2nd Edition... Amended to satisfy the anonymous poster, and most of all to keep the office of PPP with accurate game records.
Anybody hungry for some lunch? That’s what was hand delivered by Nick's team who captained his them to victory last night in SNHL. Mike D was the leader of the what ended up being the team of the white sitting ducks. The only real one who was able to fly was Matty, who was able to out muscle and out hustle the Dark teams D for a number of great power forechecking goals.
The night wasn’t a total disaster for Mike D’s captained team. They narrowly won game two and then came up just short in Game 3.
The night definitely belonged to Nick’s team. Led by the fasted paced play of Jared, Johnny and company. They never stopped running the whole night. Capping off the extended night play with 2 additional games, they humiliated Mike D’s team with 5-0 victories. Nick’s team also notched the game 1 victory, thus providing free lunch to everyone on Mike D’s team.
Finishing the night with a 4 games to 1 demolition left some people looking for answers on Mike D’s team. Believe it or not, there wasn’t any yelling or finger pointing happening during the night.
Overall the teams were decently matched with maybe one exception. Either way you slice it, Nick’s team came to play while Mike’s team came to lay… goose eggs... which was the featured dish.
Dark team roster: Nick B, Jared, Johnny, Mike M, Brendon, Reggie, Brad, Mike P
White team roster: Mike D, Ron, Billy, Matt, Bobcat, Dale, Ronnie, Nick
106 comments:
AMEN!
FIRST!
As interest continues to grow for saugus, rumor has it skippy fin will be making his '09 debut this coming sunday.
I like how the proffessor spelled Brendon's name two different ways in the recap.
Is he talking about two different people?
And was he the captain? I thought Nick and Mike D picked the teams up, right?
let's start making the teams now for next week so we don't have to have captains.
Sounds good to me...we can make them up earlier in the week, and if people know they won't be there we can adjust.
So far I know that Steve and Lenny are supposed to be there, so figure my father and Darrin in net.
Anyone else see some players on the white team playing rather cheap/dirty when they were losing?
I know John got dumped behind the net by Billy, I think. I'm not entirely sure it was accidental.
Am I imagining what I saw last night or were there some cheap plays that we could have done without?
there were cheap plays both ways.
yes we could have done with out them but it's too late now so who cares.
I think people were just playing hard
There's a difference between playing hard and playing dirty.
Dirty players intentionally break the rules to make a play. Like throwing someone's stick. That's not playing hard.
No one else saw those plays, huh?
stop complaining brendon
I didn't see them, not saying it didn't happen, but I personally didn't see it or think anyone played cheaply towards me.
I don't think anyone intentionally played dirty. There might be times where players didn't necessarily play within the rules: whether it be NHL or our rules in Saugus.
A big culprit of that last night was Bobby. He's a pain in the neck to play against because he throws his body around quite a bit, and if he is having trouble containing you has no problem grabbing your stick or even giving you a bear hug. It's borderline penalty worthy (and we obviously never call penalties), but it's the type of thing where if it's not completely blatant you just play through it. It's kind of cheating a little bit, but it's not "dirty" play.
Billy grabbed my stick a couple of times (including the one time where we both ended up crashing into my net), but that was more incidental than anything else, not dirty (and I did give him a little slash to the leg in retaliation so I can't complain).
I did think that Brendon was a little rough with Billy along the boards, and also once against Ronnie. I wouldn't call that dirty though, just not exactly smart play.
The one thing I will remind everyone though - be careful with the sliding. I was taken out once behind the net by Dimaio, and there were a couple of other times where guys could have gotten hurt (not that I think Dimaio's was intentional). Again, you can slide to block a shot, but not sliding or going down in a person's way so that you present an obstacle that they might trip over.
haha Brendan is the racoon..lol..
great d by the way lil dude..
Nah. I'm just using the Raccoon's name from an earlier blog. I found it amusing, so I jumped on the bandwagon.
My point was just that we need to keep it clean.
Yeah, John, I saw the same plays you did. And I'm not calling anyone in particular out.
Brendan and Billy were both rough on the boards, and Bob did throw some people out of his way.
But isn't there a difference between just playing more physical, which can be because you are trying harder or whatever, and when someone grabs your stick and chucks it?
You might think that Billy grabbing your stick was incidental, but how many times is it incidental? One? Three? Five?
