Thanks for the update/interview with Garry Peters, Bill. I was graced with a brief and random meeting with him earlier this year and he was classy and full of good humour.

Borrowed from a very intelligent poster on HF Boards:

In Ghost's last game played....a 4-0 loss to NYI:

Ghost not on the ice for any goals against...only pairing that can say that
CF 27, CA 15....so 64.29%...Best D on the team
CF% Rel: 12.11...Best D on team
SF% Rel: 10.42...2nd best on team behind Braun his pairing Dman. Next best Dman was at 2.78. Nisky was -22.72!
High Danger...on ice for 4 chances for, 3 against....Best D on team. Sanheim outchanced 3-8!

Does that look like a performance that should get a Dman benched? OF COURSE NOT! Yet he was.

Hagg was the replacement and the VERY NEXT game:

Hagg outchanced 7-19 Worst on team, CF% -21.31 Worst on team, HDCF rel% -30% Worst on team

But we won and Hagg never left the lineup again.


Sometimes coaches...and GM's for that matter....make dumb decisions based on nothing.
- Striiker

There’s a reason your typing this from your couch and AV and Fletcher are preparing for a adult hockey season.

Do yourself a favor and remove the foot from your mouth and educate yourself on what an ELC is and what the rules are for an ELC.
There is no common sense that would show that Sandin has a spot to lose. No such thing for a player who has never played an NHL game in his situation.
- MJL

If a player has several organizations interested in his services, is it fair to say said player has some leverage?

And what about the game before when he was flopping like a fish in front of the net while the islanders scored?
- ClaudeFather

His play in the game prior is irrelevant to what was posted, focus on the game at hand being discussed.

If you want to discuss the prior game by all means please do.

Based on the info that was provided and watching the actual game Ghost should not have been removed from the lineup the following game.

Thanks for the update/interview with Garry Peters, Bill. I was graced with a brief and random meeting with him earlier this year and he was classy and full of good humour.
- The_Journeyman

Are you sure it wasnt me you met?

His play in the game prior is irrelevant to what was posted, focus on the game at hand being discussed.

If you want to discuss the prior game by all means please do.

Based on the info that was provided and watching the actual game Ghost should not have been removed from the lineup the following game.
- Striiker

I posted the highlights to the islanders game you spoke of and he had two egregious turn overs that should get you out of the lineup.

Imagine being a hockey fan in a US city without a team, then getting to host a Canadian team for a season. Being a temporary Canadian hockey fan, that would be just too fun! There probably would not be fans allowed right away, but still, pretty cool.

As for Canada, as least they see the games broadcast. However hockey has to find a way, is better than no hockey.

I posted the highlights to the islanders game you spoke of and he had two egregious turn overs that should get you out of the lineup.
- ClaudeFather

So why are others not given the same short leash as Ghost? One mistake and he is back on the bench. Others well not so much. No need to respond back.

The numbers posted do't lie neither does the eye test in that game.

If a player has several organizations interested in his services, is it fair to say said player has some leverage?
- Striiker

Leverage for what? He was only eligible for a one year ELC deal for a certain amount. No team could offer more. You are uninformed.

I posted the highlights to the islanders game you spoke of and he had two egregious turn overs that should get you out of the lineup.
- ClaudeFather

The one turnover you referenced at the 50 second mark was not on Gostisbehere. He was clearing the puck out of a dangerous area in the slot and there was no forward support at the point.

So why are others not given the same short leash as Ghost? One mistake and he is back on the bench. Others well not so much. No need to respond back.

The numbers posted do't lie neither does the eye test in that game.
- Striiker

That's the way it is with every coach. Players aren't treated the same. Some players have more in the bank than others do.

Leverage for what? He was only eligible for a one year ELC deal for a certain amount. No team could offer more. You are uninformed.
- MJL

Really? If multiple teams want him does that give him an advantage? It isn't about the money, look past that aspect.

The one turnover you referenced at the 50 second mark was not on Gostisbehere. He was clearing the puck out of a dangerous area in the slot and there was no forward support at the point.
- MJL

Be aware of your options.

