Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
Moderator: RocketGirl
Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
After watch many games this season, you could make a good argument that the top two or three teams are from this division. I have no doubts now that St. Catherine's is the only team that can skate and complete for 60 mins with the Corvairs every time they played, they never stop working. Ancaster is not far behind!!
I am so disappointed how London has shut it down and is going through the motions after the first ten mins of game one. At least Waterloo battled every minute of that series.
I am so disappointed how London has shut it down and is going through the motions after the first ten mins of game one. At least Waterloo battled every minute of that series.
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:54 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
I totally agree with you. Ancaster vs Waterloo would've been a good series. St Catherine's and Ancaster likely would be in the final and i would say they would win. Top 3 teams in the league. All have a lot of skill and grit. And the only part i disagree with you on is that St kitts skated with Cali for three periods. They skated easily with Cali for 2 but fell apart the third every game. Their a great team though
-
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:31 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
I said it before and I'll say it again. The best two teams in Ontario were Caledonia and St.Catharines. Caledonia outshines all competition by a long shot but IMO the best series was when St.Catharines and the Corvairs tangled. St.Catharines never fell apart or quit in any of the third periods in which they played Caledonia , they were simply not strong or deep enough to withstand the constant pressure the Corvairs applied. I also predicted that Caledonia would go undefeated during the final two rounds of the Sutherland Cup Play downs. Well a win tonight by the Corvairs and along with a $1.50, gets me Tim Horton's Coffee. ![:smt045](./images/smilies/045.gif)
![:smt045](./images/smilies/045.gif)
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
Ya, but that's only for a small!BeenThereDoneThat wrote:I said it before and I'll say it again. The best two teams in Ontario were Caledonia and St.Catharines. Caledonia outshines all competition by a long shot but IMO the best series was when St.Catharines and the Corvairs tangled. St.Catharines never fell apart or quit in any of the third periods in which they played Caledonia , they were simply not strong or deep enough to withstand the constant pressure the Corvairs applied. I also predicted that Caledonia would go undefeated during the final two rounds of the Sutherland Cup Play downs. Well a win tonight by the Corvairs and along with a $1.50, gets me Tim Horton's Coffee.
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:54 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
They did fall apart in the third periods. You could see them every game slow down near the end of the second then play hard for the first couple minutes of the 3rd and go into their shell and hope they win. I agree it is due to their depth Though. Usually if Cali is only behind by 1 or 2 going into the third their still In a good position to win the game
-
- Posts: 883
- Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2014 4:40 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
1 have to agree with BTDT. In the regular season St Kitts beat us twice.
Loss in 2OT 1-0 twice. Cal won one game 4-2 but the forth goal was a empty netter.
So pretty even no 3rd periods break downs.
But in the playoffs if thats what your talking about. Cal. turn it up.
St Kitts had a hard fought series with Ancaster.
Loss some keg guys.
But still took us to O/T in one game
They did lose it once in the third. St Kitts was winning 3-2 going into the third.
Cal scored 4 unanswered goals in the third to win
Loss in 2OT 1-0 twice. Cal won one game 4-2 but the forth goal was a empty netter.
So pretty even no 3rd periods break downs.
But in the playoffs if thats what your talking about. Cal. turn it up.
St Kitts had a hard fought series with Ancaster.
Loss some keg guys.
But still took us to O/T in one game
They did lose it once in the third. St Kitts was winning 3-2 going into the third.
Cal scored 4 unanswered goals in the third to win
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:54 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
Both times St kitts beat us this year was when we were short 5 or more people. Hardly call that a win. Just like when we beat them when they were missing a whole Wack of people
-
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:04 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
That is hockey if memory recalls the Falcons were missing guys too and still the Falcons the closest team to beat Caledonia in the post season .Cali vairs! wrote:Both times St kitts beat us this year was when we were short 5 or more people. Hardly call that a win. Just like when we beat them when they were missing a whole Wack of people
- Port hockey1
- Posts: 2641
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:48 pm
- Location: Maroon's
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:I said it before and I'll say it again. The best two teams in Ontario were Caledonia and St.Catharines. Caledonia outshines all competition by a long shot but IMO the best series was when St.Catharines and the Corvairs tangled. St.Catharines never fell apart or quit in any of the third periods in which they played Caledonia , they were simply not strong or deep enough to withstand the constant pressure the Corvairs applied. I also predicted that Caledonia would go undefeated during the final two rounds of the Sutherland Cup Play downs. Well a win tonight by the Corvairs and along with a $1.50, gets me Tim Horton's Coffee.
You've been saying they'll go undefeated for a while...Looking like you were right.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
The Howard Stern Of The GOJHL. Those who like my posts: Wan't to see what I'm going to say next, Those who dislike my posts: Wan't to see what I'm going to say next.
