at this point. Lets just hope he can even get a good deal.

By R. Stroz

February 20, 2007 04:27 PM | Link to this

It’s time DW take care of business or get off the toilet. In DW’s case, maybe that should be, going back to selling toilets. There are no excuses this year for making the playoffs, no goalie injuries or late player signings. He can either do his job or leave.

By AtlantaGatorLee

February 20, 2007 04:52 PM | Link to this

Maybe Don can make another trade for somebody who gets scratched.

By R. Stroz

February 20, 2007 05:05 PM | Link to this

Calling all Thrasher GM’s. Are there any centers possibly available other than Olli Jokinen that are young, strong and fast enough to help the Thrashers? Fedorov is too old and too expensive. We don’t need any more over 35 year old centers. Other than winning face offs, what is Holik good for at 4.25 million. Why do we have Rucchin at 1.85 million this year and over 2 million next year. With this kind of dead weight, how are we going to afford the players we need to resign? I’m not even going to discuss DEVO. I just hope he isn’t resigned.

By ranallo10

February 20, 2007 05:11 PM | Link to this

Note to AtlantaGatorLee:

Denis Hamel was claimed by the Thrashers (Waddell) off of waivers from the Ottawa Senators Hamel was not traded for. The Thrashers lost nothing in exchange for his services (except for the remainder of the league minimum contract he brought with him—$450K).

Now I’m sure Mr/Ms Lee is not the only person who misunderstood how Atlanta has acquired players recently, so here is a link to an amazing website that keeps you updated on most ATL transactions throughout the hockey season. Feel free to visit it more than once. Thrashers Transactions

On a bright note, it appears that Hamel was signed as a temporary replacement to the injured JP Vigier. I guess it’s nice to know that one of the Thrashers’ “best defensive player”, “best checker”, “hardest worker” is replaceable by a waiver wire acquisition (quotations provided by the soothsayer, Bob). It speaks volumes to the type of role Vigier actually plays on this team.

Fringe talent is easily replaceable by fringe talent from another teams roster.

PS - Vigier sucks

By R. Stroz

February 20, 2007 05:15 PM | Link to this

Other than Boulton, the healthy scratches have been a who’s who of players DW brought in this summer. The only new players that have pulled their weight are Metro and Sim.

By Tom

February 20, 2007 05:18 PM | Link to this

Think Burnside has been reading this board. He has the situation pegged. We have some great talent that does not have the complimentary players.

I have been away for a couple of days and came to this conclusion. Kolvy is having his best season. Scoring like he has with such mediocre talent along side of him must be exhausting.

By R. Stroz

February 20, 2007 05:18 PM | Link to this

ranallo10- would you please add DEVO to your P.S. list

By ranallo10

February 20, 2007 05:30 PM | Link to this

R. Stroz:

I’ll have to put your de Vries request on the “PS pending” list along with Sutton. It’s only fair to claim one player sucks at a time, otherwise it would get a little too overpopulated with checking line wingers, 3/4/5/6 defenseman, and backup goalies.

Thanks for the request.

By Braves fan 202

February 20, 2007 05:31 PM | Link to this

Maybe they can pull it together, it doesnt matter who starts they both can win us games. The defense is what matters, get rid of cheap shout sutton

By ranallo10

February 20, 2007 05:31 PM | Link to this

PS (pending) - Greg de Vries sucks

By pondscum

February 20, 2007 05:42 PM | Link to this

Very good read by Burnside and really it makes common sense.

If DW sits back and really does nothing before the deadline,then he may cost the Thrashers alot more in the future.His love affair with 3rd line players has gotta stop.

The attendance improves,but he sits back as the team slides and waits for that improvement in attendance to hang on.I’m sorry,as many guarntees,” 5 year plans”,promises,and excuses that have rolled out from him….can you really think/sense attendance will keep improving(if not go down)? How much more “hanging on” can the fans take?

The Wild are looking like they probably are headed to their second postseason berth,the Preds their 3rd straight.The Pens,after a few down years of rebuilding(much like an expansion team) look poised to be in the playoffs.And now that we are in year 2 of the cap era in the NHL and the playing field has been leveled out,he is out of excuses period.

