
They have kids rostered from Canada and Nebraska for Christ sake!
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
Are the open tournaments closer to Duluth?GoalieDad23 wrote:YouthHockeyHub has them rated as the fourth best AAA team for 2002s . . . only behind the Blades, Machine Orange, and EuroAmerican Red . . .which begs the question . . . Why are they playing in open tournaments?![]()
They have kids rostered from Canada and Nebraska for Christ sake!
Oh Yes!---that hot bed of hockey.......NebraskaGoalieDad23 wrote:YouthHockeyHub has them rated as the fourth best AAA team for 2002s . . . only behind the Blades, Machine Orange, and EuroAmerican Red . . .which begs the question . . . Why are they playing in open tournaments?![]()
They have kids rostered from Canada and Nebraska for Christ sake!
Euro out shot MG 52-18. Goalie stood on his head is the rumor. Nice win for MG...That goalie must feel like the man!YouthHockeyHub wrote:The LSS organization is really hard to call. I saw an edition last year that was very impressive. 02 is a loaded year, we know these teams really well. The 02 MG beat Euro today, so things will likely change.
TZ
SammyOB wrote:Euro out shot MG 52-18. Goalie stood on his head is the rumor. Nice win for MG...That goalie must feel like the man![/quoYouthHockeyHub wrote:The LSS organization is really hard to call. I saw an edition last year that was very impressive. 02 is a loaded year, we know these teams really well. The 02 MG beat Euro today, so things will likely change.
TZ
Is that the official count. Relayed through the hotwire to the twin cities......
Gold had three power play goals.. Several break downs on both sides.. Sloppy game IMO ..YouthHockeyHub wrote:Two things.
First, read this: http://www.youthhockeyhub.com/tony-scot ... s-on-goal/
Second, traded texts with Euro coach today....he's been schooled well in above. Never once mentioned SOG.
SOG: THEY DONT MATTER...PERIOD.
Agree, if you hypothetically lose 3 games in a weekend all by the score of 2-1 and in one game you got outshot 50-3, the second game the shots were 25 apiece and the final game you outshot the other team 40-10, it tells you something. You are still 0-3, no denying that, but it does give some indication as to which team controlled the game.old goalie85 wrote:Shots on goal matter to the goalies that is a fact. I think it helps to paint a picture of how the game went.
Like the guy on PBS with the fro!InThePipes wrote:Agree, if you hypothetically lose 3 games in a weekend all by the score of 2-1 and in one game you got outshot 50-3, the second game the shots were 25 apiece and the final game you outshot the other team 40-10, it tells you something. You are still 0-3, no denying that, but it does give some indication as to which team controlled the game.old goalie85 wrote:Shots on goal matter to the goalies that is a fact. I think it helps to paint a picture of how the game went.
I'm not suggesting it's a perfect science, maybe one team was just really good at dumping it on net from outside of the blue line, but as OG said, it paints a picture.
Shots don't matter, quality scoring chances do.. The team that gets the most and/or capitializes on them wins. If your team has three breakdowns a game and the other team capitalizes on them you don't need 40 sog...Section 8 guy wrote:Regarding SOG......you are in a 7 game series. Scenario A) After game 1 you were outshot 35-5 but won the game 3-1. Scenario B) After game 1 you outshot the other team 35-5 but lost 3-2.
After which scenario would you feel better about your chances of winning the 7 game series?
Sometimes shots on goal tells you a lot about how two teams compare. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the goals on the scoreboard tell you a lot about how two teams compare. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes the scoreboard paints a more accurate picture, sometimes the SOG do.
Does it matter at the end of the day when discussing who won that specific game? No. But it can sometimes be a piece of the puzzle when discussing how a hockey game went or how two teams compare.
If it wasn't why would they bother even tracking the stat in the first place?
I dont think anyone is saying that the SOG stat doesnt matter at all or doesnt have a purpose for evaluating your teams play. but I here way to often from the losing team "we out shot them by alot and should have won" My answer would be "So". Or They only won because they had a good goalie. My answer "goalies count" the best goalie/hottest goalie in the NHL generally wins the stanley cup. Does that mean they shouldn' have won the cup?O-townClown wrote:Tony, assume I'm coaching a team that is heavily favored. We go out and lose. That's why they play the game.
I'm asked, "How did you LOSE to them!?"
I could answer, "our kids played well. Really put a lot of pressure on the net. Their goalie is excellent and they capitalized with a couple goals when they had a 5-on-3. I think we outshot them 24-8."
If I'm not allowed to quantify that I feel our kids outplayed them it leaves me with what?
They questioner felt our team was certain to win and wants an explanation. I don't know how you do that without referencing shots. Take the Miracle on Ice game. Everyone knows the U.S. won a game that people didn't think they could. When you look at the SOG it shows the CCCP showed up to play.
Just because you don't care to mention SOG doesn't mean others can't. It'd be like me saying a game recap can't mention that a goal was even strength, PP, or SH. After all, a goal is a goal. They all count as one.
I think we agree.. SOG is a stat worth looking at, but its not why you win or lose.O-townClown wrote:Nuts, I wholly understand.
Now explain to someone that wasn't there how a team could dominate the game play and still lose. You'll mention the goalie and don't pretend citing shots on goal isn't a way to quantify how well that goalie played.
Last I checked SOG isn't the only stat kept during a college or pro hockey game. If it wasn't worth tracking they'd stop.
I have no problem with people looking at SOG.