Social Icons

twitterfacebookgoogle pluslinkedinrss feedemail


Hockey Challenge 2014

Recent Articles


Tbirds get what they deserve...

This is going to be pretty short, sweet (rotten?) and to the point.

That game last night was disgusting. The game last night left me significantly less hopeful for the future than I was 24 hours ago and (of course) I will tell you why.

That was a Seattle team that just doesn't care about winning. Chilliwack sucks people, they aren't good... Seattle has loads more talent... but at least the Bruins play hard, at least they played with an edge to their game, with some effort, with some desire.

The 1st period last night was one of the worst I have seen by a Seattle team in a while and only by the grace of God, er Pickard, they somehow were tied 1-1 at the end of the period. Seattle should be lucky that Pickard didn't just fall out the zamboni door with how much the ice appeared tilted towards their own zone.

The trade deadline is just a couple of weeks away and after what I saw last night, this team is full of players who just don't care enough to be winners. I would be completely in favor of cleaning house and getting rid of a bunch of players. Maybe they will play harder in a difference system or in a different city.... who knows.

Over the next week or so I'm going to be working on a post for the trade deadline that will take a look at every player on the roster and my opinion on some of them changed after last night.

On the slightly positive side... it isn't everyone. Some players are trying, a lot aren't. Prab Rai had a sick goal last night and Calvin Pickard was the only reason why Seattle nearly stole 2 points from Chilliwack.

This isn't a coaching problem, this is a player problem. Unfortunately, it is usually easier to fire the coach than fire the players... except in Junior Hockey where players aren't really contracts and big signing bonuses (well... not really). This is a systemic problem and if Russ were as smart as I think he is he would be on the phone getting rid of any player who doesn't want to work hard and play the game hard the right way.

"When you pull on that jersey, the name on the front is a hell of a lot more important than the one on the back." - Herb Brooks

Find me some more players who believe in this and I'll get excited about this team.


Anonymous said...

I can understand your frustration but I think your overexaggerating. Yes, the first 15 minutes were horrid, but they played decent, not great, hockey after that. I'm not sure why you think the T-birds are so much more talented than the Bruins though. They're probably about equal with the Bruins being a bit older. As for trades I hope you're not going to suggest we move a lot of the current players because very few of the older ones have trade value that will net you something much better in return and you have to keep and develop the younger ones.

Thunnex said...

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I thought the 2nd period was better but mostly with the benefit of several power play chances. They spent nearly half of the 2nd period with the man advantage and managed only the one incredible goal by Rai.

The 3rd? They were outshot 14-3 and gave up a total of 7 power play chances. That represents one bad period, one horrible period and one ok period. I total that up to a pretty bad game. I know the scoreboard said we were leading 2-1 but we didn't deserve it at all. Pickard was the only reason that game was close. A lesser goaltender and that game is 3-1 or 4-1 in 'Wacks favor at the end of the 1st.

As far as trading is concerned, I'm talking less about "value" than about getting rid of players who aren't buying into the concept of playing hard and playing for the team. If that means you are 16 and you are playing for yourself, I want you out. If you are 19 or 20 and you are playing for yourself I want you out too.

As far as talent in concerned... Obviously that is just my opinion and opinion is subjective but I would say that on a night where Seattle played like garbage and Chilliwack played hard and Seattle was 4 minutes away from winning the game in regulation. That suggests to me that Seattle has more talent, they just don't want it as bad.

I certainly respect your opinion, but in my opinion Seattle is more talented and just played with considerably less heart.

Anonymous said...

I think that the lack of effort has been an issue all year. Pickard has kept this team in games that with an average goaltender would have been blowouts. Last night was worse then usual. This game should have been a blowout after the first period.

Mike said...

Totally, totally totally agreed Tyler. I told a friend after the game that I felt as though the season ended last night even though it was only the first game of the 2nd half.

To have an opportunity to pick up 2 points on a team that you are contending for a playoff spot with, right out of the gate AND have that game at home with almost 4,000 fans and to play like that is disgraceful. I saw little effort from most players except for Calvin as usual.

Its amazing that people say "well we got a point". Are you kidding me? Why did we get a point? Because of our great offense, our stellar defense? NO because of one person, Calvin!

