Paul Hamilton on Ryan Miller this morning on WGR

[tom webster]

No, it's not overreaction. The FO (along with the fans) wanted to see how he would handle that kind of workload, and he didn't handle it well. He just might not be built for that many games. This year's goalie class is showing that the heavy workload goalies are few and far between. Again, there is nothing wrong with a goalie who plays 60-65 games and still has a lot in the tank for the playoffs.

 

As for your second point, Lindy completely contradicted that in the end-of-the-year presser:

 

Ruff on whether he wants to see Miller play 70-plus games:

 

"Ideally, no (to 70-plus games). It was a very trying season for him, and you don?t know what you?re going to get out of your goaltender until you go there. Hindsight is always a tough place to go. I think he lost some quality practice time in a real tough schedule. In February and March, he couldn?t take three days to practice (the little things)."

 

LINK

 

I missed the point that Ruff contradicted Reiger. Still think its an over reaction to one season. You are all assuming that the work load was the root cause of his problems.

[Bmwolf21]

I missed the point that Ruff contradicted Reiger. Still think its an over reaction to one season. You are all assuming that the work load was the root cause of his problems.

In interest of fairness and full disclosure, I present Ryan's numbers from March - see below - and this year's numbers aren't really out of whack from his normal March. FWIW, I have been one of Ryan's biggest supporters on this board, and really believe that the team's shoddy defense really hung him out to dry even more so this season. That being said, watching him down the stretch this year I saw could see a guy that was hitting the wall mentally and/or physically, fighting to stay in the games, swimming through his crease, struggling to recover after going down, struggling to maintain his focus. His timing was a bit off pretty much most of March and he gave up 4 or more goals in 7 of his 14 games.

 

March Monthly Totals:

2007-08 6-5-3, 3.21, .847

2006-07 7-4-2, 3.42, .893

2005-06 6-5-1, 3.47, .888

 

Career March numbers:

40 GP, 19-14-6, 3.36, .888

 

So if you believe that the reason isn't the physical/mental fatigue from the heavy workload - which again, Lindy seems to think it was - then what is it? And as a corollary, what is the benefit to him playing a 70+ schedule versus playing 60-65 games and being a little sharper more often, a little more rested, and having a little more gas in the tank come the stretch run and playoffs?

[ExiledInIllinois]

I found 1 guy.....Grant Fuhr in 1987-88 played 75 regular season games at 5'11" and 188 lbs, and I don't think anyone would call Fuhr skinny. That is it!

 

Billy Smith would only play 40-45 games a year with the Isles and then would play the whole playoffs. Chico Resch and Rollie Mellanson got the other 35-40 games a year.

If Ryan Miller is going to play 70+ regular season games and still lead the Sabres to the Stanley Cup, he will join Grant Fuhr as the only goalie to do it in modern NHL history.

 

On that team with Fuhr....

 

Gretzky

Messier

Kurri

Anderson

Tikkanen

Simpson

Huddy

McTavish

McSorley

Beuekeboom

Lowe

 

and let's not forget Dave Hannan and Craig Muni

Good people of the court......I rest my case.

 

And he might be blind and light in the loafers...(OBJECTION!)

 

There is a reason why the fatest guy on the team is the goalie! Now don't take that as a put down... They still have to be athletic and a good skater helps... Why would you want to expend extra energy if you are smaller or skinnier?

 

Who was the goalie in the 1960's that was questioned by his coach for having a "beer belly" and lax training habits? His reply was: "I don't drink beer, I drink VO!"

[tom webster]

In interest of fairness and full disclosure, I present Ryan's numbers from March - see below - and this year's numbers aren't really out of whack from his normal March. FWIW, I have been one of Ryan's biggest supporters on this board, and really believe that the team's shoddy defense really hung him out to dry even more so this season. That being said, watching him down the stretch this year I saw could see a guy that was hitting the wall mentally and/or physically, fighting to stay in the games, swimming through his crease, struggling to recover after going down, struggling to maintain his focus. His timing was a bit off pretty much most of March and he gave up 4 or more goals in 7 of his 14 games.