![:smt102](./images/smilies/102.gif)
![:smt033](./images/smilies/033.gif)
![:smt029](./images/smilies/029.gif)
![:smt083](./images/smilies/083.gif)
![:smt102](./images/smilies/102.gif)
-
- Posts: 401
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 12:31 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
All good and valid replies. Thanks to all of you for keeping it sense-able.--
![:smt041](./images/smilies/041.gif)
![:smt041](./images/smilies/041.gif)
![:smt041](./images/smilies/041.gif)
![:smt041](./images/smilies/041.gif)
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
There were two factors that led to the Nationals performing so poorly against Caledonia (at least in the first three games) relative to how other teams in the GH or Midwest may have performed against them in the post-season.
One, is familiarity. When you play a team several times over the course of a season you get to know their strengths and weaknesses, and you become less intimidated by them. The Corvairs' roster, reputation and bank account -- not to mention their facial hair -- is enormously intimidating to a team that's never played them before. After a few games, however, well, they start to look mortal despite all their talent, size, speed, experience, money, swagger and lumberjack beards.
Two, is health and suspensions. The Corvairs entered the final with a full line-up, well rested after 16 relatively (I stress "relatively") easy games, give or take a few games in the last two rounds. If anyone wants to dispute this, start by explaining Pelham to me, and the scores against Niagara looked like a cake walk for the most part, too.
Meanwhile, the Nats line-up was banged up following 26 hard-nosed games against Strathroy, Leamington and Stratford (Lasalle was less hard-hitting) and their blueline limped through the final games against Cali due to injuries and penalties. Sehovic played only one period in four games due to an injury sustained against Stratford in the semi-final. Harris played only two periods in four games due to his suspension. I won't get into "the sucker punch" debate, but a subjective 3-game suspension in the Cup final seemed overly harsh for the transgression, especially on a play that resulted in London being left short-handed for 9 minutes and no one -- no one -- from Caledonia being penalized, despite Harris clearly being incited to drop his gloves by Seguin. Doty sat out a full game for his check from behind, and Ruddock missed half a game for his check from behind.
I'm not making excuses here... the refs called 'em liked they saw 'em, the boys got the penalties they deserved, and you've got to stay out of the box to win hockey games -- unless you've got the firepower of the Corvairs. But my point is that the Nationals would have been a different team in the first three games if not for the absence of some absolutely key players. Not for one period did they get a chance to test their top six d-men against the Corvairs offense. And let's not forget that Warren, arguably the Nats most lethal offensive weapon, was out with a concussion for the entire post-season.
I am not saying -- and have never said -- the Nats had much hope of defeating the Corvairs, even with a full & healthy line-up and even with some more games vs Caledonia under their belt (to breed familiarity and contempt) before arriving at the final.
What I am saying though is you can't speculate or imply the Nationals couldn't skate with St Kitts or Ancaster (or Waterloo) without seeing them play -- which you never have, and never will. And you'll never convince me that there was another team in the GO that deserved a shot at Caledonia more than London.
The most remarkable story of this postseason was Waterloo. That they defeated the Dutchmen was impressive enough, but to fare as well as they did against the Corvairs was a real accomplishment, so hats off to them. Not sure what happened to them against Stratford who, from my perspective, was the toughest challenge the Nats faced this season with the exception of Caledonia.
Sorry for the verbal diarrhea (Port is my inspiration
) but all this needed to be said because the premise underlying this thread is that the Nats didn't work hard enough or deserve to be in the final and that the West and Midwest are inferior conferences to the Shoe. That’s bullshi* and the Nats performance last night -- out-shooting Caledonia in overtime with four key players not on the bench in a decisive game of the league final -- goes a long way to proving the point. As Sutherland Cup finalists, I suggest to you that London is #2, followed closely by Stratford at #3.
One, is familiarity. When you play a team several times over the course of a season you get to know their strengths and weaknesses, and you become less intimidated by them. The Corvairs' roster, reputation and bank account -- not to mention their facial hair -- is enormously intimidating to a team that's never played them before. After a few games, however, well, they start to look mortal despite all their talent, size, speed, experience, money, swagger and lumberjack beards.
Two, is health and suspensions. The Corvairs entered the final with a full line-up, well rested after 16 relatively (I stress "relatively") easy games, give or take a few games in the last two rounds. If anyone wants to dispute this, start by explaining Pelham to me, and the scores against Niagara looked like a cake walk for the most part, too.
