flip12
-
Content Count
2691 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
77 -
Feedback
0%
Posts posted by flip12
-
-
Marleau's also a similar size but can beat opponents with finesse and is usually pretty good defensively as well. He ticks a lot of the nice-little-things boxes. If he's paired with Matthews and stays healthy he could put in 30 again, maybe 20 the next year, then who knows? It's still a lot of paper for a guy his age.
-
3 hours ago, DarkStar50 said:Summer starting year 3 on Marleau's deal at $6mil+ cap hit is when 34, 29, and 16 all come off 3 year rookie deals? If so, this can't be good. They are going to want to give 34 a long term deal, no bridge deal, and we are going to be talking $$$$. 29 and 16 won't come cheap either.
IMHO, this "character guy, in the room, leadership" role is the most over-hyped thing in hockey chemistry, Are you basically saying your vets from this past year didn't have it or just an excuse to justify signing a few vets on light $ deals?
But who among the TML '16-'17 roster compares to Marleau, experience-wise? I don't know how valuable it is or isn't, but I can see Matthews playing with Marleau for a year could accelerate his ascension, even if his learning curve is already leaps and bounds ahead of most of the pack.
I recall Rob Blake saying how he remembers Melrose putting him between Larry Robinson and Gretzky when he was a rookie, because Barry was trying to get it into his head that he could be one of the best defenseman in the world if he would step up to it. https://www.nhl.com/news/blake-used-motivation-to-pave-way-into-hall-of-fame/c-738080
Chemistry's a good way to put it. You put two things together and you're not sure they're going to work...so maybe groundbreaking/theoretical/experimental chemistry. But once in a while it works. -
It makes sense if they want to accelerate the young kids' development. Marleau's been a team captain for years and has lots of difficult playoff experience. Moore and Hainsey are also character guys that know what it takes to compete based on the little things that have prolonged their careers, because Marleau's production puts him in the lineup where that's not the case for the other two.
It's a lot of money for Marleau, but it seems like all of this is an investment in the team's character. Literally buying experience in the hopes that it will rub off on the young guns.
-
4 hours ago, clarkiestooth said:Yeah, you have a point. But the KHL is a long, long way from the NHL.
Totally agree.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, clarkiestooth said:This would have been exciting if we could summons a 2005 Kovi. 2017 Kovi is just a guy who was a healthy scratch for SKA.
Yeah, KGB is right, you were thinking of 2016 Kovy, who was apparently missing Panarin pretty hard. 2017 Kovy was pretty beast again (with strong support from Datsyuk and Voynov). He's still only 34! This could give him the chance to be the second Russian to get 500 NHL goals. And I think he wants to win a Stanley Cup. His chance with the Devils was pretty dim with his injury limiting him and they didn't have so much offense aside from what he could produce when he was healthy.
-
4 hours ago, Cosmic said:Large in Super Tacks Girdle. 34 inch jean size.
You got it (and Large in SuperTacks girdle).
How much does your girdle weight @Cosmic?
-
9 hours ago, t1tan said:If I can skate pain free(hopefully) I don't care what they look like
I'm with you personally, but the fact is it is a design product so on that plane it is necessary to discuss concept, fit and finish, etc. And plenty of shallower buyers will be swayed by looks alone.
-
2
-
-
21 minutes ago, syinx said:And it lost the "small shop handmade-look" charm for me, now.
I assumed that would go out the window, but the level of polish I expected instead is nowhere to be seen.
-
He had good chemistry with Panarin at SKA.
-
The new design looks at least as clunky as the MLX:
-
I've been watching their stock and they were almost out of the Shifts but recently got a bunch more in. It could be a last push of some stock that was sitting somewhere?
I love a lot of the concepts in this boot, though the RPE's have them as well: aggressive forward angle, flexy but reinforced tendon guard, good wrap on the forefoot and extended toecap under the first laces. I'm not sure what size I would need though, and don't really need a new pair of skates yet.
It's such a shame Alkali wasn't sold to Warrior instead. They could have been a great addition to the company and a rival on the ice skate market. It was nice having Justin Hoffman's design evolve and such a shame it got abruptly cut off just as it got to the RPD/RPE iteration :/
-
4
-
-
3 hours ago, swede said:The ribcor 70k has been out for like a month now here in Sweden.. but only at a few selected retailers (not monkey and greatskate because of their american connection)
Are there any online retailers that show them? I'm curious about the pricing of the 68K. Looks like it lines up with the JetSpeed 370 at $300 according to the pricing on a UK retailer I found yesterday. If that's the case, I'm twice as keen on trying these as I was before. It's great what technology you can get for $300 these days. Back in the 90's, that was almost a top of the line skate and it is again, only with a few of the extra bells and whistles and bling excluded.