IMHO, when you grab someone's stick intentionally and throw it out of your way, you are playing dirty to compensate for your own lack of talent.
Anyone know if the goals scored by the black team was a new record for one week? 24 total goals, right?
So Triple P just replaced Brendan's name with Nick everywhere.
Triple P, care to enlighten us as to why you thought Brendon was the captain of the team? Curious.
That actually tied the record set last December 26th.
because early in the week we posted about having brendon and MikeD being captains, ron came late and didn't realize nick filled in for brendon, don't read too much into it
Here at the offices of P, P and P we always aim to please, and usually never fail to deliver.
The reason is this... Somewhere in the last post there was a call for Mike D and Brendon to be team captains.
I remember that because my office needed to send Ron a fax to scratch the teams he purposed and let those two take a shot at it.
Look at that... Ron's protege TPJ comes in to intercept the pass.
Now that's an alliance that can't be broken!!!
even though the scores don't show it the teams looked pretty close on paper
Steve - Jimmy
Nick - Mike D
John - Ron
Jared - Billy
Bradley - Ronnie
Reggie - Dale
Brendon - Matt S
Mike W - Nick ?
Mike P - Bobcat
swap the goalies
Can’t let that one slide by about the teams.
Mike Meadows and the new kid Nick was a mis-match beyond all mis-matches.
Bradley gets a lot of flack, but he can carry the ball and shoot much, much better than M-Ron. That being said, I’ll let this one slide.
Looking back, we should of have had Mike P for Nick or even Bradley for Nick.
I didn't pair them off in the list
Wow... we have a relation to the doe doe bird.
i think we expected too much too soon from billy and bobcat, they're great players but it takes even the best of us to get back in the swing of things in street hockey.
It takes atleast a few weeks.
Now I know how Curt Shilling feels. John, (unintentionally I believe) hit my really hard in the achilles tendon with his stick during the 3rd game. OUCH!! My ankle didn't feel right for the rest of the night. When I got home and took my sneaker off...you guessed it..I had a BLOODY SOCK. I knew something wasn't right. It hurt like crazy and there was a good reason why.
Meant to say..Hit me really hard.. not my really hard.
slow day on the blog.
brett r u filling in for wpr this week?
No i don't have enough free time to give it the attention it deserves.
WPR must not have had a job or something. He always put out a quality post
I thouhgt the teams were slightly miss matched. Ron was rught on with the miss match. its only two players but we only had 2 subs so we always had little ron out there with me or bob cat or nick with me or bob. So we never had a strong D for any time. plus Nick wasn't in the first game at all. Dale came late wich was expected and was a big help. We just ran out out enrgy. If we traded nick for Bradley it would have been a big difference. The last game was a farse. Even though we played it.
other nick has to change his name if he ever shows again....im confused.
are you guys really saying that Brad would have been your difference maker? are you kidding me! Would you have lost 5-2 instead...maybe, I cant say for sure.
No knock on Brad, but there is only a handful of "difference" makers in Saugus...Brad isnt one of them.
I didnt say we would have won those last games but Brad is a way better player both skill and positionaly than nik who never played hockey a day in his life. He was clearly out of position and gettig beat all night
it would have taken a big trade you're right nick.
but the outrageous part was that a trade wasn't made.
Ok now come back with: "but the scores were close"
We all could see that in every game Nick's team out played Mike D's team by quite a bit, no matter how hard Ron and "angry billy" tried to score.
I definately think the teams would have balanced out more than what we had. I don't know about your team but our D and goalie felt it was a 3 on one all night
Brett i agree. It didn't matter how hard our off tried it wasn't that close
we sent much of our bench time stategizing when to send little ron and nick out there. I dont think you had that problem. Correct me if i am wrong. Just to clearify i am making no excuses but jus reasons for the type of play we displayed.
i see what you did there brett, angry bill, hahaha. Rememeber when he made fun of the Bill Mueller signing? what an idiot!
anyways...i offered a trade to Mike he said no.
I will admit I didnt beg him to make a trade. I enjoyed what I was a part of.
Nick i know how you feel. I've used the "but the scores are close" excuse many times.
it was a nice excuse but to be honest brett if I was the white team I wouldnt have made a trade. Im to cocky, arrogant and confident. I would have convinced myself that we would made a comeback. Heat of the moment type of thing.
If I was them I would have convinced myself that ron would score again after game 2.