 

March Monthly Totals:

2007-08 6-5-3, 3.21, .847

2006-07 7-4-2, 3.42, .893

2005-06 6-5-1, 3.47, .888

 

Career March numbers:

40 GP, 19-14-6, 3.36, .888

 

So if you believe that the reason isn't the physical/mental fatigue from the heavy workload - which again, Lindy seems to think it was - then what is it? And as a corollary, what is the benefit to him playing a 70+ schedule versus playing 60-65 games and being a little sharper more often, a little more rested, and having a little more gas in the tank come the stretch run and playoffs?

 

Just to be clear, I am not dismissing your suggestions out of hand, and understand that playing less may be the right thing to do. My original post to this thread was in reference to all the talk about his physique and training habits when all signs pointed to mental fatigue, if anything. In general, I think fans tend to over react to short term results which may just be anomalies.

[hopeleslyobvious]

Stanley Cup Goalies

 

2007 Giguere 6'1" 201 lbs vs Emory 6'1" 203 lbs

2006 Ward 6'1" 200 lbs vs Roloson 6'1" 180 lbs *** played 41 regular season games

2005 N/A

2004 Khabibuhlin 6'1" 208 lbs vs Kiprusoff 6'1" 185 lbs *** played 38 regular season games

2003 Brodeur 6'2" 215 lbs vs Giguere 6'1" 201 lbs

2002 Hasek 5'11" 177 lbs *** 65 regular games vs Irbe 5'8" 190 lbs *** 51 RS games

2001 Roy 6'2" 190 lbs *** Roy played over 63 games three times in career (65+67+68) and was eliminated by the 2nd round each time... vs Brodeur

2000 Brodeur vs Belfour *** 62 games

1999 Belfour** 61 games vs Hasek***64 games

1998 Osgood 5'10" 176 lbs*** 64 games vs Kolzig 6'3" 230lbs

1997 Vernon 5'9" 170 lbs*** 33 games vs Snow 6'3" 200 lbs

1996 Roy vs Vanbiesbrouck 5'8" 176 lbs*** 57 games

1995 Brodeur vs Vernon ***30 games

1994 Richter 5'10" 190lbs***68 games vs McLean 6'0" 182 lbs*** 52 games

1993 Roy vs Hrudey 5'11" 195 lbs*** 50 games

1992 Barrasso 6'3" 210 lbs vs Belfour*** 52 games

1991 Barrasso vs Jon Casey 5'10" 155 lbs*** 52 games

1990 Ranford 5'11" 185 lbs*** 56 games vs Moog 5'9" 180 lbs*** 46 games

There you have it. Even the best in the game like Roy and Hasek were limited to 60 or so games for the most part. In the last two decades, there is NOT ONE GOALIE LIGHTER THAN 190 LBS TO MAKE IT TO THE STANLEY CUP AND PLAY MORE THAN 64 REGULAR SEASON GAMES.

 

Someone print this F'r up and send it to the Braintrust at the Arena. I don't want to come here and bitch for the next 5 years.

 

Hey, I'm not in a science field, but just thinking back to College, I seem to always remember hearing "Correlation does not equal causation."

 

Adding weight does not improve endurance. In fact, I think the more "bulking up" an athlete does, the more it hurts their endurance. Your muscles may be stronger, but they are not able to perform as well over the long term. Not to mention the fact that they now have to carry 20-30 extra pounds.

 

I'd be interested to know what your training routine is that makes you such an expert in this field.

[nfreeman]

Stanley Cup Goalies

 

2007 Giguere 6'1" 201 lbs vs Emory 6'1" 203 lbs

2006 Ward 6'1" 200 lbs vs Roloson 6'1" 180 lbs *** played 41 regular season games

2005 N/A

2004 Khabibuhlin 6'1" 208 lbs vs Kiprusoff 6'1" 185 lbs *** played 38 regular season games

2003 Brodeur 6'2" 215 lbs vs Giguere 6'1" 201 lbs

2002 Hasek 5'11" 177 lbs *** 65 regular games vs Irbe 5'8" 190 lbs *** 51 RS games

2001 Roy 6'2" 190 lbs *** Roy played over 63 games three times in career (65+67+68) and was eliminated by the 2nd round each time... vs Brodeur

