POLL: YOUR VIEW ON GORDON’S OT-LOSS STANCE
“It’s a tie in my mind.” What do you think?
Islanders practice today is optional, but your participation in our first Point Blank Poll is mandatory.
Always going on the assumption I often get things wrong, I’m anxious to hear your take on Scott Gordon’s post-overtime loss comment from last night:
“As I told our guys, ‘Whether you lose in a shootout or lose in overtime, it’s a tie in my mind.’ The body of work is done in the 60 minutes. That’s what’s important.”
The coach seemed to more than imply - by including “lose in a shootout” - this was not just his position last night, but in general. I wrote in my game recap that Scott might want to re-consider his position. I understand the Islanders were pretty good in Philly and the coach needs to hit on the positives, but it still was the team’s fifth loss in a row. They have not held a lead since Trent Hunter’s overtime goal in Tampa Bay.
Are you okay with the coach’s stance that an overtime or shootout loss is a tie? Does this mean if the Islanders win in a shootout, he also views it as a tie?
No doubt, all of you have your view of Gordon’s motivation. Let’s hear it.
What’s your take on Gordon’s overtime-loss stance? Please keep it to just one Comment post each. We’ll tally it up and review after everyone’s done trick-or-treating.
113 Responses to “POLL: YOUR VIEW ON GORDON’S OT-LOSS STANCE
“It’s a tie in my mind.” What do you think?”
Please Wait
To me, a win is a win and a loss is a loss no matter how you try and spin it. There are no more ties in hockey, so its either win or lose. I beleive that the players look at last night as a loss no matter what the coach is saying. This team needs a win in the worst way. This way is shows some type of tangible evidence that they guys are working hard and creating the right habits.
since i have already written this season off as a non-playoff year, i’m ok with this stance. i consider this is developmental year where gordon gets his system down and everybody gets used to playing it. i was happy with the point last night. when we’re ready to contend for something i think this pov has to change.
I’d be more comfortable if he clarified it to mean shootout and not include OT. That’s 4-on-4, though sudden death - and maybe that is his qualifier?
Agree with Dan. They LOST last night. I don’t care if it was in OT or reg it was a LOSS. That was one of the more sophmoric, idiotic statements I’ve heard any Isl coach make. Please. I EXPECT the players to play hard. Reward WINS and punish guys who don’t play hard or how he wants (Tame-bellini are you listening???)by sitting them.
This is exactly why the Islanders have not won in a while, nor will they win anytime soon. This thought process around the organization is getting frustrating. I am a huge, die-hard Isles fan and it hurts me to hear somehting like that. I know this is a developmental year, but how much can we take? And how many good, yuong kids do we have and how far away are there? And what the h*** is wrong with DiPietro? Why do I not even know when Comrie is on the ice?
You’re reading way to much into this comment. He’s a goal oriented coach and at this point his primary goal is to have the team play 60 minutes of consistent hockey in his system. This got them a tie. To me, his point was that it’s a different game in OT and shootouts than 5 on 5, and he’s happy they’re becoming more consistent. Baby steps.
would bill parcells be ok ??how bout pat riley, vince lombardi .al arbour..would they be ok with an overtime lose???
i think what he means is that everything after the 60 minutes is a gimmick so whatever happens after those 60 minutes can’t be taken seriously. so in order to get an accurate result of a team, you have to look at what they did in the non-gimmicky minutes. somthing like that.
Bottomline: It’s something a little league Dad or coach would say to a bunch of kids…
Who weren’t that good.
guerin 13 _not scoring on a 4 on 3 during gimmicky minutes is ok ?????
I took it as he wants the “system” to work in the 60 min of the game. And it’s getting closer. I had no problem with his stance. and the one thing you can say for sure… He sure as hell DRESSES better than Ted. ;o) (Love the “tie” tie.)
As Bill Parcells said, “Your only as good or bad as your record indicates”. I understand that this may be a write off season but you do not tell these young players that losing in OT/Shootout is a not a big deal. We want a team that will go through a brick wall to win, not one that will gain bad habits.
if they had blown a late lead instead of the other way around then what? is it still kosher? i seem to recall gordon being all gung-ho about playing hard and winning despite injuries and what not. this seems antithetical of that stance and a little off-putting.
my sons a marine they dont tell the marines its ok to lose a close fight..kill or be killed
Hunter missed an open goal two minutes before Carter netted on a non-open goal. Do you focus on the lower skill-level on your team, or do you send them out again Saturday with lifted heads after picking up a hard-fought point on the road? As people have said before, don’t read too much into this.
