Which is why I don't think I'd give him up for Lucic whose skillset has been eclipsed in today's NHL.
- JohnScammo

You don’t know today’s NHL you Old Bag

I wouldn’t mind Ebs Barzal and Lucic together. Add some grit and net front presence to that line. Not to mention nobody will phuck with Ebs or Barzal. Kind of like Wilson being on OV and Kuzy’s line.
- nyisles7

7, I see Lucic slowing that line down. That line scores based on its speed. It's not a line that typically sets up shop in the o-zone, providing time for a guy like Lucic to plant his butt in front of the crease.

You don’t know today’s NHL you Old Bag
- nyisles7

Oh, I forgot you play hockey....

7, I see Lucic slowing that line down. That line scores based on its speed. It's not a line that typically sets up shop in the o-zone, providing time for a guy like Lucic to plant his butt in front of the crease.
- JohnScammo

Oh they set up all the time while barzal does hot laps around the o zone

Oh, I forgot you play hockey....


- JohnScammo

Wow you found the rookie in 7s league

Oh they set up all the time while barzal does hot laps around the o zone
- Upstate_isles

Fair point. I haven't seen any stats on the subject, but it seems like they score most of their goals on the rush, not while Barzal cycles in the o-zone.

Wow you found the rookie in 7s league
- Upstate_isles

Fair point. I haven't seen any stats on the subject, but it seems like they score most of their goals on the rush, not while Barzal cycles in the o-zone.
- JohnScammo

The guys at lighthouse have video of every goal hes set up it's awesome although it was from like 60 games or so

Can’t keep giving Washington PPs they will make you pay. OV with a huge goal

Oh, I forgot you play hockey....


- JohnScammo

Don’t use my pictures against me

This should be a goal

Oh they set up all the time while barzal does hot laps around the o zone
- Upstate_isles

100% Upstate. Ladd played on that line and Lucic imho is faster than A Badd.

Lucic played with Bergeron and the Rat.

No goali interference there ref?

Edit: wow I just don’t know what is or isn’t goalie interference

This is a good elimination game, but the Knights are still going to lose.

No goali interference there ref?

Edit: wow I just don’t know what is or isn’t goalie interference
- nyisles7

No I didn't think so it was two guy battling and he was pushed in.

This is a good elimination game, but the Knights are still going to lose.
- JimmyP

Of course I said Caps in 5

No I didn't think so it was two guy battling and he was pushed in.
- Upstate_isles

I get that but his foot totally pulls/hooks Holtby’s leg which totally interfered with his ability to make that save.
For mr it’s just not clear when it is and when it isn’t, after watching the decisions made this year.

I get that but his foot totally pulls/hooks Holtby’s leg which totally interfered with his ability to make that save.
For mr it’s just not clear when it is and when it isn’t, after watching the decisions made this year.
- nyisles7

I completely agree that more often than not the goalie interference calls seem like they just flip a coin...but that was most certainly not interference. Djoos looked like he was doing an offensive lineman drill trying out for the Redskins. He bowled him over backwards and his feet shot out, I don't think he could avoid that.

I get that but his foot totally pulls/hooks Holtby’s leg which totally interfered with his ability to make that save.
For mr it’s just not clear when it is and when it isn’t, after watching the decisions made this year.
- nyisles7

Yea it did hook his foot. Personally I think if the goalie is interfered with because the defending player causes the contact it should be a goal unless it's a dive, so I guess it's still ambiguous

Yea it did hook his foot. Personally I think if the goalie is interfered with because the defending player causes the contact it should be a goal unless it's a dive, so I guess it's still ambiguous
- Upstate_isles

I don't think so. When watching it in real time he was pushed back and got swung around. I don't see any intentional interference. Slow-mo can be deceiving.

I don't think so. When watching it in real time he was pushed back and got swung around. I don't see any intentional interference. Slow-mo can be deceiving.
- JimmyP

I don't think so. When watching it in real time he was pushed back and got swung around. I don't see any intentional interference. Slow-mo can be deceiving.
- JimmyP

Right I'm agreeing it was a good goal I was just saying it did hook his leg but only cause he was pushed in and if the contact was a result of the defending player it should count

- nyisles7

I should reply before this gets taken down. That slo-mo wasn't deceiving.

Right I'm agreeing it was a good goal I was just saying it did hook his leg but only cause he was pushed in and if the contact was a result of the defending player it should count
- Upstate_isles

100% slow motion or regular speed. I get why this is a goal but I have seen goals taken back with similar situations. It’s the consistency or inconsistency of how it’s called I’m having trouble with.

I should reply before this gets taken down. That slo-mo wasn't deceiving.
- JimmyP

I’m smelling OT here tonight.