2000 Brodeur vs Belfour *** 62 games

1999 Belfour** 61 games vs Hasek***64 games

1998 Osgood 5'10" 176 lbs*** 64 games vs Kolzig 6'3" 230lbs

1997 Vernon 5'9" 170 lbs*** 33 games vs Snow 6'3" 200 lbs

1996 Roy vs Vanbiesbrouck 5'8" 176 lbs*** 57 games

1995 Brodeur vs Vernon ***30 games

1994 Richter 5'10" 190lbs***68 games vs McLean 6'0" 182 lbs*** 52 games

1993 Roy vs Hrudey 5'11" 195 lbs*** 50 games

1992 Barrasso 6'3" 210 lbs vs Belfour*** 52 games

1991 Barrasso vs Jon Casey 5'10" 155 lbs*** 52 games

1990 Ranford 5'11" 185 lbs*** 56 games vs Moog 5'9" 180 lbs*** 46 games

There you have it. Even the best in the game like Roy and Hasek were limited to 60 or so games for the most part. In the last two decades, there is NOT ONE GOALIE LIGHTER THAN 190 LBS TO MAKE IT TO THE STANLEY CUP AND PLAY MORE THAN 64 REGULAR SEASON GAMES.

 

Someone print this F'r up and send it to the Braintrust at the Arena. I don't want to come here and bitch for the next 5 years.

 

Game over. Dwight, that was a pretty impressive win.

[Done]

Hey, I'm not in a science field, but just thinking back to College, I seem to always remember hearing "Correlation does not equal causation."

 

Adding weight does not improve endurance. In fact, I think the more "bulking up" an athlete does, the more it hurts their endurance. Your muscles may be stronger, but they are not able to perform as well over the long term. Not to mention the fact that they now have to carry 20-30 extra pounds.

 

I'd be interested to know what your training routine is that makes you such an expert in this field.

 

maybe you'd like to look at one of my earlier posts

 

First of all, Miller CAN'T add 20-30 pounds of muscle. His weight itself isn't even the issue. It is the playing time that goes with the weight. Guys have gone to the Cup and played 70+ games, but they are ALWAYS big. There have been plenty of smaller guys go to the Cup, but their workload is limited. When I can pull up the data I did, it isn't some wishful thinking. The data holds up to the point of guys like Belfour and Roy going to the Cup when playing 60 games or so, yet the multiple times they reach 70....they get nowhere near the Cup.

 

One guy in the history of hockey has weighed less than 190 lbs and still made it to the Stanley Cup while playing anything approaching 70+ games in the regular season. There are dozens of goalies that weigh less than 190, and many have made it to the Cup, but look at those workloads and tell me it is all a coincidence.

 

I am assuming we can't change the weight of Miller, but we can change his playing time.

[Bmwolf21]

I am assuming we can't change the weight of Miller, but we can change his playing time.

Since we started this debate and you've done the math and research I've still yet to see one argument as to why Miller "needs" to play 70+ games, which seems to be the default position of those who think his workload wasn't too much.

 

ROI for a franchise goalie? Maybe, but that's debatable. You need to get to the playoffs and then have him win another 20 games to earn the Cup. If we pay him $20M for a season and he plays 10 regular-season games and then wins the 20 games to get the Cup in Buffalo? It would be worth every penny.

[stenbaro]

Really?

 

When plugging a 4x8 area.

 

IMO, the more you can plug it, the curve for skill and heart goes down proportionally.

 

Afterall, if they can find the perfect specimen to plug it 100%, what skill and heart do you need.

 

Bigger does help.

 

Even with an inch here or there, with good positioning, do you think that some of those outside shots get deflected away?

 

There is a reason why they standardized the equipment...

 

<_< <_<

Ok,,if that was the case then sign the big show from WWE...LOL..

[Done]

Since we started this debate and you've done the math and research I've still yet to see one argument as to why Miller "needs" to play 70+ games, which seems to be the default position of those who think his workload wasn't too much.