Here’s the thing, and when an OTL became a point, hockey pundits around the country made this argument:
OTLs against conference opponents are very bad things. Non-conference? Not as bad, because the “extra-point” goes to the other side of the continent.
OTLs against DIVISION opponents is even worse. Not only does it give your division foes more confidence against you, but it also gives them more confidence going into their next game; no matter who they are playing, we would rather have them feeling down as opposed to being energized. The Islanders’ OTLs do not exist in a vacuum.
If Hilbert doesn’t turn into one of those billiard trick shot artists on ESPN during slow sports seasons, we don’t get even that one point, so it’s good. But, Philly, who started abysmally, is now even farther ahead of us in the division because we couldn’t score on a 4-3 for two straight minutes. How is this a “tie?”
To suggest that a game lost in OT is just a tie is not exactly dishonest, but I’m sure a team would rather tie than lose. The L in OTL does not stand for “Good Effort”, “Moral Victory”, or “Tie”.
I guess he wants to give his team a little bit of a reprieve in the midst of a five-game losing streak, but a loss is a loss and Gordon needs to find a way to use this as motivation rather than make some kind of excuse.
I think his point was that they played a good game. They were tied after 60 minutes which means they did not get their butts handed to them and they did not blow out the other team. It was a tie for the most part. You know he wanted the win. He just wanted to say something positive about the game and he spewed out a dud.
The comment was to outline the positives. There is no reason to come down negative after that game. The constant pressure and attacking and the fact that after the first period they played a good game. Similar to the carolina game and for the most part the ranger game they were in it and putting pressure on and peppering the goaltenders. That being said, the islanders lack a finisher to put them home. That will be a growing process which we are all prepared for. I think in this instance it was a case of accentuating the positives. There is nothing that you can do (besides not take a penalty in OT) when you have a flyer 4 on 3 power play in OT. I think he could have crafted his langauge better. Something to the effect of, “we had a great 60 minutes of hockey, the penalty was unfortunate, but we need to keep applying the pressure and keep up the intensity and focus in OT.”
Unless it goes into the “win” column, its LOSS.
And by the way, the “tie” mentality is 180 degrees from the notion that coach gordon is trying to raise expectations.
You can hold hands all you want, as well as emphasize positives, but at the end of the day, they did not win. If you aint first, your last.
I’m fine with the comment. Maybe it could have been worded better to not sound so “Little League-ish,” but oh well.
Chris, for this season, I’m ok with Gordon’s comments. It’s a rebuilding year, obviously, and the coaching staff, the players, and the fans should pay more attention to progress and consistency than the record. (I know that’s not what vets like Guerin and Weight want to hear but it’s true). Frankly, I’ve been happy with the increased progress and consistency over the past week or so despite not having a win.
This is the NHL, despite the Islanders trying to act like they are in a minor league city, so there are no moral victories at his level only wins and losses
Mr. Gordon is very lucky that Charles Wang owns the Islanders and not George Steinbrenner as he would have been fired before the sun came up this morning.
Whatevs we got a point, it’s better than if Hillbert didn’t tie up the game for us. I’ll take it cause I don’t expect great things from the Montreal game tomorrow
I’m sure his blurb about it being a tie was more a way for him keep it positive than it was an admission of accepting failure.
Unfortunately NY sports fans always jump to (the wrong) conclusion; it’s what we do.
There are no moral victories. A loss is a loss. The Isles lost last night and are 2-7, having lost the last five. A loss in OT or in a SO is the same as a loss in regualation: its a loss. BYW, the league should do away with the stupid “point for getting to OT” thing. You either win the game and get two points, or you lose and get none.
You get 1 point out of 2, that’s half of a win and not a loss. Sounds pretty close to a TIE to me. I don’t have a problem with his view.
I think a lot of people are reading too much into this and making a big deal out of nothing. What he said is factually correct as far as the points you receive, whether you lose in OT or Shootout it is a Tie (1pt). If you win, then you win. I don’t think he was looking at it in terms of giving up a point to someone in your own division. Most of you are reading that into what he said.
Also, I think he is correct that the body of work is what is important. I personally am not expecting much from the Isles this season in terms of wins. Let’s be realistic, they are starting players with practically zero NHL experience. What kind of season do you expect them to have?
We are supposed to be rebuilding, so focus on the things that make rebuilding important such as developing solid players. Winning doesn’t help develop solid players, solid players help develop a winning team.