Meanwhile, the Nats line-up was banged up following 26 hard-nosed games against Strathroy, Leamington and Stratford (Lasalle was less hard-hitting) and their blueline limped through the final games against Cali due to injuries and penalties. Sehovic played only one period in four games due to an injury sustained against Stratford in the semi-final. Harris played only two periods in four games due to his suspension. I won't get into "the sucker punch" debate, but a subjective 3-game suspension in the Cup final seemed overly harsh for the transgression, especially on a play that resulted in London being left short-handed for 9 minutes and no one -- no one -- from Caledonia being penalized, despite Harris clearly being incited to drop his gloves by Seguin. Doty sat out a full game for his check from behind, and Ruddock missed half a game for his check from behind.
I'm not making excuses here... the refs called 'em liked they saw 'em, the boys got the penalties they deserved, and you've got to stay out of the box to win hockey games -- unless you've got the firepower of the Corvairs. But my point is that the Nationals would have been a different team in the first three games if not for the absence of some absolutely key players. Not for one period did they get a chance to test their top six d-men against the Corvairs offense. And let's not forget that Warren, arguably the Nats most lethal offensive weapon, was out with a concussion for the entire post-season.
I am not saying -- and have never said -- the Nats had much hope of defeating the Corvairs, even with a full & healthy line-up and even with some more games vs Caledonia under their belt (to breed familiarity and contempt) before arriving at the final.
What I am saying though is you can't speculate or imply the Nationals couldn't skate with St Kitts or Ancaster (or Waterloo) without seeing them play -- which you never have, and never will. And you'll never convince me that there was another team in the GO that deserved a shot at Caledonia more than London.
The most remarkable story of this postseason was Waterloo. That they defeated the Dutchmen was impressive enough, but to fare as well as they did against the Corvairs was a real accomplishment, so hats off to them. Not sure what happened to them against Stratford who, from my perspective, was the toughest challenge the Nats faced this season with the exception of Caledonia.
Sorry for the verbal diarrhea (Port is my inspiration
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
- Port hockey1
- Posts: 2641
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 3:48 pm
- Location: Maroon's
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
Qwerty, you make some valid points... But a lot of excuses as well. The not being familiar thing goes both ways for one.
I think Rocket Girl's brother's saying pretty much sums it up.
Have a great Summer my friend.![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
I think Rocket Girl's brother's saying pretty much sums it up.
Have a great Summer my friend.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
The Howard Stern Of The GOJHL. Those who like my posts: Wan't to see what I'm going to say next, Those who dislike my posts: Wan't to see what I'm going to say next.
![:smt102](./images/smilies/102.gif)
![:smt033](./images/smilies/033.gif)
![:smt029](./images/smilies/029.gif)
![:smt083](./images/smilies/083.gif)
![:smt102](./images/smilies/102.gif)
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
You, too, old buddy. ![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:54 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
Great post qwerty. I agree it's hard to compare the teams to eachother. But I think that St kitts was a way better team then London. Don't want to take anything away from London but they leaned on their goalie too much. If the defence had a bad night or played a good offence like Caledonia or to a lesser extent St kitts then they wouldn't have a chance. St kitts is a very solid team. Could easily withstand londons offense.
Goalie wise I think Hughes and the St kitts goalie (can't spell his name) are great. Hughes is a big goalie who is so quick with his pads, side to side, and blocker. His weakness is still five hole and glove. St kitts goalie to me was even better. He was so quick and the only way to score on him was a odd rebound (didn't happen that often) or a deflection. Both are
Solid but edge St kitts.
On defense both again lean on this heavily. Londons defense were bigger who liked to get in the way and block shots. Had a couple who could skate. Led by ruddock. They can keep a team outside in their zone and joins the rush right after getting it out. St kitts were absolutely solid as well. Take care of their own zone first. Can dominate the boards with size and grit. Led by either kelly or felker. They don't join the rush. They start the rush. Try control the play and were the most dangerous part to the team. Pretty even but I still think edge to St kitts.
Offense
Both are decent. Not the best part to either team by any means. London is quick and can transition very well. Capitalizes on oppurtunitys when they get them. Not bad but if you play sloppy they will make you look stupid. Quick forwards too. That's how they beat half the teams they faced this year. St kitts is bigger offensively. More skill then London but not enough effort and quickness. Their 2 young kids are easily their best players offensively to me. As long as you don't let the idiot Evans draw penalties then your fine. They can score on power plays though. edge to London.
I think a series between the two would come
Down to home ice. Both teams are great at home. But I think on a regular size surface it would be close but I think St kitts wind because their defences ability to carry their offense but still play shut down D.
Qwerty I agree it's impossible to 100% say who would win but that's as close as we can get. Just an opinions of theses teams though.
Goalie wise I think Hughes and the St kitts goalie (can't spell his name) are great. Hughes is a big goalie who is so quick with his pads, side to side, and blocker. His weakness is still five hole and glove. St kitts goalie to me was even better. He was so quick and the only way to score on him was a odd rebound (didn't happen that often) or a deflection. Both are
Solid but edge St kitts.