To play a game like this to start the 2nd half, being only 2 points out of a playoff spot, leaves me nearly hopeless for the rest of the season.

I agree.. get rid of whomever doesn't want to be here and play hard. We would have a better chance to make the playoffs with gritty players. Not losers who only want to party.

And Chilliwack does pretty much suck except for Howse. Gore is a horror in goal and yet we can only manage 20 shots including OT! Totally disgusting.

Up next, Saskatoon...ugggg!

Anonymous said...

Chilliwack played hard for 15 minutes, not 60. So I disagee with your assessment that the Bruins played so much better yet barely beat a Seattle team that played horrible all game and thus Seattle must be more talented. The Bruins are more than just Howse. Sundher is a good player and so is Manning, and Gore is actually a pretty decent goalie. Sure the T-birds played poorly for the first 15 minutes but you have to give the Bruins some credit for that. Chilliwack took almost as many bad PIMs as the T-birds. Where is Seattle markedly better, talent wise outside of Pickard, Rai and Wells? They're either very average or very young. The two teams have played each other three times and the Bruins have won twice; I think that's a good enough sample size to say the T-birds are not dramatically more talented.

Unknown said...

I'm intrested, who are the players who don't seem to want to be here? Maybe I'm missing something, I have no contact with the kids or anyone who knows them, I was not at the game last night but listened and to me it sounded bad, but who are the players you don't think want to be here. My personal opinion is we have the skill to be better than a lot of teams, we are just young, and young teams are prone to have up and down years. I think some of the players have checked out knowing this team isn't ready to be a playoff team yet. But I would love to know which players you think and why you think that.

Thunnex said...

You are sort of contridicting yourself a little. You are saying they only played hard for 15 minutes but you also want me to give them credit.

Obviously you are a Chillwack fan and that's fine, we can just agree to disagree. I think Seattle is more talented than Chilliwack and I've stated my support... so we'll just leave it at that.

I thought Chilliwack deserved the win last night and Seattle didn't and that is exactly how the game ended up.

Thunnex said...

To respond to Chris. I'm going to be a little more senstive here. It's one thing for me to call out the team in general and talk about "some players" that are playing hard and some who aren't and it's another thing to public blast kids who are 16-19 individually and specifially and I'm not really into that.

I know that is really really really lame because I'm basically bashing them without naming names, but I just don't feel comfortable calling out individual players and pointing fingers.

To clarify... I don't know for a fact that there are players who don't want to be here but I think the effort being given by some players "suggest" they don't want to be here and I would much rather lose every game the rest of the season with 25 Sentyurin's skating their butt off than players who don't want to work hard.

Sorry for the lame answer, I just don't really want to call out specific players.

Anonymous said...

I don't recall any of the young guys cruising. I would have liked
to see more of the Rouse and Alos line...those guys where flying and finishing their checks. I think combined saw these 2 lines out there for less than 15 shifts for the entire game.

Anonymous said...

This question has been nagging me all year: Why is Nealson the captain? He has played with zero heart nearly all season. Oftentimes he seems to simply be going through the motions. He doesn't dig very hard on the boards and isn't the team's voice on the ice. Not only does he not play like the captain, but he actually plays like a zombie on the ice. I just don't get him this year. Sena or Wells would make much better captains.

Thunnex said...

Yeah I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with this one too. Nielsen is the type of skater who "looks" like he doesn't care and "looks" like he isn't skating hard when he is actually (IMO) skating smart and playing smart. He IS your best penalty killer. He IS your best two way center. He plays the game the right way and from what I am told he is a LOT more vocal on the bench than most people know. (I certainly wouldn't, I sit 11 rows behind the bench I can't hear anything being said down there)

Nielsen is the opposite of Lockhart and that isn't a knock on either player... they just have different styles.

I hear this a lot... that people don't like Nielsen as a player. I definitely could be wrong but I just don't see that... I see a guy who skates smart, wins faceoffs and plays defense first.

We're talking about a guy with a -6 on a team full of minus numbers.

Would I love to see more out of him? Sure... but I don't think he is the problem on this team.

Mike said...

