Canada V Russia

[Spode]

Tomorrow night. Russia looked really good against the US and I didnt even mind the Smack talking at the end of the game from Malkin. Turnabout is fair play.

Canada looked awesome against the Czech in all aspects of the game except one, the scoreboard, which makes me a bit worried.

Any thoughts?

 

[Goober Mcfly]

I agree. If Canada can't win by 6-8 goals in every game they play, they're no good at all.

</dripping sarcasm>

You know, contrary to some people's opinion, the final score in a hockey game does NOT indicate how well each team played. Case in point was yesterday's game.

*awaits Ranger68's rant that the only statistic that means anything is the final score*

 

[scubadoo]

*awaits Ranger68's rant that the only statistic that means anything is the final score*

LMAO

 

[Spode]

<wipes Goober's slackjaw drool off shoe mistaken for sarcasm>

where do you get

they're no good at all.

out of my post.

<pats Goober on head and gives him a stick of pepperoni>

"there that outta keep that tooth busy"

 

[Goober Mcfly]

First, thanks for the pepperoni.

Second, you intimated that you were worried the Canadians would lose against the Russians because they didn't win by a wider margin, did you not?

Canada looked awesome against the Czech in all aspects of the game except one, the scoreboard, which makes me a bit worried.

Meh. It's not worth arguing about. Go Canada Go!!!!

 

[shack]

You know, contrary to some people's opinion, the final score in a hockey game does NOT indicate how well each team played. Case in point was yesterday's game.

Ranger's point is that in almost all cases the final score indicates how well the teams played relative to eachother, not if a team played well in relation to its potential, i.e. the better team that day will win on the scoreboard.

Do you think that Canada won but was outplayed by the Czech's? If you think that Canada played better, then the score was an accurate reflection of which team was better.

I think I read that Canada outshot the Czechs by 40-8 in the 3rd period. The conclusion is that one of the Czech players, the goalie (a team member) played well enough to compensate for the fact that the Canadian skaters badly ouplayed the Czech skaters. This made the final score relatively close.

 

[Goober Mcfly]

insinuated goober, insinuated

No, intimated.

 

[Spode]

Wouldn't be worried about Canada's chances accept for some things that have happened in the past ie.

http://espn.go.com/classic/s/Classic_1972_usa_ussr_gold_medal_hoop.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_on_Ice

http://www.eurobasket.com/events/wc/wc02_D6.asp

http://www.2betdsi.com/lines/soccer-lines.htm

and most recently

http://www.tsn.ca/world_jrs/news_story.asp?ID=109881&hubName=world_jrs

Aw fuck it!!! GO CANADA GO!!!

 

[Goober Mcfly]

Ranger's point is that in almost all cases the final score indicates how well the teams played relative to eachother, not if a team played well in relation to its potential, i.e. the better team that day will win on the scoreboard.

No, no, no, no, no. Ranger's point is that in ALL cases the final score indicates how well the teams AS A WHOLE played relative to each other.

Do you think that Canada won but was outplayed by the Czech's?

No. I did watch the game.

If you think that Canada played better, then the score was an accurate reflection of which team was better.

Yes, in a black and white world. However in a world of varying degrees, Canada should have pounded the snot out of the Czechs.

I think I read that Canada outshot the Czechs by 40-8 in the 3rd period. The conclusion is that one of the Czech players, the goalie (a team member) played well enough to compensate for the fact that the Canadian skaters badly ouplayed the Czech skaters. This made the final score relatively close.

Yep. Agreed.

 

[Spode]

Do you think that Canada won but was outplayed by the Czech's? If you think that Canada played better, then the score was an accurate reflection of which team was better.

I think Canada BADLY outplayed the Czechs and the score was in no way a reflection of the game IMHO. The thing that has me thinking is that if the Canadians don't capatilize on these chances against an inferior team (CZCH), against the Russians they may not have the luxury of playing an offensively impotent team. Ovechkin is arguably the best player on the ice, or at least thats what the NHL scouts say.

 

[Spode]

No, intimated.

He's right Sheik. He just insinuated that I intimated.

 

[Spode]

Woooo HOOOOO man fight!!!! Now boys put on a hockey jersey and slam each other into the boards and I'll get my martini and lawn chair...

No thank you. I respectfully decline as I have just retaped my glasses after getting broken......CLUYVEN!!!

 

[plyrs99]

lol, at one point, heading into the 3rd period, the czechs had but 4 shots. canada, dare i say, played the last period, not wanting to lose, not playing to win.

only one reason the score even somewhat flattered the czechs, goalie marek schwarz. as pierre mcguire would say, marek schwarz, was a monster!