Little did they realize the defensive combo of me and brendon...lol.
I'd like to repeat that brendon played great last night on defense.
Ok enough about him. Im sure he will be himself next week.*
*Brendon if you read the site Im joking, if you dont, Im not.
"made a comeback"
make? heheheh...I should re-read.
The best way to prove who's right is to have almost the same teams but, put the two newbies to hockey on the other team and give the white team Bradley and another player and see what happens. I really don't think 2 first timers should be on the same team at the same time. Nothing against them, they did the best they could. It's just not fair to the team that has them. The games would have been closer for 2 reasons. One is we would have had more even teams and the second reason is that it's deflating to see your defense not be able to stop anybody. They didn't know what to do. You could see people on our team start to mail it in because of frustration. Like I said...Try the same teams only exchange those two players. That will solve the controversy.
It's also true what Matt said about strategy. I couldn't figure out if I should play defense or offense or a little of both at the same time. We kept trying to see what would work.
but it's almost impossible cause were gonna have new poeple next week and some that won't show.
How are we gonna make the teams if Scott shows?
I really want John, Joe and Jared to have those two rookies against me Brett and Ron and see what happens. Whoever else comes just even out the players and let the games begin.
Of course if Scott shows that changes things.
If Scott doesn't show up, the reason I want John, Jared and Joe against Brett, Dale and Ron is this. Most people would say Brett and John are in the same class. Jared and Ron are both good scorers, again fairly even to most people. Most everybody on this website thinks I can't even come close to playing defense as well as Joe, so, already they should have an advantage. I just want John and Jared to see what it's like to play like you are short-handed all night. And they should have to have both of the rookies on the floor at the same time most of the night like we did.
Dale stop complaining! A team with you Bobcat, Ron, billy, plus solid guys like matts and miked should've matched up with us. Plus you had the better goalie, but you gave steve no chance.
Our starting 5 of me johnny nick reggie and brendon on paper was not as good as yours, add the goalies in too. The way to offset that was dark team having better secondary players.
Maybe a small trade would've helped, but for the most part i thought a lot of guys on white team just had bad weeks, doesn't mean you couldn't win with those same exact teams.
We did win one game, remember? I also will agree that A lot of us did have bad weeks and a lot of us quit on Steve in the last 2 games. Still, instead of saying it didn't matter, put those two rookies on your team and then let's see what happens. And I am not the only one complaining. All I said was I don't think 2 inexperienced players should be on the same team. It seems like common sense. Especially when there are not a lot of subs.
AM I WRONG ABOUT THAT?
I really do want to see if it made a big difference. Think of it as an experiment. I just want some other players to be the mice this time.
The reason I know it made a difference is because I was my usual 35 minutes late. (Which I can't help.) You guys were already into the 2nd game. That has never happened when you start at 6:30 and I get there at 7ish. I couldn't believe you guys had already played a game and were in the middle of another. We had no defense with those two guys out there. Again, not their fault. They just started playing.
They could turn into really good players....
.... WHEN THEY LEARN HOW TO PLAY!!!!!!
dale your the fourth, maybe third best defender.
joe and nick are ahead of you. Possibly chris...stop trying to put yourself on a pedastol!
How am I putting myself on a pedestal? I said what you just said!! Do you comprehend what you read? I said give the other team Joe. They should want him over me. So what's your problem, anonymous.
As a matter of fact, then, put joe on their team and give our team one of those top defenseman you are talking about. Chris or Nick. I can be chosen as a role player. I just want those teams.
i was embarrassed on how i played last night, i didn't leave a good impression at all.
I was the most embarrased I've ever been after playing hockey that I can remember in my whole life. I openly admit it and I'm not posting anonymously. I also want to apologize personally to Steve for letting him down. He deserved better.
i looked lost out there for my first time out there, i have a lot of work to do before i can be respected as a decent player. i looked like a fool out there.
You tried hard and you will get better. You were put in a bad situation. I hope you play again.
For those guys to be put on the same team wasn't fair to them never mind the white team.
None of us were that good our first time playing.
Hey, you got to start somewhere.
guys that's pretty lame to have nick and ronnie as scape goats. If i recall ronnie had the #1 winning percentage this year and Nick was the second fastest person there next to petzold.
I was only just average the first time I played hockey. It took me at least 2 games to become great. You should give yourself at least 2or 3 games to be able to play like me.