I’m beginning to think he’s a bit of a kook to be honest…not so sure he (or many of our players) are cut out for the NHL. But what do I know? A loss is a loss regardless of when it happens…everytime we let that other point get away it separates us that much more from everyone else.
I think it is way to early to make any determination about the coaching job of Scott Gordon. What has plagued this franchise over the long term is an inability to be patient with its young players, and its coaches. The “Milbury” culture is still lurking in the organization. This ties into the comment about the tie, because after 5 straight losses, fans are already looking for someone to blame, or commenting about the state of the team. I think Gordon’s comments about the tie are being over valued. But, I also think he is looking for anything positive to take out of the on-ice performance for this team. I think he sees a lot of frustration and discomfort—particularly with players like Neilsen, Okposo, Bergenheim, even Tambellini. These young players are the future of the franchise, and I think they are all grinding their sticks to saw dust. They need to know that they are making some progress.
Fans can suggest what ever they want—but Al Arbor’s first season stats: 78 games, 19 wins, 41 losses, 18 ties for a total of 56 points. Not exactly a hall of fame start. Now Scott Gordon may not be Al Arbor, and Kyle Okposo is not Clark Gillies, and Chris Campoli is not a young Potvin, but we don’t know what we have after 8-10 games. If we finish with 56 points this season, then we finish with 56 points and will add Tavares or Hedman, and we will have the chance to build. Let’s hope Snow has really purchased the idea of a youth movement, and PATIENCE!!
This is the same coach that said at his introductory press conference that you go into each season expecting to win every game?
I know where he’s coming from. At this point I think he’s more concerned about how the team performs within the 60 min game.
Whatever ever comes after in a shootout or OT is whatever comes after! You don’t coach a team to get to OT or a shootout.
I can’t get on him for the “tie” comment.
Sounds to me like he is just trying to encourage them to work for 60 minutes- first thing first, you know? What would be the point of him bashing them for playing hard and losing? Does anyone out there think this team is losing because they arent even trying to win???
In a league that featured 272 games that went beyond regulation last year (22% of all games) and had one team gain 19 “extra points” and two teams gain only 4, it seems silly for a coach to ignore extra time.
In 2006-07, the Isles earned 10 ot/so points, Montreal and Toronto each earned only 8. Without those points, there would have been no playoffs on Long Island since 2004.
Perhaps Mr. Gordon should touch base with Herm “You play to WIN the game” Edwards.
Applause for that post, HyeDray. Too bad so many wont read it, they will keep bashing the coach because everyone on this team isnt Ovechkin.
“my sons a marine they dont tell the marines its ok to lose a close fight..kill or be killed”
Why would you even compare the two? God bless your son, but what a stupid analogy.
HyeDray- Dead on. Everybody wants to rebuild, but nobody wants to go through the process.
Ties?
Since the beginning of the season I have been concerned with the ties that Gordon has been wearing…Last night was no different. An odd polka dot thing that clashed with his jail cell striped suit.
Goal scorer?
Enforcer?
Tim Gunn, where are you?
Because the Isles get a point no matter what and he is just looking to see the team go hard for 60 minutes. It is coach speak for a team needing to hear a positive note that the effort particularly in the 2nd & 3rd periods was there, and the gimmicky nature of the OT & Shootout make it less like real hockey. But as others have said it is ok for now not for later.
jax_ hyperbole
With the injuries they have right now a OT loss is a tie ( you get 1 of 2 much needed points ). I agreed with Gordon 100% that last’s nights game was a tie….
1st half = not so good
2nd half = very good & showed heart with the comeback
the only minus was we should have finished them on the 4-3.
I’m OK with it…at this point, it’s all about baby steps and building on something positive. I can’t imagine he’d be satisfied with a tie if they were 6-2 and expected to be competitive.
As Bill Parcells says, “You are what your record says you are.” Well, we know what they are, at least this year. Let’s build on the positives and go from there.
if it was a Western Cof team I would agree, but if Gordon does not understand the importance of winning games vs the East in regulation, or that the Flyers won the night with 2 points vs 1, I;m worried
I think the comment was made just to show a progress after long winningless streak.
Iles looked much better then the previous games. Too bad, we dont have true goal scorers. I hope Snow will realize it better sooner than later. Changes should come. Otherwise, Isles will no be able to dig out from a deep hole they are in.
Understand what he’s trying to do but it just doesn’t sound right. A loss is a loss and this was a loss. No excuses.