It’s time to lay it out all on the line,for better or worse and take a shot.I’m not demanding a cup as I feel most folks aren’t.The chance to play for one,yes, I feel enough time has been put in for it.And if you can’t even get a chance,then how are you ever gonna really win it all?

But some of the statements from DW has me really thinking,what the hell is he thinking?

Every GM looks to improve his team and never seems satisfied,knowing his job could be lost at anytime.But not with DW.It seems he has to much job security.

We’ve now seen a couple centers,defenseman moved that the price was right and could’ve been helpful.And considering this team has never really made a major move outside of Heatley’s asking,the assets should be there.But it seems this guy is so scared someone might fleece him,he doesn’t wanna take a chance.

But then again,maybe every other GM knows what most folks know already… is that outside of the 1st round pick in a draft,Waddell sucks at picking/drafting talent.

He can get picked/annointed by his buddies,friends all he wants to try and put together international rosters(whole other dead beaten horse). But his track records there as well with the Thrashers all the same thing…..he doesn’t have a clue and the results speak for themselves.And if anyone can or wants to defend him,sorry if I hurt your feelings about your kin folk.But sometimes the truth hurts.

By R. Stroz

February 20, 2007 05:58 PM | Link to this

The problem with the Thrashers GM, DW, and the Hawks GM, Billy Knightmare, is that they both like to play the nickel slot machines, tinkering with mid level players hoping to hit it rich. However, most GM’s learned a long time ago that the payout at the dollar slots is a lot better.

By ranallo10

February 20, 2007 06:04 PM | Link to this

Speaking of dead beaten horses, I hear JP Vigier is coming back tonight.

By Thrashers27

February 20, 2007 06:27 PM | Link to this

Ranallo,

I think JP himself would be the first to agree with you that he’s not the most talented guy on the team, but he has never claimed to be. At the very least he gives 100% every time he touches the ice. Instead of raking him over the coals, shred the GM and coaching staff for keeping him. Let’s just hope DW can bring in a quality player by the end of the week.

Go BLUE!!!

By Lee

February 20, 2007 07:07 PM | Link to this

Yet another Atlanta team that can’t finish a year as good as it started (Braves, Falcons), well at least they aren’t the hawks

By Lee

February 20, 2007 08:31 PM | Link to this

We suck so bad. What do we have like 9 SOG so far? I think Carolina has like 16. We are just awful, Bye bye division, bye bye playoffs, bye bye Hartley and bye bye Waddell

By B. Thenet

February 20, 2007 08:46 PM | Link to this

The Thrashers are playing with the energy and enthusiasm of a very tired sloth. They seemed to be so concerned about giving up a goal that it paralyzed their offense.

How do you shutdown Ilya? Give him clear passing lanes to his linemates.

It was nice to see an old guy wearing a C bury the puck in a clutch situation…wrong team though.

Lets see if the PP can redeem them to start the 3rd

By B. Thenet

February 20, 2007 08:48 PM | Link to this

The Thrashers are playing with the energy and enthusiasm of a very tired sloth. They seemed to be so concerned about giving up a goal that it paralyzed their offense.

How do you shutdown Ilya? Give him clear passing lanes to his linemates.

It was nice to see an old guy wearing a C bury the puck in a clutch situation…wrong team though.

Lets see if the PP can redeem them to start the 3rd

By Lee

February 20, 2007 09:29 PM | Link to this

Um…maybe we spoke too soon….(ehem…clearing throat)…they played the best third period in two months. Hossa was Hossa, Kovy came up big, the PK was great and I am about to buy a Hedberg jersey. If this team shows up every night, we will be in the playoffs. Surely Hartley will have to go with Hedberg now on Thursday.

By yellowjax

February 20, 2007 09:29 PM | Link to this

3-1, Slow start shot wise but they played agressive D all night and shows some heart and guts in the 3rd. Hedberg was excellent and looked very relaxed. He’s been in pressure games before. GOOD JOB BLUE!!!

By Brian

February 20, 2007 09:32 PM | Link to this

KOVVY!!!!! Let’s get these next too at home and start a run.

By B. Thenet

February 20, 2007 09:32 PM | Link to this

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSE

It is great to see Ilya score a meaningful goal like that. Even better to see Boulton get all fancy with the backhand.