Aren't a few of the guys on the white team admitting they didn't play well? I don't think anyone is saying its all on them. Let's just move on. This subject is getting old.
You didn't look like a fool out there Nick G.. No one expects you to be a superstar. It's us, the experienced players that look like fools when we don't play well. We have no excuses. We have been playing for a while.
Sometimes it's a perfect storm of a lot of guys having a bad night on one team and no real chemistry.
Throw in a couple of rookies and you have a recipe for disaster.
I do think chemistry has a lot to do with how a team does. Good players don't always click together.
Like Brett feels he plays better with John than with Ron.*
Both are good players, are they not? Some just click together more.
* ( I'm a poet and I don't know it.)
Chemistry major,
I wasn't at the game, would you say that the lines were similar to covalent or ionic bonds?
this site is terrible without WPR
In my experience chemistry comes into play when players are flying around making passes and anticipating where there mate will be.
Last night for much of the game we weren't creating opportunities where, I feel, chemistry was not coming into play.
We stood around more than usual and they just out played us.
Johnny and Jared showed us some chemistry. Even Mike M and Brendon moved around and were open alot.
I would absolutely take those same teams again, except you need to divide up the inexperienced guys evenly.
And finally to Dale... we had a good alliance going, but I gotta jump ship on you. You said, "I was the most embarrassed I've ever been after playing hockey that I can remember in my whole life."
Please... gimme a break. This night was not your most embarrassing game(s) brother.
Ron. I agree. I know I've had much worse games. Though, I'm not sure if you are complimenting me or telling me you've seen me play a lot worse. Regardless, what I meant was that I never was on a team that lost that badly and that quickly 2 games in a row. I want those teams again, too. I want to be with you, Matt, Steve, Mike, etc. I think we can play better. That's why I'm embarrassed. But, like you said...split up the rookies and start again. We beat them once and we can do it again.
yeah, i said that because you scored our only game winner and then you scored on your patented back hander shot :)
So, In other words...Personally I have been way more embarrased by my own individual play. Team wise NO! And I am taking part of the blame for that.
You know we are better than that Ron. You know it, I know it. and the American people know it.
From the perspective of someone who plays to have fun...
Ronnie said the on the way home last night.
Playing Defense was alot of fun. I like that way better than playing winger
I looked over, smiled and, like any Dad would do, said, "Yeah Ronnie, you were unstoppable out there. Way to go kid!"
Scott! To answer your question, I would say neither. It was more like.... A stationary phase.
"A stationary phase is a substance that shows different affinities for different components in a sample mixture in a separation of the mixture by chromatography. The mobile phase (a solution containing the sample) flows over or through the stationary phase to effect the separation."
Let me say it In layman's terms so you hockey players can understand it:
there was a lot of standing around by the white team. They were in a ...STATIONARY PHASE!!!!!
that makes me excited too. Few people like to play defense...no glory there.
Hey i had to throw out a couple spinaramas to shake ronnie sunday. that's all i got, didn't mean to interrupt ron and dale, hey if nothing else, you guys have online chemistry.
You brought it into perspective, Ron. That's what I admire about you. You are classy on and off the ice. (floor)
you stay classy ron leger
I think I'm going to cry. sob! sniff!
This is better than ripping people.
not to brag but i think that i'm faster than petzold
now im sure thats not Nick G. Did he even know which one was Petzold?
i know who petzold is, i have played frisbee with him before.
I think we should have a race between about ten people to see who actually is the fastest player there. I think we may be surprised who wins.
why don't you hold a full skills competiton?
i agree just because you beat someone to the ball does not mean your faster, guys like johnny and ron won't foolishly run as fast as they can and tire themselves out rendering themselves useless afterwards.
And no nick, unfortunately you are not faster than petzold, take the compliment tho.
I want in the foot race. I say I crack the top five
Anybody own a radar gun to see who's shot is the fastest?
It's foolish to try and run as fast as you can to make a play? You mean like if someone is on a breakaway and you could catch up to them if you went all out, but, only you don't cause you don't lose your breath? Okay, whatever.
Nick G - you're not even CLOSE to Petzold, no offense
yes exactly anonymous, way to take things way out of context, your the best, so incredibly smart, thank you for your incredible insight on all things hockey. Unfortunately our small little brains can't handle your knowledge and reasoning, so don't bother next time posting.