You are lucky enough to have a 2-1 lead going into the 3rd period(because of your goalie) at home and you get outshot 14-3 in a period that you simply need to TIE in order to get the two points.. you call this effort?? please!

Mike said...

Oh and Gore has a GAA of nearly 4 and a save percentage of about .880.. thats is NOT even close to good..

Anonymous said...

I didn't contradict myself at all. The 15 minutes of good hard hockey the Bruins played made the T-birds look bad over that 15 minutes. After that it was a fairly even, rather sloppy game. But there is nothing in the way they have played this season that would suggest the T-birds are more talented than the Bruins. If anything you contradicted yourself saying they T-birds would have lost big if not for Pickard. So where is all that talent outside of Pickard? Without him how many wins would they have?

Mike said...

This is NOT a talent issue... we have talent ...old (shapps,rai,neilsen) and young (jacobs, alos, muth ) and in between (rouse, fleming, bonsor, ramsey, warg)

Its an EFFORT issue, Chilliwack is NOT Tri-city, not Spokane, not even Everett... and they came into our barn and kicked our asses because they put in an EFFORT they CARED they WANTED to WIN... thats the difference..

You can't teach DESIRE...

Thunnex said...

I just spent 15 minutes writing out a long response and decided this was better.

Opinion is opinion.
Opinion is not fact.

I'm not going to waste any more of my time arguing with someone who provides no facts. You think Chilliwack more talented, that's great. Saying that Gore is "actually pretty decent" posting an 88.2% save percentage isn't usually how I would define "pretty decent".

Respecting your opinion doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

I believe Seattle is more talented, that is an opinion.

Anonymous said...

Tyler, you think Nielsen wins faceoffs? You might want to track that. Rouse wins a lot more faceoffs than the 20 year old captain. Nielsen may be a strong penalty killer but if he played with 1/2 the effort of Lockhart he would be a lot better.

Thunnex said...

Rouse wins a ton of faceoffs. Did I say somewhere that Nielsen was better than Rouse on faceoffs?

Anonymous said...

Putting the words "Nielsen" and "wins faceoffs" in the same sentence is a joke. Complete waste of an overage spot. He needs to go. Let the younger kids get more ice team. This team is going nowhere.

Anonymous said...

Just remember in the long run - and this is for everyone...that you are getting worked up and saying a player is no good when, technically, this is their job and they are teenagers still learning how to basically live without their parents and still go to school! Some of these kids are far more mature than any one of you. How about someone goes to your job and tells you that you're terrible at stapling paper even if they've never had training in your job?!? Let's take a moment and realize these are extremely talented kids playing in the highest level of development hockey! DEVELOPMENT! Now, can I shadow a doctor and tell them they are treating a patient incorrect or they suck a diagnosing please?!?!

Anonymous said...

Yeah they are kids. Well aware of that. But they have chosen a career that will be scrutinized. If they can't handle the heat they need to get out of the kitchen. Many a fan feels Nielsen is a waste of an overage roster spot. But Sumner likes him and that's all that matters I guess. Bottom line is his hockey playing days are numbered. I am sure he is a nice kid, but not a role model on the ice whatsoever, he does as little as he can to get buy out there. Might be a leader off the ice, but not on the ice.

Anonymous said...

I'll eat crow on Schappert. He has manned up this year. I wasn't happy we kept him as an overage at the beginning of the year, but Nielsen has shown me nothing more than what we saw of him last year. Schappert and Rai are both on ice leaders. The face Nielsen wears the "C" is nothing short of a head scratcher.

Anonymous said...

I enjoy reading Tyler's blog and appreciate his work keeping the fans informed. But it does bother me to see a few posters SLAM individual players. Constructive critism is one thing but to say a player is a waste, can't do something or is useless is just an immature rant. Some of these posts seem like there is a personal grudge towards a player and have very little basis. It is obvious that some are novice fans and have never played the game. Everyone should keep in mind that comments on this and any board are only opinions and certainly not facts.

Anonymous said...

Where is the team that won 5 out of 6 earlier this year? Going into Vancouver and kicking their ass? Where is that team?? Can anyone tell me that? Tyler is right this team has got talent, but it does not sustain itself(like last night), so okay who is at fault?Another question I have is has anyone seen Jon Parker, when he was in that stretch of 5 out of 6 wins he was awsome, now nothing, I don't get it?