 

ROI for a franchise goalie? Maybe, but that's debatable. You need to get to the playoffs and then have him win another 20 games to earn the Cup. If we pay him $20M for a season and he plays 10 regular-season games and then wins the 20 games to get the Cup in Buffalo? It would be worth every penny.

 

Right....look at the history of guys like Vernon and Billy Smith...they played 30-45 games each year and took home 7 Cups in crunch time. I was shocked that Patrick Roy averaged just over 60 games per year. You would think of any goalie in the world that you would ride, it would be him.

 

Are the Sabres the type of team that can throw $6-7 million at Miller and be patient enough to play him 60 times a year? They way Miller frazzles himself, you could argue he should be closer to 50 games. In hindsight...Marty Biron was the perfect guy to have around. I just don't see Buffalo putting up the money needed at the position to make Miller most efficient.

 

Not only did Miller play almost every game, but he constantly had guys harassing him and crashing him without any fear of retribution. Add that to the mileage and the system really looks flawed. The one guy in history that bucked the trend was Fuhr, and he had Mcsorely, Beukeboom, Steve Smith, Muni, Lowe and Huddy as his defensemen. Not only was he protected, but you had Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Anderson and Tikkanen up front. Not exactally Tallinder and Pommers.

[Bmwolf21]

Right....look at the history of guys like Vernon and Billy Smith...they played 30-45 games each year and took home 7 Cups in crunch time. I was shocked that Patrick Roy averaged just over 60 games per year. You would think of any goalie in the world that you would ride, it would be him.

 

Are the Sabres the type of team that can throw $6-7 million at Miller and be patient enough to play him 60 times a year? They way Miller frazzles himself, you could argue he should be closer to 50 games. In hindsight...Marty Biron was the perfect guy to have around. I just don't see Buffalo putting up the money needed at the position to make Miller most efficient.

 

Not only did Miller play almost every game, but he constantly had guys harassing him and crashing him without any fear of retribution. Add that to the mileage and the system really looks flawed. The one guy in history that bucked the trend was Fuhr, and he had Mcsorely, Beukeboom, Steve Smith, Muni, Lowe and Huddy as his defensemen. Not only was he protected, but you had Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, Anderson and Tikkanen up front. Not exactally Tallinder and Pommers.

I was really glad to see Lindy acknowledge that they did a poor job protecting him this year, and I hope it wasn't just lip service - that they really do intend to shore up the D and protect him more next year.

 

As for the number of games - I think we're in the same neighborhood, just at different ends of the street. I think 60-62 games is about right for him, if Lindy plays his cards right and limits his number of back-to-back nights and gives him nights off when the team is heading into a 2-3 day break, which would give him an extended break of 4 days off. Have a reliable backup that can handle 20 games without a huge dropoff (sorry Tbo) and work on upgrading the defense and defensive-zone responsibility, and he should be OK at a 60-ish game clip.

[Done]

I was really glad to see Lindy acknowledge that they did a poor job protecting him this year, and I hope it wasn't just lip service - that they really do intend to shore up the D and protect him more next year.

 

As for the number of games - I think we're in the same neighborhood, just at different ends of the street. I think 60-62 games is about right for him, if Lindy plays his cards right and limits his number of back-to-back nights and gives him nights off when the team is heading into a 2-3 day break, which would give him an extended break of 4 days off. Have a reliable backup that can handle 20 games without a huge dropoff (sorry Tbo) and work on upgrading the defense and defensive-zone responsibility, and he should be OK at a 60-ish game clip.

 

I'm with you. The magic number seems to be 60-64 games. That is what all the good ones do on a regular basis.

 

I wouldn't mind having a really old vet like CuJo that can get you .500 hockey during the 20 games he gives you, yet can still win playoff games in his sleep when it really matters. He almost won that series for Calgary. It would be nice if that lockerroom could be filled with some Stanley Cup war stories for the kids to get excited about. You could fire Corsi then!

[Bmwolf21]

I'm with you. The magic number seems to be 60-64 games. That is what all the good ones do on a regular basis.

 

I wouldn't mind having a really old vet like CuJo that can get you .500 hockey during the 20 games he gives you, yet can still win playoff games in his sleep when it really matters. He almost won that series for Calgary. It would be nice if that lockerroom could be filled with some Stanley Cup war stories for the kids to get excited about. You could fire Corsi then!

