HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

I don't know where this came from, but if White Bear continues to play like they have this week, they may be better than we gave them credit for.

This game was really all WBL. The score really did not reflect the how well the Bears played. They outshot, out hustled, and out worked the Stars, but again defensive breakdowns really hurt the bears. I thought they played MUCH better than they did agains HILL last week.

Im not much on ripping on kids, they work hard, and they are young and mistakes are made. But... I was told how good the WBL goalie was, and up to this point I have been really unimpressed with his play. The shootout was a prime example. Now, I know that the stars have some snipers, but he never made one save. The only miss the stars had was a wiff on the puck by the forward.

Also, what does it say about the bears when 2 of your 3 shooters in the shootout are sophomores, and the third shooter is a senior defensmen.

One note I would like to make... the first shootout goal scored by AHA I thought was a bit boarderline. The kid went to the net, pulled off to the side and actuall back peddled then shot over the sprawled out tender. I thought that goal should have been disallowed! Just my two cents.

I think the bears, if they play as they did last night, will give Hill a run in sectionals!

deleted

PuckPatrol wrote:This game was really all WBL. The score really did not reflect the how well the Bears played. They outshot, out hustled, and out worked the Stars, but again defensive breakdowns really hurt the bears. I thought they played MUCH better than they did agains HILL last week.

Im not much on ripping on kids, they work hard, and they are young and mistakes are made. But... I was told how good the WBL goalie was, and up to this point I have been really unimpressed with his play. The shootout was a prime example. Now, I know that the stars have some snipers, but he never made one save. The only miss the stars had was a wiff on the puck by the forward.

Also, what does it say about the bears when 2 of your 3 shooters in the shootout are sophomores, and the third shooter is a senior defensmen.

One note I would like to make... the first shootout goal scored by AHA I thought was a bit boarderline. The kid went to the net, pulled off to the side and actuall back peddled then shot over the sprawled out tender. I thought that goal should have been disallowed! Just my two cents.

I think the bears, if they play as they did last night, will give Hill a run in sectionals!

I had been wondering about that... he went almost all the way past the goal and then came back after the goalie had "sprawled out." Is that allowed in a shootout?

hockeyxfan01 wrote:

PuckPatrol wrote:This game was really all WBL. The score really did not reflect the how well the Bears played. They outshot, out hustled, and out worked the Stars, but again defensive breakdowns really hurt the bears. I thought they played MUCH better than they did agains HILL last week.

Im not much on ripping on kids, they work hard, and they are young and mistakes are made. But... I was told how good the WBL goalie was, and up to this point I have been really unimpressed with his play. The shootout was a prime example. Now, I know that the stars have some snipers, but he never made one save. The only miss the stars had was a wiff on the puck by the forward.

Also, what does it say about the bears when 2 of your 3 shooters in the shootout are sophomores, and the third shooter is a senior defensmen.

One note I would like to make... the first shootout goal scored by AHA I thought was a bit boarderline. The kid went to the net, pulled off to the side and actuall back peddled then shot over the sprawled out tender. I thought that goal should have been disallowed! Just my two cents.

I think the bears, if they play as they did last night, will give Hill a run in sectionals!

I had been wondering about that... he went almost all the way past the goal and then came back after the goalie had "sprawled out." Is that allowed in a shootout?

yes and he skated backwards after he went by the goalie, which is also not allowed

one more question. birkinbine for WB had 2 goals going into the shootout, and then scored in the shootout. does this count as a hat trick?

PuckPatrol wrote:This game was really all WBL. The score really did not reflect the how well the Bears played. They outshot, out hustled, and out worked the Stars, but again defensive breakdowns really hurt the bears. I thought they played MUCH better than they did agains HILL last week.

Im not much on ripping on kids, they work hard, and they are young and mistakes are made. But... I was told how good the WBL goalie was, and up to this point I have been really unimpressed with his play. The shootout was a prime example. Now, I know that the stars have some snipers, but he never made one save. The only miss the stars had was a wiff on the puck by the forward.

Also, what does it say about the bears when 2 of your 3 shooters in the shootout are sophomores, and the third shooter is a senior defensmen.

One note I would like to make... the first shootout goal scored by AHA I thought was a bit boarderline. The kid went to the net, pulled off to the side and actuall back peddled then shot over the sprawled out tender. I thought that goal should have been disallowed! Just my two cents.

I think the bears, if they play as they did last night, will give Hill a run in sectionals!

Sager picked these three players because two of them already had two goals i beleive and the defender had a goal and has a pretty nice slap shot, that can beat many goalies. Which he did twice yesterday.

i also thought this goal should be disallowed... but i dont know much about shoot outs either.

formerlybackofnet wrote:

wbmd wrote:

mnhcky65 wrote: not a hockey genius, this is just goaltending in any sport.