Anonymous said...

That is what I blame on coaching. There are a lot of people on here that defend Sumner, but there is NO doubt this team has an incredible amount of talent. Young talent yes. But they have proven they can play with anybody. But who do you blame for the inconsistency? I blame Sumner and his staff hands down.

Unknown said...

Here is my deal, I love coming on too this website and reading tylers blogs. Infact I check it everyday because I enjoy talking to him even though I never met him. I enjoy it cause he knows hockey, even though I don't always agree with him, he is normally right. With nielsen, its funny to me to read what some have written about him. No one complained when he was centering lines with greg scott or bud holloway, infact, he was vvery much liked by all fans. He has never been a spotlight guy, and no where does it say, that is what a captain has too be. To me, he doesn't need to score goals, he doesn't even need to say anything. But since we are all out on the ice during the game, we know he isn't vocal and doesn't lead whatsoever. That's crap, no one knows how he is around the team on and off the ice. I would take 10 nielsens over 10 lockharts any day. He is the first line center for a reason, he is the first line center for both power play and pk for a reason. But because he doesn't score at will, because he isn't thomas hickey, he's automatically no good. No one here said he was nhl material. Seattle was spoiled with thomas hickey, and its hard to follow something like he was. But wait till next year when we are bitching about our captain, who's that going to be? Sena? Yeah because its great to have our captain take a elbow penalty behind the play because someone gave him a hard check? Wells? What validates him to be captain, cause he's on a line with prab rai and, oh wait, who else? Dillion? Don't even get me started on him? Keep bitching like true "seattle bandwagon fans" that you are. I bet if we were decent this year you would be telling us its because of the leadership qualities of lindsay nielsen.

Thunnex said...

As a small added note. I know for a fact from an extremely reliable source that Nielsen is the most vocal player on the bench and in the locker room.

I'm not sure where everyone gets this notion that he isn't vocal just because you don't see him yelling at teammates on the ice.

Mike can also tell you this, he sits behind the bench and can hear who does a majority of the talking/yelling, it is normally Becanic and Nielsen.

Anonymous said...

Once again, I never said Chilliwack was vastly more talented than Seattle. They are two teams similar in record and probably similar in talent. I gave you a stat: 3 games head to head and the Bruins have won 2. Here are some more stats. The top 5 scorers on the Bruins are all plus players. Not one T-bird in their top 5 scoring is a plus player. In fact Seatle has only one plus player on the roster (ironically former Bruin Scott Ramsay at +5). Not to mention Chilliwack played the other night without their 4th leading scorer (Horak). 4 of the Bruins top 5 scorers are 17-18 yr olds. 3 of Seattle's top 4 scorers are 20 yr olds. 4 of the T-birds top 6 scorers are either 19 or 20 yrs old. So these teams might be pretty equal this season but it looks like the Bruins might have the brighter future. My original point was and still is, the T-birds are not that much more talented, if at all, than the Bruins.

Thunnex said...

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think you can really judge "talent" based on stats... but at least you are making an attempt and I can appreciate that.

I don't think I ever mentioned anything about who has a brighter future. The argument was... who, currently, is more talented. I see more talent on the Seattle side than on the Chilliwack team.

The fact that the Bruins have taken 2/3 really doesn't matter because as I stated about the game Sunday, Chilliwack won because they played harder, not because they are more talented... In My Opinion.

Let it go man... what point is there arguing with some dopey Seattle fan about your Bruins. Just enjoy making the playoffs, because Seattle probably won't.

Anonymous said...

You say you can't judge talent based on stats yet when I opined that Gore was a decent (never said great) goalie, you threw up his stats to counter that arguement. I guess I'm still trying to figure out how you quantify the term talent.

Thunnex said...

I never actually made a comment on Gore's "talent". I merely pointed out that you said he was "actually pretty decent".

I give up... you win... you're right, I'm wrong. whatever.

MIKE said...

Ok, look.. 3.92 is a freaking fantastic GPA but it is a horrific GAA!! I'd rather have Al Gore in net!!

Anonymous said...

And every player on your roster being a minus player is proof of talent.

WHL Scoreboard