On defense both again lean on this heavily. Londons defense were bigger who liked to get in the way and block shots. Had a couple who could skate. Led by ruddock. They can keep a team outside in their zone and joins the rush right after getting it out. St kitts were absolutely solid as well. Take care of their own zone first. Can dominate the boards with size and grit. Led by either kelly or felker. They don't join the rush. They start the rush. Try control the play and were the most dangerous part to the team. Pretty even but I still think edge to St kitts.
Offense
Both are decent. Not the best part to either team by any means. London is quick and can transition very well. Capitalizes on oppurtunitys when they get them. Not bad but if you play sloppy they will make you look stupid. Quick forwards too. That's how they beat half the teams they faced this year. St kitts is bigger offensively. More skill then London but not enough effort and quickness. Their 2 young kids are easily their best players offensively to me. As long as you don't let the idiot Evans draw penalties then your fine. They can score on power plays though. edge to London.
I think a series between the two would come
Down to home ice. Both teams are great at home. But I think on a regular size surface it would be close but I think St kitts wind because their defences ability to carry their offense but still play shut down D.
Qwerty I agree it's impossible to 100% say who would win but that's as close as we can get. Just an opinions of theses teams though.
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
Thanks, Cali. It would be great if there were more cross-over games between conferences other than the two games they play at the pre-season showcase so the teams could get a flavour for one another. For instance, maybe at the mid-season point, teams could be seeded in some cross-over matches so the top dogs get a chance to face-off, and the bottom-feeders get the same chance against teams lower down in the other conference standings. Would be an exciting change of scenery for the players and also a chance for the league to do a bit of a check-in on parity before the post-season gets underway. You can see by the scores and intense rivalry between CC and StCF that they build their teams to compete against one another. Same goes for the Dutchies and Cullitons. Comes back to that familiarity thing IMO. In the West, Leamington has been the gold standard against which the contenders measure themselves in recent years. Any way, my diatribe was not meant as a dis against St Kitts or anyone else in the Shoe... just to say there are some compelling reasons why London failed to keep it closer in the final, and that there's no way to judge realistically without seeing head-to-head play. If you only saw Nats play in the final, you didn't see the whole team at its best.
-
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 8:15 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
I've just been getting a kick out of the two Corvair fans arguing with each other over whether we fell apart or not in the third during games.
Things get a little crazy during the year, but no denying we love playing the Corvairs. Girhiny and Bullard may seem to hate each other at times, but I'm certain neither would want things any other way (other than maybe an odd Falcon series win lol)
Great games all year. The best team won it all. Hands down. Congrats to that entire organization, especially the players. They were something to watch.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Things get a little crazy during the year, but no denying we love playing the Corvairs. Girhiny and Bullard may seem to hate each other at times, but I'm certain neither would want things any other way (other than maybe an odd Falcon series win lol)
Great games all year. The best team won it all. Hands down. Congrats to that entire organization, especially the players. They were something to watch.
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:54 pm
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
St kitts always fell apart in the third period. Could never keep up the same as usual. It's always an amazing rivalry to play between Cali and St kitts. During the game everybody from both sides may hate eachother but afterwards it's all a game. No matter who wins between us the better team is going to go represent the conference and show how strong it is.
Qwerty that's a great idea. I think that would really be an interesting event to see. I totally agree London was not the team that they should've been in the final. But I realistically think if they were at most it was a 5 game series for Cali.
Qwerty that's a great idea. I think that would really be an interesting event to see. I totally agree London was not the team that they should've been in the final. But I realistically think if they were at most it was a 5 game series for Cali.
- RocketGirl
- Posts: 3222
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:34 pm
- Location: Stratford
- Contact:
Re: Golden Horseshoe Top Three in GOJHL
When they first brought the 3 leagues together and introduced the interlock games, there were 6 games. You played 2 at the Showcase and then had 2 home and homes with each Conference later in the season. I think it was a week in November and a week in December that was allotted for the interlock games and everyone played 2 during that week. After a season or 2 of this, due to complaints about increased travel costs, the interlock was reduced to 3 games, 1 at the Showcase and then a home and away for the other 2 games. After a season or 2 of that, due to complaints about the increased travel costs, the interlock game was reduced to just 1 at the Showcase.Qwerty wrote:It would be great if there were more cross-over games between conferences other than the two games they play at the pre-season showcase so the teams could get a flavour for one another. For instance, maybe at the mid-season point, teams could be seeded in some cross-over matches so the top dogs get a chance to face-off, and the bottom-feeders get the same chance against teams lower down in the other conference standings.
I've also heard the excuse that it didn't help attendance either.
Queen of the GOJHL
Sometimes you just have to straighten your crown and remind them who they're dealing with.
Sometimes you just have to straighten your crown and remind them who they're dealing with.