Oh My..The Canucks DO Have A Pulse!
by Sean Zandberg on Dec 10, 2009 10:21 PM PST
in Game Review
45 comments
That was a game the Canucks didn't have to win, but needed to. I'm sure they had a bit of fatigue issues themselves, having arriving in Vancouver the day after the Preds game, but they still took it to the Thrashers, who were playing in a back-to-back situation. I'll keep this in point form.
-I don't think Ilya Kovalchuk liked being limited the way he was. His anger boiled over at Ryan Kesler late in the game. Kovalchuk played 27:03 (wow), had 1 assist and only 3 shots and a -2. Rich Peverley continued his point-producing ways, tallying 2 assists, 2 shots and was a +1. Nik Antropov scored a goal, was a -2, and played over 23:00. Many of those minutes he was on the ice too long, to the dismay of Atlanta coach John Anderson. John Shorthouse and John Garrett said he looked like the Leafs version of Antropov more than the Thrashers version. I laughed. Nothing doing for Maxim Afinogenov either. The Thrashers tried for the stretch passes all night long to spring breakaways but the Canucks would have none of it.
More after the jump
-Thanks to yoata, Steve Bernier's middle name is now "Almost". That guy just can't bury his chances lately. Not consistently anyway. He still finished with 1 assist, 3 shots and a +1.
-It's all about the Sedins tonight. When they play games like that, we win. Daniel had several chances to score 4 goals. He finished with a hatty and 10 bloody shots! Whoa!
-Brother Hank had 2 assists. He is now 3rd in NHL scoring with 38 points, 1 behind Marian Gaborik and 4 behind Jumbo Joe Thornton.
-2 assists for Alex Burrows tonight. He could have scored a couple but was either snake-bit or missed the net.
-This game could have been a worse result for the Thrashers if not for Ondrej Pavelec. I thought he looked pretty good after the Canucks scored a few flukey ones on him earlier in the game.
-With Kyle Wellwood benched, Darcy Hordichuk got the call. But all he did was get into a fight, show some hustle, and play a MERE 4:29. Huh.
-For a supposed tired team...the Thrashers looked pretty quick throughout the game, but mentally their game was not there.
-Look at the shots on goal (click on the BOXSCORE link). The Canucks never let up on these guys.
Great game!
-For the record: the Canucks PPV channel (once they go off the air) turns into a "fireplace" channel. That's so smart. Now I can cozy up all by myself to a fake fire because my wife left me because I watch too much hockey. Thanks, Canucks! How about you put a vintage Canucks game on instead? You know...so I can get the best bang out of my $13.00?
MY 3 STARS:
1. Daniel Sedin...duh
2. Henrik Sedin
3. Rick Rypien. That's throwing the champ a bone. He didn't get a lot of ice-time, but was a force every time he was on the ice. Ripper...I love you man! Is his killing of Boris Valabik on YouTube yet? Why yes it is. Here ya go:
And just to throw in a screen capture...check out the Van fans after the Ripper fight...
Yeah..don't EVER eliminate fighting from the game. Ever.
0 recs |
45 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
The NHL just put out a memo to the other 29 teams.
Their enforcers have been warned that they should not upset Ripper. No further word was given, except to mention that size does NOT matter.
Boogard was CC’ed, as he is the next one into the Tazmanian Devil’s house on Saturday.
6’7" and 245…and he was literally beaten down to the ice. Bet Boris had never met a guy like THAT in the Motherland.
Great win! Funny how most of the goals were weird ones, but the Canucks had oodles of breakaways and 2 on 1s.
The earliest use of the word with the spelling we recognize today is found in "L'Acadie: or Seven Years' Exploration in British America" by James Edward Alexander, published in 1849:
We also met a lusty fellow in a forest road with a keg of whisky slung round him who called to us 'Come boys and have some grog, I'm what you call a canuck"
It’s fukt how we go from “where’s all the scoring???” to several flukey ones. This is just one game though. They gotta go streakin right about now.
by Sean Zandberg on Dec 10, 2009 11:36 PM PST up reply actions
The Canucks are doing well, right? Discounting those two previous games, it seems so. I’ve been traveling around with little internet connection, and it’s usually pretty haphazard like the one I’m on now.
Good to see Dank quickly getting his feet and Burrows following suit. Hopefully Hank keeps up his scoring ways, too. Oh, and let’s have less stupid penalties all around as usual.
I said hi to a fellow Canucks fan in Brisbane, so if he reads this blog, hi! That was me!
okay, here we go, bieksa’s move of the night :P
"If you ever lose your way in the dark, a good thing to find in your pocket would be Mathieu Schneider's teeth." Kurtenbloggers
"If Chuck Norris was up against 7 Rangers, he'd call Ryan Kesler." random commentor at yahoo
GO CANUCKS GO!
nice! And then Mitchell mimicked Bieksa right after that…
great find, missy! I’m laughing all over again.
by Sean Zandberg on Dec 11, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions
checking out some post-game vids.....
-wow. the game’s official 3rd star was SOB!!!!!! has hell frozen over or something???