To limit the game to minutes played and not outcome is ridiculous. It’s one thing to reward effort and point out positives but a loss is a loss. He shouldn’t have said it.
A loss is a loss, theres nothing much more to it. Theres no such thing as a tie anymore, hold your team accountable for losing.
Let’s not forget this is the same Gordon who people were happy with because he held the team accountable and didn’t take the “easy way out” when answering questions about the loss to the Rangers. I’m sure he’s not promoting an “everyone gets an ‘A’” culture in the locker room.
Honestly, I was and am a huge Nolan fan, and think he was a great coach and am still a bit put off that he was dismissed the way he was, but I will say that this team, weak as it is, has looked stronger with each passing game under Gordon. Over time, the coach will make some changes and adjustments as he gets acclimated to the NHL, as will the GM, as will the players.
He never said anything about what a win in a shootout or ot would mean to him so we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. As far as losses go I agree that losing in OT or a shootout for THIS TEAM is a loss. Other teams that will be in playoff contention later this year might have a different viewpoint on this. But with this Islanders team winning the game, in most cases, means that the team played well for 60 minutes which is most important right now as we build.
Way too much crying on this board. It’s embarrassing.
I think it was a conciliatory way of saying the team had lost already four in a row and at least they got one point out of it. Sort of a way to say, hey, don’t get down on yourselves, we got a point out of the game. It’s a step forward.
Having said that, I agree, it comes across the wrong way no matter how you slice.
I think that on it’s face, the statement is a pretty ridiculous one. But, I interpret it to mean that overtime and shootouts are not real hockey, and just because you get a fluke bounce in a game of 4 on 4, or you lose a breakaway contest, it does not mean that you were outplayed and deserve to lose. So, what you need to do is look at the actual 60 minute game and see how you performed there to truly determine whether it was a good performance or not. I know many think we played a great game last night, but I am not so sure I feel that way. We played hard, but playing hard only gets you so far. Eventually, you need to start putting some pucks in the net.
He could deal with this as badly as he wants, he dressed an enforcer, hes ok in my book.
I dont think Gordon believes it either. He’s trying to spin another hard fought game that they lost into a positive. His message to the players should be about strong starts to games. Falling behind within the first five minutes of games is proving very detrimental to a team light in goal scorers/finishers.
What if we won in ot or shootout and he made the same comment? Would we be having this discussion? We would be saying that he wasn’t happy with effort of 60 min and only won a skills competition.
I’ve gotten to the point where whatever ANY coach says about ANYTHING must be taken with 2 grains of SALT because there is soooooooo much BS, “Coach Speak” and ‘motivational’ words, that I believe most of what they say will NOT make sense or be 100% accurate.
Like I said before in the gamenight blog, I guess the Islanders are like that 7 yr- kid. Its okay you played hard and tried hard so that is something to be proud of. This organization is hiliarious!
VOTE FOR 18-55-8 in ‘08! We are all “At Least Tying er I mean trying” Islanders. Its a JOKE!
SNOW MUST GO!
DP MUST BE BOUGHT OUT OR FORCED TO RETIRE ON DIABILITY OR SOMETHING!
It was just a bad choice of words from Gordo. He knew they played a good game and couldn’t come down on them for it. Being that he’s new to the game, guys like Botts haven’t taught him the ropes yet. This is the second thing he has said (not pulling the goalie) in his short NHL career that, I’m sure, he wishes he could take back. Once he learns the ropes, we’ll hear more of the, “it was a good team effort” “we didn’t get the bounces” “the (blank) are a very good team” “we need to play within the system” and less of these uplifting phrases that we’re all looking way to into. At least I hope so, because if he really does believe these things, we’re in for a rough season.
Please Chris, sit him down like I’m sure Greg did for you once and teach him the right and wrong way to answer post game questions.
oh and one more thing can this team please stop giving up the first goal in the first minutes of the game. Its like your in line to get a beer and BOOM its 1-0 opponents within the first couple of minutes. This means they are unprepared! You won’t even get a chance to tie in that case.
When the league stops calling an overtime/shoot out loss a LOSS….then we can feel good abput a LOSS.
This is a professional league not mites where you don’t want the players to feel bad.Follow that line of thought and if you lose the Stanley Cup in over time, I guess you get half?
When the league stops calling an overtime/shoot out loss a LOSS….then we can feel good about a LOSS.
This is a professional league not mites where you don’t want the players to feel bad.Follow that line of thought and if you lose the Stanley Cup in over time, I guess you get half?