You had me at Fire Corsi. B-)

[ExiledInIllinois]

Ok,,if that was the case then sign the big show from WWE...LOL..

 

Yes, really get the youngsters to skate early... Once they get the skill, it should be easy... Just have to get the big guys when young an pull them away from say football and get them into hockey... But, that leaves us with the dabate about young children and hockey and how it is a sport that is prohibitive because of rink times and overall cost... Again, get the big guys to start skating all over the ice... Wouldn't it be cool to see both teams the size (and skill, which will get better and better through time) of say a Chara? <_< <_< Phase the munchkins out...

[hopeleslyobvious]

Again I go back to the old statistics fact that correlation does not equal causation.

 

While I'm at it. You have conveniently skewed the facts. You included the number of games played by someone under 190, while just giving us their height and weight if they are over 190. When you look at the GP during the time that you referenced, only 2 goalies have played over 65 games and gone to the Stanley Cup Finals:

 

 

2006-2007: Giguere 56 GP, Emery 58 GP

2006 Ward 28 GP, Roloson 41 GP

2005 N/A

2004 Khabibuhlin 55 GP, Kiprusoff 38 GP

2003 Brodeur 73 GP, Giguere 65 GP

2002 Hasek 65 GP, Irbe 51 GP

2001 Roy 62 GP, Brodeur 72 GP

2000 Brodeur 72 GP, Belfour 62 GP

1999 Belfour 61 GP vs Hasek 64 GP

1998 Osgood 64 GP vs Kolzig 64 GP

1997 Vernon 33 GP vs Snow 29 GP

1996 Roy 62 GP, Vanbiesbrouck 57 GP

1995 Brodeur 40 vs Vernon 30 GP (Lockout year)

1994 Richter 68 GP, McLean 52 GP

1993 Roy 62 GP vs Hrudey 50 GP

1992 Barrasso 62 GP vs Belfour 52 GP

1991 Barrasso 48 GP vs Jon Casey 52 GP

1990 Ranford 56 GP vs Moog 46 GP

 

So that brings us back to my point, that your weight has nothing to do with your conditioning. I actually find it kind of funny how you conveniently left facts out that worked against your argument.

 

So again, I'd like to know what your particular exercise background is that makes you such an expert on endurance training.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Everything equal, size has to matter... Nobody is perfect and everyone is caught out of position from time to time. Who would you want caught out of position a big dude or a skinny dude?

 

IMO, the bigger the better and like I said, skill and conditioning can even taper off a little!

 

There is one constant... That is the size of the net opening... Hockey is a fluke sport... Just imagine if Sauve got just a little piece of Park's shot to send it elsewhere, anything could have happened 25 years ago.

 

I am firm believer that size in hockey can override everything else GIVEN the proper training through the formative years... You see what is happening to the game as the players get bigger... Technology and size is quickly outpacing the game.

[Done]

Again I go back to the old statistics fact that correlation does not equal causation.

 

While I'm at it. You have conveniently skewed the facts. You included the number of games played by someone under 190, while just giving us their height and weight if they are over 190. When you look at the GP during the time that you referenced, only 2 goalies have played over 65 games and gone to the Stanley Cup Finals:

2006-2007: Giguere 56 GP, Emery 58 GP

2006 Ward 28 GP, Roloson 41 GP

2005 N/A

2004 Khabibuhlin 55 GP, Kiprusoff 38 GP

2003 Brodeur 73 GP, Giguere 65 GP

2002 Hasek 65 GP, Irbe 51 GP

2001 Roy 62 GP, Brodeur 72 GP

2000 Brodeur 72 GP, Belfour 62 GP

1999 Belfour 61 GP vs Hasek 64 GP

1998 Osgood 64 GP vs Kolzig 64 GP

1997 Vernon 33 GP vs Snow 29 GP

1996 Roy 62 GP, Vanbiesbrouck 57 GP

1995 Brodeur 40 vs Vernon 30 GP (Lockout year)

1994 Richter 68 GP, McLean 52 GP

1993 Roy 62 GP vs Hrudey 50 GP

1992 Barrasso 62 GP vs Belfour 52 GP

1991 Barrasso 48 GP vs Jon Casey 52 GP

1990 Ranford 56 GP vs Moog 46 GP

 

So that brings us back to my point, that your weight has nothing to do with your conditioning. I actually find it kind of funny how you conveniently left facts out that worked against your argument.