Still not a shot on goal.

And therefore not a save!

it doesnt need to be a SOG to be a save. Maybe it does when recording, but if the shot doesnt go in the net, its not a goal now is it? obviously a save then.

Personally I dont care if those kids scored goals or not. A shootout should be reserved for your snipers.... and if the case is that the two sophomores, and the senior are it, then I will accept that!

mnhcky65 wrote:

formerlybackofnet wrote:

wbmd wrote: Still not a shot on goal.

And therefore not a save!

it doesnt need to be a SOG to be a save. Maybe it does when recording, but if the shot doesnt go in the net, its not a goal now is it? obviously a save then.

What???

blanco oso wrote:one more question. birkinbine for WB had 2 goals going into the shootout, and then scored in the shootout. does this count as a hat trick?

No it's not considered a hat trick when completing it in a shoot-out.

Since the game officially ends as a tie, the goal won't even count towards his season stats.

mnhcky65 wrote:it doesnt need to be a SOG to be a save. Maybe it does when recording, but if the shot doesnt go in the net, its not a goal now is it? obviously a save then.

Obviously a save then?? Not when the shot isn't even on goal in the first place and especially when the goalie didn't make the save. His friend the goal post did.

Since my role is to look at net minders, not only is hitting a pipe or a crossbar NOT a shot on goal, I critic the valu of the goal post. Was the goalie pushed out that created a less effective shot? Or was the goalie beaten and the shooter had a wide open net and hit the post?

Let's take this one further...... If the goalie catches a puck, sticks away a puck or any other shot that, from my perspective would not even have hit the net if he did not touch the puck, than I don't count that as a shot.... I also do not count it as a shot, if the puck is dumped in from outside the blue line, UNLESS it was a clear attempt to put it on goal. So, if it's a penalty kill, and the shorthanded team is clearing the zone, and it happens to go on net, I don't count it.

midwesthockeyscout wrote:Since my role is to look at net minders, not only is hitting a pipe or a crossbar NOT a shot on goal, I critic the valu of the goal post. Was the goalie pushed out that created a less effective shot? Or was the goalie beaten and the shooter had a wide open net and hit the post?

Let's take this one further...... If the goalie catches a puck, sticks away a puck or any other shot that, from my perspective would not even have hit the net if he did not touch the puck, than I don't count that as a shot.... I also do not count it as a shot, if the puck is dumped in from outside the blue line, UNLESS it was a clear attempt to put it on goal. So, if it's a penalty kill, and the shorthanded team is clearing the zone, and it happens to go on net, I don't count it.

Let's review the definition: any time a puck goes toward the net and the puck would have gone in had the goalie not stopped it, that is both a shot on goal and a save. In an empty net situation, a clearing of the zone that goes into the goal would be a shot on goal. Then why are shots headed for the goalie are considered non shots just because you think the player intended not to score, or probably didn't think they were going to score? There are many shots that are deflected off of people, skates and sticks that were not intended to be on net that somehow found their way to the goalie, but these are considered shots. The official scorer reserves the right for judgment, but we all need to be clear on what a shot is, so that everyone is more consistent with counting shots. Of course, I also agree that pucks that hit the post or those that would have gone over the goal are also not considered shots, even if the goalie had stopped the one going over the net.

freakforhockey wrote:

midwesthockeyscout wrote:Since my role is to look at net minders, not only is hitting a pipe or a crossbar NOT a shot on goal, I critic the valu of the goal post. Was the goalie pushed out that created a less effective shot? Or was the goalie beaten and the shooter had a wide open net and hit the post?

Let's take this one further...... If the goalie catches a puck, sticks away a puck or any other shot that, from my perspective would not even have hit the net if he did not touch the puck, than I don't count that as a shot.... I also do not count it as a shot, if the puck is dumped in from outside the blue line, UNLESS it was a clear attempt to put it on goal. So, if it's a penalty kill, and the shorthanded team is clearing the zone, and it happens to go on net, I don't count it.

Let's review the definition: any time a puck goes toward the net and the puck would have gone in had the goalie not stopped it, that is both a shot on goal and a save. In an empty net situation, a clearing of the zone that goes into the goal would be a shot on goal. Then why are shots headed for the goalie are considered non shots just because you think the player intended not to score, or probably didn't think they were going to score? There are many shots that are deflected off of people, skates and sticks that were not intended to be on net that somehow found their way to the goalie, but these are considered shots. The official scorer reserves the right for judgment, but we all need to be clear on what a shot is, so that everyone is more consistent with counting shots. Of course, I also agree that pucks that hit the post or those that would have gone over the goal are also not considered shots, even if the goalie had stopped the one going over the net.

This entire thread is really getting of the main topic of the AHA & W.B.L. game.