Lehtonen has played poorly vs. Carolina, excellent coaching move by Hartley in going with Moose. Could have been down 2 or 3 in the first period alone.

Is this the turning point in the season? Bring on the Bolts!!

By Rawhide

February 20, 2007 09:35 PM | Link to this

I’m glad I stopped by Costco on the way home and got that case of Tums,….looks like they are gonna be eaten like candy around here for the next 6 weeks or so…

What a game,…just when we needed it!!!

Looks alike coach Bob made the right call with putting Moose ‘tween the pipes…. sometimes you need the goalie to hold down the fort while the offense finds it’s way. Very fitting that he gets an assist on Hossa’s goal!!

PK looked good, especially on the all-important 5-3 kill in the 3rd after Suts decided to practice uralogy on that poor Cane in front of the net…..(OUCH).

Now,….come on Florida! Beat the Bolts!!!

GO THRASHERS!!!!

By Rawhide

February 20, 2007 09:42 PM | Link to this

Two questions:

1. Does HiBob play his hot hand and keep MOOOOOOOOOSE in the nets Thursday?

2. Anyone notice that, just after tonight’s win, the story was atop the ajc.com’s sports page????? Very nice!

By michael

February 20, 2007 09:57 PM | Link to this

Kari plays against the Bolts. Moose back in for the canes game.

By russian

February 20, 2007 09:58 PM | Link to this

Big Win!!! I love it! Great PK. Moose was Hot. :-)

By Brendan

February 20, 2007 10:05 PM | Link to this

It’s totally cliche, and is overused, but tonight might have been the biggest win in the franchise history. The Bolts and Cats are in OT as I write this. Go Panthers! If Only Florida had been able to hold that 2-1 third period lead in regulation. We’d be back in 1st place.

By Brendan

February 20, 2007 10:11 PM | Link to this

Michael, I think that’s right. Kari vs. Tampa. Then Hedberg again vs. the ‘Canes. Though, who knows, right? Hartley tends to ride a hot goalie until he lays an egg. At this point, Hartley will try whatever will result in points.

Versus control center did a segment on “dirty points.” (Points from OTL’s and SOL’s.) They cited Atlanta as the team most impacted by a potential change in point allocation. They were discussing 3-points for a regulation win, two for an OT win or shootout. Or keeping things the way they are, except removing the point for a losing team.

By Brian

February 20, 2007 10:13 PM | Link to this

Brendan, let’s climb back into first our next game.

By Lee

February 20, 2007 10:17 PM | Link to this

Well Tampa just won in a shootout, so we still have our heads in their rears right now, maybe we can end their hot streak and start our own.

By Thrasher_Ed

February 20, 2007 10:21 PM | Link to this

Revoltin development Tampa Bay wins in a shootout as Belfour lets in a cheap one versus Brad Richards!! Darn it

Revoltin development in Florida, Bolts win 3-2 in shootout as Belfour allows a cheap one to Brad Richards. Darn guess we have to do it ourselves at Blueland Thursday. Lets Go Thrashers!!

By Bob

February 20, 2007 10:26 PM | Link to this

Brendan, how does Billion Dollar Eddie not stop Richards’ shot in the shootout? Crap. Tampa is on a roll, we need to win Thursday night.

Moose stole that one for us, does Hartley play him against Tampa? Nice assist on the Hossa goal too.

Turning point in that game was when we scored the shorty and killed the 5 on 3. They actually pressured the puck on the PK and it was much more effective. Nice to see the PK better tonight, JPVJ with the solid game, Kovy and Hossa were the best players out there. Why does it take backs against the wall to get that kind of effort?

Hartley rolled 4 lines, that had the guys in a good flow.

By Craig Custance

February 20, 2007 10:50 PM | Link to this

Hedberg looked pretty good tonight — so who do YOU start on Thursday: Lehtonen or Hedberg?

By Brendan

February 20, 2007 10:51 PM | Link to this

Brian, it’s a deal! Another 4-point “swing.” Wins against the division are always so critical.