 

So again, I'd like to know what your particular exercise background is that makes you such an expert on endurance training.

 

I am totally full of sh!t

 

I sell ice cream to your nephews out of my 1985 GMC Savana in my boxer shorts.

 

 

You need to tone done your attitude young man...if you can't read, then that is your problem.

[hopeleslyobvious]

I can read just fine. Why do I need to tone down my attitude? Because I caught you only citing the numbers that help your argument?

[hopeleslyobvious]

Everything equal, size has to matter... Nobody is perfect and everyone is caught out of position from time to time. Who would you want caught out of position a big dude or a skinny dude?

 

IMO, the bigger the better and like I said, skill and conditioning can even taper off a little!

 

There is one constant... That is the size of the net opening... Hockey is a fluke sport... Just imagine if Sauve got just a little piece of Park's shot to send it elsewhere, anything could have happened 25 years ago.

 

I am firm believer that size in hockey can override everything else GIVEN the proper training through the formative years... You see what is happening to the game as the players get bigger... Technology and size is quickly outpacing the game.

 

I do agree that size has it's advantages when it comes to getting in front of the puck. However, I think someone who weighs more isn't going to have the same endurance as someone who is smaller.

 

Just for starters, if you weigh 20 pounds more, your muscles have to carry around 20 pounds of extra weight.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I do agree that size has it's advantages when it comes to getting in front of the puck. However, I think someone who weighs more isn't going to have the same endurance as someone who is smaller.

 

Just for starters, if you weigh 20 pounds more, your muscles have to carry around 20 pounds of extra weight.

 

Good point... I think that will change in years as the youngsters start getting bigger and bigger... Endurance starts early.

[Done]

I can read just fine. Why do I need to tone down my attitude? Because I caught you only citing the numbers that help your argument?

 

OK....want to get burried?

 

The following goalies weighing under 190 have appeared in a combined 13 Stanley Cups

 

Belfour

Hasek

Fuhr

Kiprusoff

Ranford

Richter

 

In those 13 appearances, only 1 time did a goalie play 70+ games in the regular season, and that was Grant Fuhr.

 

These goalies HAVE played 70+ games in their careers. Here is the listing of those seasons, as well as the amount of playoff games they then played in that same year.

 

Belfour

 

'91 74 games 6 playoffs

'93 71 games 4 playoffs

'94 70 games 6 playoffs

 

Kiprusoff

 

'06 74 games 6 playoffs

'07 74 games 7 playoffs

'08 76 games 7 playoffs

 

Fuhr

 

'96 79 games 2 playoffs

'97 73 games 6 playoffs

 

Hasek

 

'98 72 games 15 playoffs

 

Ranford

 

'94 71 games 0 playoffs

 

Richter

 

'98 72 games 0 playoffs

 

Turco

 

'04 73 games 0 playoffs

 

 

So....we have this same batch of goalies going to 12 of 13 Stanley Cups when playing less than 70 games

 

This same group when playing OVER 70 games in 13 seasons...made 1 trip to the Stanley Cup...1 Conference final....8 first round losses and 3 missed playoffs.

 

Now, I'm sure that size has nothing to do with it, and neither does games played. It was bad ice.

 

 

I don't know what has your panties in a knot about this. I never said small athletes don't have success. Small athletes get into peak condition much quicker than their bigger counterparts. That is a huge advantage. Once the bigger athlete can match the fitness level needed for the contact sport at hand, he is going to be able to perform at HIS PEAK PERFORMANCE with less recovery time needed in between performances than his smaller counterpart. The smaller athlete may in fact posses a HIGHER PEAK PERFORMANCE than the larger counterpart, but needs MORE TIME ON AVERAGE to recover in order to REPEAT HIS PEAK PERFORMANCE.