-that is probably the first time i’ve seen a post-game talk with rypper
"If you ever lose your way in the dark, a good thing to find in your pocket would be Mathieu Schneider's teeth." Kurtenbloggers
"If Chuck Norris was up against 7 Rangers, he'd call Ryan Kesler." random commentor at yahoo
GO CANUCKS GO!
SOB is definitely playing better hockey than he did earlier this season. It’s interesting that as soon as a regular got injured (Edler), SOB took a penalty the following game (and didn’t any when all regular Dmen were healthy). Credits to him for his better play lately. That would help Gillis find a new team for him.
from canucks.com recap
This two points moves the Canucks to within a point of the Dallas Stars for eighth in the Western Conference and the two goals Daniel Sedin didn’t score has Safeway executives breathing a sigh of relief. A meeting is scheduled for Friday to re-think the five-goal million dollar Score and Win campaign.
lol.
"If you ever lose your way in the dark, a good thing to find in your pocket would be Mathieu Schneider's teeth." Kurtenbloggers
"If Chuck Norris was up against 7 Rangers, he'd call Ryan Kesler." random commentor at yahoo
GO CANUCKS GO!
If you listen carefully to the 5 goal announcement Murphey says that the winner “may” get the money if one guy scores 5 goals—not necessarily “will” get the money. My guess is they’ll wrangle their way out of it somehow if someone scored 5.
by Bobby Canuck on Dec 11, 2009 10:01 AM PST up reply actions
Although pr would be horrendous if that ever happened.
by Bobby Canuck on Dec 11, 2009 10:02 AM PST up reply actions
Mind you, by drawing attention to it like this they are maximizing its effectiveness. Maybe they don’t really wanna wiggle out of it, they just want everyone to talk about how they might? After all, the 5-goal probabilities are well known and can be insured.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
I’m sure they just want to talk about the tough economic times…..haha
by Sean Zandberg on Dec 11, 2009 11:43 AM PST up reply actions
They’ve gotten loads of publicity so far, and now they can “debate” a bit, then announce that of course they will stand by their contest (to much applause).
If they’re smart, they’ll do just that. Dunno if they planned this or if it just landed in their lap, prob the latter, but either way, if they play their cards right, it’s the kinda publicity they can usually only dream of, all free.
Mind you, it’s Safeway we’re talking about, a perennial candidate for the worst-managed company in Canada, so we’ll see. With most companies, it wouldn’t even be an issue … but in their case….
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
A million dollars! (Kinda.)
It’s another case of $50,000/year for 20 years, like the Wendy’s shootout contest. Hey, I wouldn’t turn it down, but picture getting $5,000 this year from a big lottery win 20 years ago…
Quick math: in the last 20 years, a player has scored 5 or more goals only 8 times. Using round numbers, that makes 30 teams * 20 year * 80 games = 48,000 games.
8 occurrences out of 48,000 = 6000. The odds are somewhere around 1 in 6000 that a player will score 5 or more goals, or, if you prefer, 6000/80 = once every 75 years on average for a given team.
$1,000,000/75 = $13,300 per year as a rough actuarial risk for the contest. Dunno how much an insurance co would charge you, but it can’t be that much for a biz like Safeway to insure their payout on the contest. Heck, they got at $13,000 worth of publicity out of last nite alone.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
There are
2 teams in each game, so split your number in half.
Also, my suspicion is that most of those 5 goal games were in the older part of the last 20 years, when scoring was much higher than today, how many 5 goal games we’ve seen in the new NHL since the lockout might be a better indicator although a smaller sample size.
True. So make it, really round numbers, $25,000 a year for Safeway to insure their contest. That’s still a cheap marketing budget for what they’re getting. It’s so cheap that I’m actually kinda surprised at how low it is, now that we do the math.
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
Remember insurance companies have to make a profit
so they’re not going to charge you only the expected value (covered amount times probability).
On the other hand, scoring rate is probably at an all time low, it may be able to get a company to insure it for $25K a year. But again, Safeway can well afford paying the $50K a year, so it should self-insure, i.e., take the risk without insurance. I would accept $25K a year in heartbeat to insure this for Safeway, btw.
FYI the $50K a year
refers to the actual prize money, $50K for 20 years ($50K x 20 == $1000K = $1 million).
They do have to make a profit but they are competing with each other. We insure contests all the time and it is much cheaper than you would think. As long as the odds are extremely long, which they are in this case, you can get very reasonable insurance rates. We did a contest where we could potentially give away 50 grand and the insurance cost 500 bucks cause the odds we so long of anyone actually winning. They probably pay in the ragion of 10 grand a year for insurance.
If your contest could give away $50K yet it costs only $0.5K to insure, it means the chance of having a winning is at most 1%. Given that insurance companies have to make a profit, my guess is that the real chance is probably 0.5% or less, so a hypothetical non-profit insurance company with no cost of operation would charge you $250 for the same policy.
Isn’t the odds of having 5 goals scored in a game less than 1%? 0.000333 by my calculations. So Safeway is probably getting a similar price to what we got if not less.
Also it has to be a Canuck so if the odds of a player scoring 5 goals in a game are 1 in 3000 based on the number casual gave then the odds of a Nuck doing it are 1 in 6000. Or 0.000166% chance. That is close enough to zero for insurance companies. They are making profits because there is basically zero chance of it happening.