Bob, the Bolts would have scored on all three, but Lecavalier hit the post. But you’re absolutely right, that Richards goal was a “gift from the hockey gods.” Before that, the ref called a double-minor on Florida with about 2:00 left in regulation, in a 2-2 game. I couldn’t believe that one, either. The Cats had some chances in the OT, too. The guy who committed the infraction was sent on a break-a-way right out of the sin bin. Those bouncing pucks. It was a great chance. Bygones.

By Brendan

February 20, 2007 11:00 PM | Link to this

Apologies for the non-topic post. But did anyone else catch that segment on Versus discussing the potential point reallocation? There was something I didn’t understand. Truthfully, all three panelists seemed confused as well. And stated as such. But there seemed to be a consensus among them that there should never ben 3-points awarded for a win—that it should always be 2-points. But then, they seemed to agree that there should not be any points for losses. And only Keith Jones said, “Wait, I don’t want to take away a point for a shootout loss.” Well, if the league wants to award 2-points for a win, and no points for losses of any kind. Ummn, why don’t they just go with W-L, with “games up” and “games back,” just like MLB and the NBA? Why stick with points?

By Brendan

February 20, 2007 11:04 PM | Link to this

Craig, I’ll go with Kari for the Bolts game. But I think Hartley’s going to go with Hedberg. Shrugs. Who can say?

By The Falconer

February 20, 2007 11:07 PM | Link to this

Great game tonight. Before the game I predicted that they would win 2 of the next three games left in Feb on my blog.

re: expensive centers. Don’t forget that the reason we can’t afford Jokinen or Forsberg type salaries is that are playing Holik $4.25. Next year Holik and Rucchin will make a combined $6.6 million.

If that salary was not on the books we could put that money toward a stud defenseman or scoring center. At least the Sutton salary will be off the books.

By Brendan

February 20, 2007 11:08 PM | Link to this

Craig, do you sense any anger or frustration on the part of the many UFA’s and RFA’s on this team that none of their contracts have been renewed yet for next season? Is there any correlation between that and the slump? Or do the FREE AGENTS on the Thrashers know good-n-well that it’s Waddell’s policy to not renegotiate contracts during the season? I’m just curious. If you can’t talk about it, I understand.

By Brian

February 21, 2007 01:00 AM | Link to this

Brendan - I talked about that points topic many blogs ago. If you do 3 for a win and only 2 for a shootout, then you can do away with the point for a loss and it also places more emphasis on winning the game with a goal, not in the gimmick that the traditionalists refer to the shootout as. But with it being 3 & 2, you can’t go purely by W-L, the .500 average won’t equal 1/2 the points possible. A team that is 10-0 with all their wins in regulation should have more points than a team that is 10-0 with all their wins in the shootout. But at least you get rid of that 1 point for a loss.

I know it is confusing, but mathematically it works out better this way. To answer anyone’s question now as to why not make it 2 for a win and 1 for a shootout, that makes a win twice as more important than a SO, they only want to make it 50% more important so you make it 3 & 2 instead of 2 & 1.

Again, the 10-0 team with all regulation wins has 30 points to the other 10-0 team with only 20 points. It only takes just over 3 games to catch up then. If the 10-0 team with all regulation wins has 20 points to the other 10-0 team with only 10 points now it will take 5 games to catch up. Now that I have totally confused you more than Versus, just take it that the 3 points for a win is good and it will get rid of the 1 point for a loss but you can’t go strictly on W-L like the NBA, MLB or NFL.

By Brian

February 21, 2007 01:04 AM | Link to this

Oh yeah, play Kari vs. Tampa then bring the Moose back for the game after that - VERSUS CAROLINA AGAIN!!!

Brendan - I like the fact that a lot of these UFAs & RFAs aren’t signed. It gives us the opportunity to totally revamp in the offseason with a few good exceptions. And besides, aren’t players supposed to play harder in “contract years”? With that being said, shouldn’t this deter a slump and not add to it or no?

By Craig Custance

February 21, 2007 08:20 AM | Link to this

Brian and Brendan - I don’t sense frustration from the UFAs, I think this team is pretty focused on the task at hand right now, that stuff will get taken care of later. Waddell has been pretty clear in his philosophy in this regard, plus there’s something about having a group of players playing, not only for a playoff spot, but for a new deal. Every bit of motivation helps.