That's the way it is with every coach. Players aren't treated the same. Some players have more in the bank than others do.
- MJL

Just throwing it up the wall to a vacant point is not a justified move, it led directly to a great scoring chance for the islanders.

That's the way it is with every coach. Players aren't treated the same. Some players have more in the bank than others do.
- MJL

Yes that is correct. For higher end players it should be that way. For the others not so much; should be on equal ground.

Really? If multiple teams want him does that give him an advantage? It isn't about the money, look past that aspect.
- Striiker

You're making yourself look stupid. You were wrong and it has been shown that you are wrong. On multiple fronts. Continuing to double down is just making you look dumber. Due to the rules of the CBA, he had no contract leverage. Due to the fact that he is an unproven player, not a high draft pick player that is considered a guaranteed NHL player and has played zero NHL games. He is not guaranteed a spot in the lineup. It is not his spot to lose. He has to earn the spot in camp.

Just throwing it up the wall to a vacant point is not a justified move, it led directly to a great scoring chance for the islanders.
- ClaudeFather

Yes it is. When a defenseman is not given an outlet option and no support, moving the puck out of the dangerous slot area to the area farther away from the net, with a possibility of the puck going out of the zone is a justified move. It is a team game.

Yes that is correct. For higher end players it should be that way. For the others not so much; should be on equal ground.
- Striiker

No such thing as equal ground.

You're making yourself look stupid. You were wrong and it has been shown that you are wrong. On multiple fronts. Continuing to double down is just making you look dumber. Due to the rules of the CBA, he had no contract leverage. Due to the fact that he is an unproven player, not a high draft pick player that is considered a guaranteed NHL player and has played zero NHL games. He is not guaranteed a spot in the lineup. It is not his spot to lose. He has to earn the spot in camp.
- MJL

All your opinion and not a fact. He did have leverage. To say otherwise is making you look dumber as you say. If he was in demand with multiple team courting him that is leverage. How you can say otherwise is purely false.

All your opinion and not a fact. He did have leverage. To say otherwise is making you look dumber as you say. If he was in demand with multiple team courting him that is leverage. How you can say otherwise is purely false.
- Striiker

What I've offered is facts. Again, leverage for what? That's what you can't tell me. What was he leveraging?

Yes it is. When a defenseman is not given an outlet option and no support, moving the puck out of the dangerous slot area to the area farther away from the net, with a possibility of the puck going out of the zone is a justified move. It is a team game.
- MJL

Wrong, you don’t just throw it up the wall. The better option would have been to push the puck to his corner where he could have retrieved it, protected the puck, and tried to make a better play. Just throwing it up the wall on the ice is never a good idea.

Wrong, you don’t just throw it up the wall. The better option would have been to push the puck to his corner where he could have retrieved it, protected the puck, and tried to make a better play. Just throwing it up the wall on the ice is never a good idea.
- ClaudeFather

Up the wall is the safer play.

Up the wall is the safer play.
- MJL

It’s really not at all, this scenario was a great example. Up the wall was straight to the other team while to his own corner or side board would have ensued a battle where he would have had a good shot of coming out with the puck.

It’s really not at all, this scenario was a great example. Up the wall was straight to the other team while to his own corner or side board would have ensued a battle where he would have had a good shot of coming out with the puck.
- ClaudeFather

The further you get the puck away from the net, the safer the play is. Putting the puck in the corner has no chance of exiting the zone. That play is not on Gostisbehere. It is on the lack of forward support.

The further you get the puck away from the net, the safer the play is. Putting the puck in the corner has no chance of exiting the zone. That play is not on Gostisbehere. It is on the lack of forward support.
- MJL

It went directly to the islanders, it was a horrible play. If he had put it in the corner there was a chance for us to come up with the puck. Not watching the entire shift you can’t know what happened why there was no forward support on that side but regardless he threw the puck blindly to the other team and it led directly to a scoring chance for the opposition.