It’s non-zero (otherwise why would anyone insure), and that’s why there’s a demand for insurance. Insurance companies cannot treat a low probability event as 0 probability, otherwise they would lose money overall, if they write many policies (which they want to). The chance of someone having a car accident is definitely much higher than these contests having a winner, yet insurance companies still offer auto collision insurance and make lots of profits.
I guess this kind of insurance (for contest) is to simplify the accounting and budgeting. I’m not sure it’s for really the financial interest of the insurance buyers.
That’s why I figure it must be pretty low cost to insure the contest. At a certain point the cost of the insurance would outweigh the risk and then Safeway’s lawyers and accountants would realize that they are wasting money on insurance and would just take on the risk themselves. Plus as yoata mentions below they are getting money and products from the vacuum people and all the other highlighted prize companies. So if the insurance was priced at a level say more than 25,000 a year, just to use a random number, Safeway would just take on the risk themselves.
by Section 312 on Dec 15, 2009 10:01 AM PST up reply actions
That's hardly
the whole budget for the promotion.
That’s just the insurance, they still have to advertise and air time on NHL games can’t be cheap, although they surely get some help from the highlighted product sponsors.
Then of course there’s administration, etc, these contests don’t set up and run themselves, especially one this size which is across four provinces and who knows how many stores.
The Canucks should save this game in their video library,
and watch it every time they want to see themselves lose. The Thrashers looked exactly like a typical Canucks team on a day when they don’t feel like giving 100%.
1. Very soft on the puck, in the first half of the game.
2. Almost no forechecking and hitting.
3. Occasional flashes of brilliance, but total inconsistency.
4. Believing that they can win with a few smart plays and some finesse.
These are just a few points, there would be many more, that lead to their loss.
In turn, the Canucks easily matched everything that the Thrashers did, and cranked it up just a notch, to secure the win. Frankly, they made it look easy, except a few occassions when the Thrashers realized that there is a hockey game in progress, and they decided to participate.
I don’t want to take away TOO MUCH credit from the boys, the fact that the Thrashers looked rather lame was also the result of the Canucks doing all the right things.
I am really happy for the win, except for the nagging thought that they won because they HAD to win. It’s like receiving a present from somebody, when you know that the person who gave it to you, had no other choice.
Los Angeles, CA
Thrashers were coming off of a back to back which is probably why they played so poorly. Hopefully the Canucks can capitalize on a tired Wild team tomorrow night.
That is always a good excuse for a no-show. But on the other hand, they lost on the previous night, so one would expect them to try harder, even if it hurts.
The way I see it, these guys are paid a lot of money, so taking it easy is not what they are supposed to do.
Los Angeles, CA
Which Canucks team? I have seen several this year alone, sigh.
And I still wonder – I mean, for a team that even fights in practice after a win? – if they’re under such strong orders not to take penalties that that’s what’s putting a damper on their play at times.
Yet another reason to improve the PK!
The opposite of serious is not funny; the opposite of serious is unserious.
twitter news
apparently kesler and mitchell got a little rough during practice today. they were dropping F-bombs, and were separated by teammates before any punches could be thrown.
<a href="http://www.faceoff.com/hockey/teams/story.html?id=2330883&add_feed_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.faceoff.com%2Fscripts%2FSP6Atom.aspx%3Fid%3D894638" target="new">here’s the story, people on twitter are waiting for more updates……
"If Chuck Norris was up against 7 Rangers, he'd call Ryan Kesler."
GO CANUCKS GO!
sorry, that linking didn’t work right, <a href="http://www.faceoff.com/hockey/teams/story.html?id=2330883&add_feed_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.faceoff.com%2Fscripts%2FSP6Atom.aspx%3Fid%3D894638" target="new">here it is again.
"If Chuck Norris was up against 7 Rangers, he'd call Ryan Kesler."
GO CANUCKS GO!
warning: link button doesn’t seem to be working right now.
"If Chuck Norris was up against 7 Rangers, he'd call Ryan Kesler."
GO CANUCKS GO!
the sites are having a few issues. They should be fixed soon. Thanks for the link, missy :)
by Sean Zandberg on Dec 11, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions
Meh, stuff like that happens all the time. Kesler probably made some dickish remark (I very much like when he does that, but prefer it directed at other teams). No biggie.
by Beantown Canuck on Dec 11, 2009 2:11 PM PST up reply actions
and soon after, the Canucks went on a tear!
by Sean Zandberg on Dec 11, 2009 2:19 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Nucks Misconduct
Related FanShots on Nucks Misconduct
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Follow The Misconduct
 |
 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- NHL 2010-11 Season Preview: Wrestling with Atlanta Thrashers
- Chris Pronger's contract accepted; why NHLPA could have advantage
- Pass or Fail: When 'Jersey Shore'-level celebs invade hockey arenas
- NHL's ultimatum: Amend CBA or reject Kovalchuk, Luongo deals?
- Report: Matthew Hulsizer is Coyotes' mystery ownership candidate
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