By Rawhide

February 21, 2007 09:04 AM | Link to this

I would understand if Bob keeps MOOSE into the nets Thursday,….I mean how can you NOT reward that effort???? I guess we’ll see….

I listened to Scott Burnside on 790 this morning as I trudged through the rain coming in today…..he reitterated alot of what he said in the ESPN write-up yesterday. Most notably, that this comes down to coaching and the fact that DW has to make something happen before next Tuesday’s 3:00 deadline. To sit by and cross his fingers would not be in his best interest.

Another thing he mentioned is that the Thrashers, due to their early success,….now have a higher expectation on them. It isn’t just good enough to MAKE the playoffs, they need to go in as a division winner and/or go 2 maybe 3 rounds at least. He thinks this team is THAT good and that this city is needing THAT much from the Blue Crew…….and in order for that to happen, DW needs to add the 1-2 extra peices,…..on the blueline and a SOLID #2 center…

It was nice to listen to the insite in the local drive-to-work AM radio market, that’s for sure.

By Lee

February 21, 2007 09:17 AM | Link to this

CC, Hedberg, no doubt about it. After the way he performed in such a huge game for us I don’t think Hartley can justify not giving him the chance. And the game recap article was fantastic, as usual. I really like your articles. Hey, also any news on the trade front?

By Brian

February 21, 2007 09:31 AM | Link to this

Craig - my point exactly. Players play harder in “contract years”.

By Bob

February 21, 2007 09:38 AM | Link to this

Burnside is dead on correct. Aaron Miller from the Kings could be the guy Waddell can bring in on D, Smolinski from Chicago might be the center Waddell could get. Both could be had cheaply, which is right up The Fiddler’s alley.

I’d start Kari against Tampa and Moose against Carolina.

The rumor I heard out of the GM meetings is that they are close to going to 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OT/shootout win, and 1 point for an OT/shootout loss. The Thrashers would be the biggest loser this year if that point schedule was in place now, but who knows what next year would bring. I say do it.

By Lee

February 21, 2007 09:49 AM | Link to this

Ithink teams should get 2 points for any kind of victory and no points for any kind of loss. Maybe even 3 in regulation and 2 in OT, but I still don’t know why teams should get anything for losing a game.

By Rawhide

February 21, 2007 09:54 AM | Link to this

Lee, the reason a point is given for OT loss is because the traditionalist did not want to give up the point earned for ties. It was a way to appease them.

But the point is taken here,……why are OT games worth more then regulation games???? I would go with the 3 points for regulation wins, 0 for regulation losses,….then split the 3 points in OT, 2 to winner 1 to OT loser….

One could argure that it would make the last 5 minutes of a tie game more interesting, especially late in the season when teams need as many points as they can get!!!

By Brian

February 21, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this

Rawhide - you had it backwards. OT are not worth more. It’s 3 for a regulation and only 2 for an OT win. Meaning, close it out early and be rewarded more. Also, my original understanding was that an OT win would also get 3 points, it’s just the shootout win where you only get 2. I could be wrong on that one though.

Now that the traditionalists had a couple years of 1 point for a loss, we can take that away now and slowly remove that. All at once and they get too upset.

By Rawhide

February 21, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this

Brian,…as it stands now, OT games are indeed worth more as 3 total points are given out vs. 2 in regulation games,….my contention is that the same amount of point are awarded in all games, whether that be 3-0 in a regulation win game or 2-1 in an OT game.

By Rawhide

February 21, 2007 10:09 AM | Link to this

Thrasher Fatigue Syndrome….

Symptoms: High Blood Pressure, sore throat from screaming, sore arm muscles from throwing them up in air when Niko Kapenon comes on ice, sore leg muscles from leaping to your feet after great Hossa goal or Slater hit, general feeling of tiredness from lack of sleep.

Causes: Staying up to watch games when one should really get on to bed,when going to bed-replaying key moments of game in your head, physical need to root on favorite team.

Treatment: No known cure.

By michael

February 21, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this

Kari has to play against the Bolts in order to respond to his coaches statements. If not than Hartleys repremanding was futile and Kari will lose the motivation from that to play better. Put Moose back in for the canes. Then Hartley has to do a proper job of managing his netminders. We gotta run for the cup we gotta take care of!