-
Bjorkstrand got hunted on a vicious boarding play by Polak, are there other instances where he failed to protect himself? It's not as easy to protect oneself against illegal hits...
Another upside on OB you miss is he's a coach's son and he plays like it. It seemed Tortorella was gaga with Bjorkstrand at the end of the season and I think that's why. He makes the right play with and without the puck most of the time.
It'll be interesting to see Panarin without Kane. I think Kane boosted him and you think Kane held him back. Interesting :)
-
I'm curious to see how he'll do out of the shadow of Kane. He created some serious chances for Russia in the World Championship, but that was on the bigger ice surface. He may prove easier to nullify when he's not the 3rd or 4th checking concern. Saad makes perfect sense back in Chicago to replace Hoss's play on both sides of the puck.
-
8 hours ago, Kgbeast said:... a theoretical claim that is hard to prove or disprove. There plenty of pro and against opinions on this. What does this mean "improves responsiveness"? And if it does, by how many percents? The fastest and most agile are not in one piece boot as of yet.
MacKinnon was in FT1s for a bit, but for the latest he was in 70Ks at the World Championship.
Zucker's also one of the faster skaters in the league and he stuck with VH all year last season.
-
46 minutes ago, althoma1 said:Good pictures. I definitely prefer the flat platform to be molded into the carbon fibre itself than to have what appears to be a plastic heel piece added. It not only looks better, but one of the benefits of the one piece boot is supposed to be a more responsive feel because you're eliminating a layer between your feet and the holder/blade.
Totally agree. Unless that area has shown excessive wear, imitating the Bauer Supreme one95 heel cup only detracts from the essence of the VH->True boot. The next iteration could be spot on. But this one is too wishy-washy, lukewarm.
Edit: And the new tongue looks cheap by comparison to the old ones.
-
8 hours ago, g3k said:Clear picture of them.
They look clunkier than before.
-
7 hours ago, MyBoxersSayJoe said:Pisses me off that the refs decided the game.
A lot of cup winning games have controversial calls: Hull in the crease, 5-minute-major checking from behind on Bernier when Scuderi turned his back just before the hit, now this. It's something I'm almost half expecting in the last NHL game of the season.
-
18 hours ago, Cavs019 said:Hole in the wall LHS = the best
Love the look of oughties sticks and shafts.
-
1 hour ago, stick9 said:Maybe not bad, more like flawed or incomplete.
Other independent testing agencies (UL, CE, CSA and the dozens I have forgot or don't feel like listing) have set standards and guidelines in place. If a manufacturer doesn't follow those standards and fails testing, the agency does not grant approval. In most cases that means you are not allowed to sell your product in a certain market. This is done before the product is released to the public, not after the fact.
The data is the data, but data can be very subjective. Look, it seems like they want the right thing, but does their testing tell the whole story. How do their findings relate to the real world? Does a 5 star helmet actually reduce the risk of concussions on everyone who wears it? Hockey isn't played in a lab so how effective is their testing? I've played for a long and have yet to have a giant hammer pop out and hit me in the side of the head.
Ideally, VT should work on creating a metric or baseline along with a test procedure that all manufacturers can follow. That would allow companies to use those metrics and procedures during the R&D phase. New materials and assembly methods could be vetted before even going to market.
You make a great point about the certification boards in your second paragraph. It seems, though, there is a key difference in the case of the VT study, which is, all of the helmets they're testing have been approved by those boards. What VT is looking at, then, is "How do these already certified helmets actually perform in terms of damping collision forces similar to those incurred by hockey players in full contact leagues." It's an interesting question to study, and while you're right that it's not the best for companies to develop with, since they're subjected to the lab's analysis after releasing a new helmet, it is interesting to see that high price and high tech in a helmet doesn't perfectly correlate to a high collision damping score. Without having an independent assessment of how these different designs perform, vendors could just increase the price and the tech at will. (Now, though, if they're smart they'll probably just reverse-engineer the best results and package them in the most expensive helmet in their lineup to use VT's ratings to their advantage...and sure enough, the first ≈$300 helmet has the VT lab's current hight score.) This reminds me of when the Bauer 5000 helmet with the stiffer styrofoam-looking padding came out, and how that was supposed to be provide superior concussion protection, but didn't it turn out to be worse than the traditional VN foam in the run-of-the-mill helmets of the late '90's?