 

It isn't as simple as Big Good....it may have sounded that way. A 160 lb guy running 20 miles should have an advantage on a 200 lb guy running 20 miles, but that type of aerobic monotonous exercise is really only found in marathons and to a point, soccer.

[Bmwolf21]

Since we started this debate and you've done the math and research I've still yet to see one argument as to why Miller "needs" to play 70+ games, which seems to be the default position of those who think his workload wasn't too much.

 

ROI for a franchise goalie? Maybe, but that's debatable. You need to get to the playoffs and then have him win another 20 games to earn the Cup. If we pay him $20M for a season and he plays 10 regular-season games and then wins the 20 games to get the Cup in Buffalo? It would be worth every penny.

:oops:

Don't know where the heck I got 20 playoff wins. Obviously it's supposed to be 16. :doh:

 

Back to your regularly scheduled debate.

[Done]

:oops:

Don't know where the heck I got 20 playoff wins. Obviously it's supposed to be 16. :doh:

 

Back to your regularly scheduled debate.

 

I guess you didn't hear that Larry Quinn wrote a letter to Bettman stating that the top 10 teams in each conference should go to the playoffs with the first round consisting of 7 vs 10 and 8 vs 9. He feels it will be good for NHL revenues and playoff advertising. :death:

[Bmwolf21]

I guess you didn't hear that Larry Quinn wrote a letter to Bettman stating that the top 10 teams in each conference should go to the playoffs with the first round consisting of 7 vs 10 and 8 vs 9. He feels it will be good for NHL revenues and playoff advertising. :death:

:lol:

 

He said if they didn't approve the extra 2 teams he was taking his blue ice and hulking nets and going home...

[hopeleslyobvious]

OK....want to get burried?

 

The following goalies weighing under 190 have appeared in a combined 13 Stanley Cups

 

Belfour

Hasek

Fuhr

Kiprusoff

Ranford

Richter

 

In those 13 appearances, only 1 time did a goalie play 70+ games in the regular season, and that was Grant Fuhr.

 

These goalies HAVE played 70+ games in their careers. Here is the listing of those seasons, as well as the amount of playoff games they then played in that same year.

 

Belfour

 

'91 74 games 6 playoffs

'93 71 games 4 playoffs

'94 70 games 6 playoffs

 

Kiprusoff

 

'06 74 games 6 playoffs

'07 74 games 7 playoffs

'08 76 games 7 playoffs

 

Fuhr

 

'96 79 games 2 playoffs

'97 73 games 6 playoffs

 

Hasek

 

'98 72 games 15 playoffs

 

Ranford

 

'94 71 games 0 playoffs

 

Richter

 

'98 72 games 0 playoffs

 

Turco

 

'04 73 games 0 playoffs

So....we have this same batch of goalies going to 12 of 13 Stanley Cups when playing less than 70 games

 

This same group when playing OVER 70 games in 13 seasons...made 1 trip to the Stanley Cup...1 Conference final....8 first round losses and 3 missed playoffs.

 

Now, I'm sure that size has nothing to do with it, and neither does games played. It was bad ice.

I don't know what has your panties in a knot about this. I never said small athletes don't have success. Small athletes get into peak condition much quicker than their bigger counterparts. That is a huge advantage. Once the bigger athlete can match the fitness level needed for the contact sport at hand, he is going to be able to perform at HIS PEAK PERFORMANCE with less recovery time needed in between performances than his smaller counterpart. The smaller athlete may in fact posses a HIGHER PEAK PERFORMANCE than the larger counterpart, but needs MORE TIME ON AVERAGE to recover in order to REPEAT HIS PEAK PERFORMANCE.

 

It isn't as simple as Big Good....it may have sounded that way. A 160 lb guy running 20 miles should have an advantage on a 200 lb guy running 20 miles, but that type of aerobic monotonous exercise is really only found in marathons and to a point, soccer.

 

How about 70+ games is too many for 99% of goalies to play, regardless of how big or small they are.

 

Do you have any scientific data to back up this recovery time theory, or are you just throwing that one out there too?

 

I can think of plenty of other sports where that "aerobic monotonous exercise" is found.