By Brendan

February 21, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this

Brian, thank you. Actually, your post cleared it up for me. I have mixed feelings about the “3-point regulation, two-point any other type of win system.” I do see some merit to it, definitely. But I wonder if we’re not confusing the heck out of the casual fan? I suspect new fans are still having a hard time figuring out playoff scenarios. They just want to know this: “What does the team have to do to get in?” The short answer is usually something like, “Team X and Y must lose, while Atlanta wins.” Then that EXACT SCENARIO happens. Butttt, Team X and Y lost in OT or a S/O, got points, and remained AHEAD of Atlanta. That leaves the fan “confused” as why the team didn’t make the playoffs.

Are you feeling what I’m saying? Whereas, if it’s as “cut and dry” as “Team X and Y must lose its last two games while Atlanta wins its last three games,” then most fans, I think, would find that very clear and easy to follow. They know what to root for. How many “bystander” hockey fans root for a regulation-time loss? Maybe some do.

I would think that UFA and RFA’s would be trying their utmost in such seasons, as well. But juding from the efforts I saw since the All-Star game, they looked “disinterested.” I was at a loss to explain it, as well.

By Thrasher_Ed

February 21, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this

I say we go with Kari against TB and back to Moose for Carolina on Saturday. I had hoped Hartley would have used Moose more this year than he has. Bob, I like the Aaron Miller idea for D, and have said for weeks know that Smolinski would be a great pick up from Chicago. I am really surprised we have not seen more trades out of the GM meetings in Florida. Hopefully Don Waddell breaks out and gets us a Center and a Top 4 D-Man soon.
Blueland needs to get Crazy this weekend! Let’s Go Thrashers!

By Brendan

February 21, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

What I meant to say is, ifffff there is to be change in the format of the standings, I do advocate the straight up wins and losses, just like MLB and the NBA. Standings should reflect the actual outcome of games. They’re either won or lost.

I hear ya. “But Brendan, the standing would reflect the outcome of games if three-points are awarded for the regulation win, etc.” I think it’d just confuse people. They’re gonna have to be math majors to figure out exactly what needs to happen for their local club to win its division or get into the playoffs. Nothing is simpler than, “we gotta win and they gotta lose, and we’re down by 1.5 games with X-number of games left.”

By Rawhide

February 21, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

True, Branden,……but the ssue I have with it is that win via a shootout, (a gimmick to me),…then means as much as a regulation win.

I know I am in the minority with my view of the shootout,….and it’s here to stay…..(sigh).

If we WERE to go with simply Ws and Ls,…then what say we extend OT to 10 minutes before we go to shootouts?

By Brendan

February 21, 2007 12:08 PM | Link to this

Rawhide, I would absolutely love that. I’d want a full 20-minutes of overtime. (Not gonna happen. I know that.) If noone scores, thennn we go to the shootout.

Rawhide, I want to also agree with you on your stance on the shootout. I was surprized when the league adopted it. But, I suppose it absolutely works from a “marketing standpoint.” It’s guaranteed highlight reel material, night-after-night. But, it’s a “team” game. The shootout is a “individual skills competition” that results in WINS in the standings.

That never sat well with me. But, I figured that once you cross that line of demarcation, that there ought to also be a corresponding “loss” in the standings. Not some “half-loss.”

Brendan, just say what you want to say already. I never thought that ties were “evil, sinister things” to be avoided at all costs. A “tie” was a perfectly acceptable outcome to a game. All I’m saying now is … come full circle. If the shootout is here to stay, then do the right thing, and take the “dirty points” away. You either won … or you lost.

Before people cry about giving a good effort needing to result in a point, consider this. Every team tries hard. Even when they lose in regulation time. They still tried hard, putting in a good effort. The result is the result. Each team had 65-minutes to earn that win. If they didn’t get in, then they didn’t. And now it’s time for “shootout roulette.” If your team is terrible in shootouts, alter your strategy. Try to be more aggressive in the final 5-minutes or regulation or overtime. Ya know?

By Matt H

February 21, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

Do you admit to players that you’ve made a mistake, if you’re a coach? I think Thrashy Thrashy nailed it. If I’m Hartley, I sit em both down, say “We f*** up- Johan, you’re playing more regularly for the sake of both a’ ya’ll”, start Kari in net to give him the chance to redeem himself against the Bolts, and tell both of them that Hedberg will start the Carolina game.