Sure, helmets won't prevent concussions from whiplash. But that raises the question, what percentage of hockey head injuries are from whiplash? What would the potential benefits be to players if they had optimal collision damping in concussion prone incidents? Is there a difference of degree in concussion symptoms and could the effects of concussions be minimized by better understanding how to soften the blows hockey subjects players to? Almost all that gets discussed with the VT study is concussions, but are there potential benefits for the long-term brain health of hockey players by minimizing the brunt of the repetitive sub-concussive impacts that are more common and get less notice?
In spite of helmets being mainly engineered to prevent skull fractures, the list of NHL players who've frantically tried the latest-and-greatest helmet in hopes to avoid an early retirement due to concussions shows there is a yearning for better brain protection. How to achieve that is tough to say, as concussions and brain health are areas of growing knowledge. That is to say, whether it can even be achieved, it is too early to tell. I'm no concussion expert, but these are just bits I've absorbed along the way in trying to keep somewhat informed. It could be drastically off-base. But I appreciate what the VT lab is asking.
-
1 hour ago, stick9 said:Pretty much my view of independent test ratings.
But the "independent" here, do you see that as a bad thing? Would a dependent test rating be better in your view?
-
1 hour ago, Davideo said:I stand corrected, thank you. I was confusing it with the football study. The abstract states they added rotational measurements to the hockey study to help address this critique of the football study.
What's good about that is, they're not impervious to critique. I'd be surprised if they haven't considered the headform issue. I haven't read through their literature end to end so it could be buried in there.
My view--sure it's a flawed study, perhaps more so than would be ideal at this point (everything and every study is going to have its limitations), but it's a step in the right direction by a team that shows it's open to improvements. Doubtless, the peer-review process has raised some issues as well. I wish journals published the peer-review referees' comments as an appendix to each article. It would raise a lot of the major points that may be missed by curious readers who aren't expert in the particular topic, as well as indicate the degree to which the debate around an issue points in various directions of concern.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, kmfdm86 said:Doctors don't make money on vaccines. They make more money treating for the illnesses the vaccines prevent.
As far as the VT study goes, they measure the transfer of force to the headform the helmet is on. They use the same headform for every test regardless of the head shape the helmet was meant for.
If you've ever had on a helmet that doesn't actually conform to your head you will immediately realize why this is a problem.
The study tells absolutely nothing worthwhile about helmets that don't fit the headform they used. The helmets that fit it well score well, the helmets that do not score poorly.
They could easily fix this, gathering head shape data and creating 5 - 10 or 30 - 40 different dummies to conform to a range of headshapes to fit what people actually have and then show the scores for the various headshapes. You'd be able to see an average as well as which ones score best for the head shape you have.
2 hours ago, Davideo said:Currently we don't have the best understanding on what causes concussions and longer term brain damage. So developing safety tests is difficult. The biggest knock against the VT tests is that they only test linear forces and not rotational, which are known to play a large role. Factors such as fit and head shape intuitively seem like they would make a difference, but again there isn't much data that I'm aware off. It's also tough to perform real-world measurements when the result of accurate testing is brain damage (volunteers anyone?).
I wouldn't call them crap, but certainly not the gold standard. I play non-check adult hockey at this point and so don't worry about it. Though if I was still playing competitive, checking hockey I would probably mostly ignore them.
To address the OP's question, I have no idea about testing new models.
But they do though! It's clearly stated already in the abstract of their article for the hockey helmet study: "Injury risk is determined using a multivariate injury risk function that incorporates both linear and rotational head acceleration measurements." (source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10439-015-1278-7)
-
7 hours ago, shoeshine boy said:new VH skates for my girlfriend. many thanks to JR for helping us do the drawings and measurements when we were in Detroit back in April. :)
How's the new tendon guard attached inside? Is it still the same two piece junction?
Show It Off
in Ice Hockey Equipment
Posted · Report reply
If it's usual Kessel, he's often got a PM9 with a little open, mid-toe curve added; post some pictures of the curve and we can help identify its closest neighbors.