LOL @ Alexander Ovenchicken.

those pictures are fantastic.

i have a question though, is it bad for Ovechkin that he had as many shots as the NYR or does that speak more to the lack of offense the Rangers have? Shots on net for are a good stat.....no?

 

I think a little of both. But he does have 4 goals and only 1 win in 3 games, so Ovi still has no help when he is hot.

 

Alexander Ovechkin, now has 1 more goal than Sidney Crosby, ...















... and it only took him 17 more shots to do it!

LOL@OV!!!

 

I'm still having trouble w/ this reasoning Sol....and I despise OV. How are shots for a bad thing?

 

Shots, aren't a bad thing. Misses are.
-
Look, when OV came into the league, idiots and Capitals fans (more often than not the same thing) began talking up OV saying incredibly stupit chit like "OV is a sniper" and lauding all the goals he scores.
-
The thing was, nobody was bothering to note that in order to score so many goals he had to take so many more shots than anyone else.
-
First of all, the hallmark of a "sniper" is that he is able to achieve his goal with one, or at least a minimum number of shots. OV is the exact opposite, he is a machine gunner. Spray enough bullets all in the general area of your target and someof them are bound to hit. That's not skill, that's more opportunities, hardly laudable.
-
Currently OV has 377 career goals on 3099 shots, if he were as accurate as Pavel Datsyuk he would have 443, as accurate as Crosby he would have 464, and if he were as accurate as Steven Stamkos he would have 536!
-
It's no great thing to score more goals than most people when you are given so many more opportunities to score.
-
Think of it this way, we'll both coach a football team against each other, you get the Denver Broncos as your team, I get the New Orleans Saints, ... Only, you only get 2 opportunities to make a first down. I get 5.

Wanna bet whose team makes more first downs?

Does this help?

 

As an ex- hockey player and coach I disagree Sol. Shots for aren't a bad thing. Taking bad shots may be but thats not really a quantifiable stats. The new era of hockey analytics like Corsi and relative Corsi would also disagree w/ you.

huh? not true.

Im w/ ya here.

 

First of all, the hallmark of a "sniper" is that he is able to achieve his goal with one, or at least a minimum number of shots.
huh?

Huh? Have you lost your mind?
Obviously the use of the term "sniper" is borrowed from the Military. In the Military a sniper is supposed to drop his target with a few, preferably ONE shot. They are picked for their accuracy. Accuracy in this sense is defined hitting the target.
To deny that a "sniper" is someone who is supposed to be efficient and accurate, low attempts high payoff is absurd to the point it boarders on lunacy. Since I don't think you insane, you are extremely misguided in not understanding this.
-
To spray your target with shots to get a hit (goal) is THE EXACT OPPOSITE of being a sniper.

 

semantics Sol. so would that make David Backes more of a sniper than the reigning Richard winner? I think most hockey people associate sniper as goal scorer.

I would argue that OV's lack of interest or inability to understand defensive responsibilities are his biggest weaknesses.

 

lol matty, awesome gif. that would explain SO much

 

... and I would agree, but to call OV a sniper is an insult to snipers, it's as bad as naming Kermit Gosnell Man of the Year.

Daryyl Sutter was a sniper, Mario Lemieux was a sniper, Jari Kurri was a sniper, Ovenchicken is a dump truck o pucks.

 

I Think all AO does is think about scoring goals when he gets on the ice. The rest if his game is lacking from thinking like that. he doesn't play defense well , as Matty said. Has he ever even been up with the assist leaders in the NHL? I don't think so. So that means he has his mind in one area and one only. And that is scoring goals for himself, which is a bit selfish. But as far as taking shots? The last I heard, 'No shot is a bad shot!" Strange things happen sometimes. NHL coaches preach this....

 

-
I'm sorry Cup4Pens, I have to disagree. What if you miss every shot? Is no shot still a bad shot?

And not that Shots is the holy grail of NHL prowess, but for OV, it is VERY REVEALING.
-
For example:
In 2005-2006 Ovechkin was (tied with Kovulchuk))3rd in Goals(52) behind Cheechoo(56) and Jagr(54); however, he took 108 more shots than Cheechoo, 57 more than Jagr and 102 more than Kovulchuk. ? NOT a sniper.

OV has led the league in shots SEVEN of the eight years he has played in the NHL, yet he only led the league in goals 3 times. 4 times he led the league in shots, he finished 3rd, 4th, 3rd, and 14th!

In 2008-2009 not only did he take more shots than anyone else, he took 156 more than the next nearest.

OV is not a good goal scorer. How can you say he is good when he HAS to take more shots than anyone else, almost every year, just to have a 42% chance of leading the league in goals????

In fact, if we were to pretend than the number 2 person in shots each of the 7 years OV led the league in shots, was the same person, over those 7 years, that composite #2 from every year would have had 413 LESS opportunities to score than Alex.

Sure, by no means is Shot% the defining stat, or even one of the more important, but in Alex Ovechkin?s case it is a most revealing statistic.

OV is extra opportunity inflated hype, and just an average goal scorer.

 

I was going to jump in on this one too. Missed shots and missed locations make me cringe everytime Edzo says "it's always a good idea to get the puck to the net", because it's an incomplete thought unless he means "ON" net and/or to a certain location on net. For a goalie like Halak, I agree, just keep shooting it because he'll cough up juicy (juicy is good) rebounds. For a goalie like Smith, I would say NO! You don't want to give a guy like Smith the puck and space during any type of transition, part of the reason PHX has been better than they probably should be. It's usually tough to tell from tv (because hockey isn't a great tv sport, you can't see everybody), but missed shots can cause a ton of problems depending on the circumstances, and OV is a big offender in this area.

While I don't always like a sog, the overwhelming majority of the time, it is a pretty good idea, and I am a fan of Fenwick and Corsi to an extent. Also, in OV's defense, I think he's supposed to shoot it like crazy most of the time. I would call OV a sniper, I blame the coaching as much as anything for many of the shots that he takes.

I call OV a sniper, as a rule sog are good but there are plenty of exceptions, I love seeing Matty defend OV.

 

I still want OV on the Hawks...but only if McPhee will eat 2 million off of the cap hit.

 

I would say hijacked.

While many of his shots are borderline reckless, I think OV is does something half of the league's skilled forwards can't do reliably, and that's register a sog.

 

This is one for Solomon:

 

-
I'm sorry hockeybob, but we're going to have to take your liver for that comment."

 

this thread [del]needs[/del] [del]cries out[/del] [del]begs[/del] screams for a popcorn smiley.