As far as point totals, I’d like to see regulation wins valued over shootout wins, and see the league call a spade a spade and just eliminate the point for the OT or Shootout loss.

Have ties or don’t. I don’t care. I like shootouts just as much as I like a hard-fought tie. But don’t p** on me and tell me it’s raining. 2 points for a regulation win, 1 point for a shootout win. Nice and simple.

Oh yeah, and that win last night gives me hope. It’s another step in the right direction. And as long as the team realizes they haven’t arrived back to where they need to be, they should be fine for the rest of the season.

Also, I never in my life thought I’d be rooting for the Panthers to beat Tampa (I grew up in Tampa hating the Panthers). Every game was a bench-clearer. As much as I hated him, I always admired Mell from afar.

By Matt H

February 21, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this

Also, I fully expected Hedberg to start last night. Didn’t everyone?

By Brendan

February 21, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

Matt H., I kinda like your idea, too. Two-points for a regulation win, one point for an overtime or shootout win. Nothing to the loser.

At least, that sorta keep the NHL record book intact. If the league started handing out 3-points for regulation-time wins, and some team had 50 of them, they just DESTROYED the previous mark for points in a season.

Of course, my idea of W-L ends “points” all together. But you can probably make a comparison between “100-point seasons” and “50 win seasons.” With the accompanying asterisk about shootouts. And so forth.

Good debates, guys. I’ve enjoyed all the perspectives I’ve heard on this topic.

By Brian

February 21, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

Brendan, Matt H - I think we all agree we want to get rid of the 1 point losses. But it will be 3 for a win, 2 for a shootout so as not to make a win twice as much as a shooutout (2 to 1) but only 50% more than a shootout (3 to 2).

As for it being confusing, have you ever tried to figure out how an NFL team gets into the playoffs on the last weekend of the season Brendan? Wasn’t it our own Jim Mora who was on the cellphone during a game when someone told him “JUST GO FOR THE TIE YOU IDIOT!”

By Brendan

February 21, 2007 06:13 PM | Link to this

That is the truth, Brian. “For the Falcons to get in, the Vikings must lose or tie, while the Giants lose or tie, and the Redskins lose, tie or not win by more than 14-points.” I hear ya.

But when there’s 7 games left, and there’s potentially 21-points still on the table, the scenarios are insane. But I do agree that a win being three points instead of two is a good argument over the alternative.

But nagging at me is that old, traditionalist notion that a game should be worth the “same” amount of points every night. So, if three (3) points are to be awarded, then it makes some sense to me that two points be given for the OT or SO win, while the loser gets one point. A regulation-time win gets three (3) points while the loser gets NOTHING and chokes on it.

But I still like wins and losses, straight up, best of all. In that scenario, it doesn’t matter WHEN you win a game … or lose it. You won or you lost. 50-32 is a good year. A team’s chances are just as good any others’ in OT or the Shootout. There’s a salary cap, plus “revenue-sharing.” The ice surface is truly level.

By Bob

February 21, 2007 07:58 PM | Link to this

GM’s shot down the 3 point rule, sounds like it’ll never happen. Here’s Burke’s reason (I always liked this guy and wish he was our GM):

“Because it’s a terrible idea,” Anaheim general manager Brian Burke said Wednesday as three days of GM meetings wrapped up. “That’s why it didn’t have any support.”

By Brendan

February 21, 2007 11:13 PM | Link to this

Well, I think they acted “correctly.” But, is the current system the “right one?” In my heart, I feel like the league still has some “politics of feel-goodism” and “Old NHL” concerns over trying to protect the smaller markets. When the truth is … there are no economic inequities in the league. There IS a salary cap ANNNND “revenue-sharing.” Why is the league still trying to treat the markets that fail with such “kid gloves.”

There are enough built-in safeguards. If a team falls flat on its face, it gets a pretty decent shot at winning the draft lottery. Look at the St. Louis Blues! They’re at .500, with 61-points, and just might turn into “buyers” instead of being “sellers” at the trade deadline. They won’t ship Eric Brewer if they still think they’ve got “some shot” at the 8th seed.