Plyrs

PS - these are the kind of games that define certain players. crosby and ovenchkin have both had very good tourneys, but, one will emerge a hero, the other, will be perceived unjustly after the game.

 

[Ranger68]

I agree. If Canada can't win by 6-8 goals in every game they play, they're no good at all.

</dripping sarcasm>

You know, contrary to some people's opinion, the final score in a hockey game does NOT indicate how well each team played. Case in point was yesterday's game.

*awaits Ranger68's rant that the only statistic that means anything is the final score*

LOL
Yes, it does.

Of course, more straw men - I've NEVER said that the only statistic that means anything is the final score. LOL Goober, you so crazy! LOL *Every* statistic means something. BUT, what's more important - the final score, or the shots on goal? The final score, or the number of power play conversions? The final score, or the faceoff percentages? LOL If you think about it for a few seconds, the answer's obvious - the most important stat is the final score - it's the SUMMARY of *everything else*.

The Canadians missed a ton of chances last night. Does that mean they played *better* than the scoreboard indicated? Why? Because they couldn't convert their chances? Uh, sorry - but isn't that part of hockey? Don't good players convert more chances than poor players?

The Canadians outshot their opponents 45-15 or so last night. Does that mean they played *better* than the scoreboard indicated? Why? Because they couldn't beat that Czech goalie?

LOL
Too easy.

The fact is, the Canadians were *clearly* the better team last night and won handily.
No need to let Goober confuse you at all.

LOL

 

[Ranger68]

Ranger's point is that in almost all cases the final score indicates how well the teams played relative to eachother, not if a team played well in relation to its potential, i.e. the better team that day will win on the scoreboard.

Do you think that Canada won but was outplayed by the Czech's? If you think that Canada played better, then the score was an accurate reflection of which team was better.

I think I read that Canada outshot the Czechs by 40-8 in the 3rd period. The conclusion is that one of the Czech players, the goalie (a team member) played well enough to compensate for the fact that the Canadian skaters badly ouplayed the Czech skaters. This made the final score relatively close.

Really, shack - it's almost pointless talking to Goober.
LOL
I only bother myself because it's so much fun destroying his illogic.

 

[n_v]

Ranger you really are a piece of work. Goober cast his line and you bit. Hook line and sinker.

</what an ass>

 

[Ranger68]

No, no, no, no, no. Ranger's point is that in ALL cases the final score indicates how well the teams AS A WHOLE played relative to each other.
No. I did watch the game.
Yes, in a black and white world. However in a world of varying degrees, Canada should have pounded the snot out of the Czechs.Yep. Agreed.

Actually, I recall saying that in *almost all* cases, the score is the final arbiter of how well teams have played. I recall saying that perhaps *totally, objectively egregious* refereeing might be a cause, or who knows what else. Something *totally* beyond the pale - something *outside of the typical hockey game*.

But, fine - simplify if you must. I won't disagree.

IN ALL CASES, the final score is the total arbiter of how well two teams have played against each other *as a whole*, not separating out the individual components (which is what other statistics measure).

Anyway, I'm glad you're *sort of* paying attention.
LOL

I really have no idea what you mean "in a world of varying degrees, Canada should have pounded the snot out of the Czechs".
What do you mean by that? That the play of their goaltender was total fluke? That *shot totals* provide the best measure of how well two teams have played against each other?

Again, I suppose it provides some solace to an embittered Senators fan to somehow remove goaltending from the equation and look solely at *shots* as the sum arbiter of how well two "teams" played against each other. That being the case, Ottawa might have beaten the Leafs in some of the recent playoff series. LOL

In any case, Canada totally outplayed the Czechs and beat them handily - 3-1 - despite STELLAR play from their goaltender and lots of missed chances. If our *skaters* hadn't TOTALLY outplayed theirs, we might have lost one of those tight games that some people always end up saying "the best team lost - we outplayed them".

 

[Ranger68]

Ranger's right in only one respect: the ultimate statistic is who scored more goals. And that, my friends, is the ONLY thing that matters.

As for tomorrow night's game it should be a good one - I'm still of the opinion that the majority of junior hockey games are more entertaining than the majority of NHL games. Go Canada.

Yep.
I'm EXACTLY right.
Thank you.

 

[Ranger68]

It amazes me that I can be talked about so much when I'm not around.
And by people I'm Ignoring (n_v).
LOL
I must be doing something right.
LOL


Woohoo!

 

[n_v]

Go see a doctor Ranger. You have some serious issues.