Wow, last time I checked the board there were 29 posts...as of writing this one there are 99. Should have probably checked the blog last night.
Nick G, I thought for your first time you handled yourself very well.
I don't think the teams were as far off as it's being led to believe. With a potential starting five of Ron, Billy, Dale up front and Shumali and Bobcat on D, plus Mike D who can play any position and Steve in net - that is a very good basis for a team.
Our starting five consisted of an old dude on the wing (no offense Mikey :) and Brendon of all people on defense - usually the kiss of death for a team. Our goalie was Jimmy - more on him later. On paper we definitely do not have an edge. For any proof of that, we lost game two, and after building a 3-1 lead in game 3, Jared and I watched 3 straight goals in less than 5 minutes while we were on the bench. So it's not like our team could be beaten.
That being said, the old guy created chances, and Brendon played great on D. Jimmy was not good at all in games 1-3, but finally in games 4 & 5 he started stopping the long range slapshots, and our defense took care of the rest. Yes, we might have had an edge with our bench guys (Reggie and Mike P and Brad vs Mike D and the two rookies) but we needed to have an edge somewhere due to matchup issues elsewhere.
All of that being said, I do agree with Dale that the rookies should have been split up.
What are we in fifth grade? Let's have a race! If you guys want to, go ahead. But I question speed as a top skill needed in Saugus.
Case in point, Mike P flies around the rink and where is he on the points/goals per game average? Is he a top player because he's fast?
The fact is, and Mike P should know this by now, that we USE him. His speed is used to hustle the floor and put pressure on the D and try to make a play so that our skill players can score. He gets in a good play here and there, but speed alone does nothing if you don't have the skills to back it up.
As was said before by someone else: Guys like Johnny and Brett and Jared aren't going to waste energy trying to beat someone to the puck by one milisecond. The skill players conserve their energy and wait for the appropriate time for a burst of speed. Good management of a team means getting the younger, fast guys with less skill to contribute in a way that makes best use out of them.
So when guys like Mike P chase the puck, often it's best to let him tire himself out and then make a play on him after he has the puck, since he's not the best stick handler or passer. Even IF you can beat him to the puck, what good does it do you if you just spent all your energy in a 50-yard dash? Veteran players know this.
Here's what you need: You need just enough speed/energy to beat the defense on a breakaway ala Jared or Brett. Are they flying down at top speed? No, but they know when to turn it on and accelerate. And as long as they can beat the defense, be it Nick, Lee or whoever, they can finish. No top speed required.
Because Mike P often goes down the boards and gets out of position to score, chasing after a puck, he should work on stickhandling and passing, to be the ultimate set-up man. There will be few times when you can chase a puck down the boards, circle through everyone and score by yourself, and even he might not have enough energy to pull that off too many times. But when he beats the defense to the puck deep in the zone, he is at the best poistion to feed a cutting wing or center in the slot.
I challenge anyone to disagree with that.
I couldn't even if I wanted to. I'm out of breath just reading that thing
It's really a matter of risk/rewards ratio.
If a great player, or anybody else for that matter, knows that if he has to run at top speed to beat a fast defenseman to the ball in order to have a breakaway...I say he will run at top speed because, even though he may get exhausted, he could potentially get a goal and help his team.
The reward is worth the risk of exhaustion.
Some plays aren't worth getting exhausted over if it doesn't accomplish much.
But the key is knowing when to run hard. Sometimes a lack luster effort, on what looks like a harmless play, ends up being a goal against your team.
Running harder and subbing more is the best way to go. Alot of us just don't want to sub.
I'm exhausted from writing this. I need a another writer to come in for me. I need a break.
I'll sub for you. I just need a little help. This is my first post. Do I use sarcasm or satire. I never wrote before and I don't want to look foolish out here.
Stop writing rookie writer. This blog will never win any writing awards with you posting. You aren't good enough to blog. Come back after you learn how to write. You look lost out there.
we got worked over and beat, no excuses. Nick at one point asked if I wanted a trade and I said no. I call myself out - I played horrible and half way through game 3 I was already thinking about bostonville.
John sorry if I took you out, I think I remember that play, I think I was sliding to either block a shot or prevent a pass from behind the net - either way, my bad - I was non intentional
side note - I think it's hysterical how everyone has botched my last name, no one has ever gotten it right on here, reason I find it funny is my name is on both my hockey shirts that I wear all the time
Post a Comment