Gordon should think more about how his words affect his players! im shur nobody in the locker room liked the comment either! the players want the same thing we all want, to WIN! no matter how hard you play in regulation it still SUX to lose the game! maybe wer not winning becuse Gordon is to busy worrying about “overspeed” and his system, instead of focusing a little bit more on geting players to PUT THE PUCK IN THE NET!!!
The comment was little over the top by Gordon becasue the lost in OT. You want to say the SO is a skills competition no big deal. The Isles got a road point, the home team, who also happens to be in the same division? Ill timed comment.
Gordon MAY have a good sense of his team…they’re young, they may be down, they may need a little pick-me-up from the coach? Who knows.
The Islanders stink. That’s all we know for sure.
A loss is a loss. YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!
I agree with the poster who said we all want to rebuild, but no one wants to go through the actual process.Unfortunately, losing is part of that process.
People, a rebuild takes TIME. It is a slow process. And we have a LONG way to go.
That was me travel. It’s puzzling reading some of these comments.
Reading the comments from so many of you helps me understand the youth sports mentality that EVERYONE gets a trophy at the end of the year.
There are no emotional wins in the NHL.
I can’t see any other professional coach making that statement (imagine if Mike Singletary coached the Islanders)
A point is a point is a point.
OT & the Shootout are part of the NHL. You play until they turn the lights out, not just the first sixty minutes.
The NHL says the Islanders lost last night, they did not earn a tie.
What do I think of Scott Gordon’s quote ?
I think its not good to overanalyze it…..or think that HE personally thinks that 1 point is as good as two points.
With a competitive team - I think that you have to keep in mind that Two points is Two points is not even acceptable. I want two points in REGULATION. If you WIN a shootout or in OT - the opposition gets one point in the standings. So you get a “net/net” of one point bump in the standings against the team you beat.
Now - in the interconference games - I want the two points. I don’t care if the BlackHawks or the Kings get a point for an OT loss or shootout loss when we win.
I do mind the Rag$ or the Cryers or the Devils or for that matter the Senators getting a point when we beat them in OT/Shootout - as the point they get is detrimental to our cause.
Since I feel that way - the point about getting the tie or getting the shootout loss is a “moot” argument - because I am unhappy when we WIN a shootout or a OT win - from a points perspective.
Oh, and getting the OT win / Shootout Win beats the alternative of LOSING in OT or Shootout.
So back to Gordon, I think he was just spinning in the spin room to make his players look or feel better. Don’t think he really feels that way. I think he also want to maximize our point production and not give any “charity” points to the opposition.
Pat
How many times have you said something and others took it differently than you meant it? Seems like a bit of nit picking to me. I would have been horrified if Gordon had made it seem like he was mad at the team. At this point in time anyway.
4 on 4 OT with a guaranteed point is not hockey, just like a shootout is not hockey either. All of overtime is just a skills competition. The whole system is ridiculous. I remember the first year the OTL column in the standings was RT for regulation tie, and the overtime was for the additional point in the standings. However, I do wish they would go back to 5 on 5 OT and if you lose in OT no point.
A few things, and yes I’m going to seem like a whiner, but I consider it being a realist:
1. Why is there even a point for an OTL or SOL anymore? I thought the whole purpose of the OTL point was to incentivize teams to go for the win in OT and not have a tie. Now that there is a shootout (and no more ties), why is there still an OTL point? Instead, we’ve got a league where 28 out of 30 teams defy mathematics and finish “above .500″, b/c of all the OT losses. Ridiculous.
2. If Gordon thinks a game against an intra-conference/division opponent where your team ends up with one point and your opponent ends up with 2 points is a “tie”, well, that’s a problem…
3. What happened to the youth movement? Where’s Comeau? Tambellini? Give them a chance! This team has the same formula as the past few years- a whole bunch of FA castoffs and some unimpressive youngsters (except KO, who looks like he’s the real deal). How many Andy Hilberts and Jon Sims does one team need?
It’s astonishing that after 15 years of mediocrity we’ve failed to assemble any valuable prospects from the draft. That includes DP.
I see where he’s coming from and similarly don’t believe shootouts are hockey. But it’s disconcerting to hear even more double-speak from an organization that already has redefined injury reporting and more and kind of resembles the Bush administration in its hardheadedness. And competence.
since i too understand this is a rebuilding year and we wont be making the playoffs, his comments are justified. however, later on in the season if we lose 5 straight i’d like to see a little more fire.
we have an overspeed system correct? Why do other teams not playing overspeed just killing us with real speed. This Islanders team as currently constituted cannot and will not win playing that way. Nolan was phenominal becuase he knew this same team has too stress slowing the game down and grinding out an ugly win or POINT! Nope lets fire him and try again! STUPID! I don’t care about the rebuild and the losing but we have all third line prospects and we will have the same result for years to come!
No one wants to hear your political views Abettel. In my opinion, Gordon’s comments reflect the rest of the organization when it comes to winning, it is secondary. This opinion alone has really led to the downfall of this franchise.
Thank god nobdy is over reacting to Gordon’s comments.
I’m fine with the Coach’s Response. I’m very happy with the way the guys played last night. Seemed like I was watching a totally different team. Keep Tambellini off the Ice and in the Minors!!
The meaning behind what he said was that if after 60 minutes you are tied, it’s a wash. Both teams probably had chances to emerge victorious but didn’t.
That’s how I felt about last night’s game. We played a somewhat solid 60 minutes, and almost made it into the shootout if not for a lucky bounce the Flyers received.
Someone reading the toolbar saw yet another Isles loss, not knowing the full story. Just the final score.
So I guess I would have to vote for being in favor of the coach’s statement.
hey CB,
any word on who showed up to optional practice, today?
It is NOT OK to be accepting of losing in ANY of its many NHL forms. You can tell your players they played hard without coming off as being OK with a loss. Expect more at all times. “We were good for 60 minutes guys, but the game went 65 minutes. Not good enough”
That is a ridiculous take by Gordon and little league. Why even keep score then? Make it like the 7 year olds and don’t keep score anymore. Wow, the Isles are in worse trouble than I thought. I can’t believe Gordon said that, much less believes it.
“Thank god nobdy is over reacting to Gordon’s comments.”
Here’s a towel, Jax, you’re dripping with sarcasm, haha.
LOL!!!!
While I agree that a team and a ’system’ take a while to build, and we shouldn’t EXPECT to be in Cup contention for at least a few years, that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be trying for a win every game. Points are what get you into the playoffs, not a “good try” and a pat on the butt. So, no, I don’t agree with Gordon’s stance. We played a good game, but we lost a point, and that is NOT a win.
Nice to see that you’re all paying attention to CB’s request to keep it to one post per person on this subject.
In terms of overracting, CB asked for our opinions, if he did not I wouldn’t have commented on the quote, I don;t think his comment effects the games
Now people are saying he doesn’t care about winning. This is getting funnier and sadder by the minute.
So if they lose in OT its not a loss, same applies if they win? An OT win is not a win? I guess the game in Tampa Bay was a tie?
Someone in the car-racing world once said, “It doesn’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile… a WIN is a WIN”. That having been said, clearly the Islanders have some work to do. Why should we settle and be happy with a point for going into o/t? Winning isn’t everything? It is to the teams that are winning! In the end, it’s the final score that counts - not how “solid” we played for 60 minutes. Sugar-coat it all you want, Coach, but we lost last night… AGAIN
nobody is listening to cb’s request for no caps!
While I agree that last night was definitely not a TIE, I look deeper at his thoughts. During a 4 on 4 overtime and shootout, anything can happen. These scenarios are different from the norm and cannot be controlled as effectively.
For this reason I think that Gordon has a point in saying that he prioritizes the first 60 minutes of the game over the OT period, regardless of the result. In effect he is saying that he plays for the win at ALL times, rather than trying to hold on for one point.
I can’t believe that people are frustrated because the Isles have and optimistic coach. On I-TV Gordon refers to an OT win as a “bonus” point. If the league acknowledges that a tie at the end of 60 minutes deserves a point, why can’t Gordon? Gordon is doing nothing other than complementing his team for playing hard and earning a pint. If they had won the game in OT or shootout, he would have complemented them further by saying that they earned a bonus point. The man sees last night’s play as the glass being half full. The Islanders have consistently had pessimistic coaches over at least the last 5 years. It’s nice to see a coach make the best out of a situation rather than complain about injuries and blown calls
Holy CRAP there are some people who are completely and unbelievably obsessed with Ted Nolan around here. WOW.
Maybe Coach Scott is trying to be nurturing but a loss is a loss. Sure losing is necessary in order to rebuild but guys still need to be held accountable for a loss.
What’s most troubling about this quote for me is that it seems to evidence a lack of interest in planning to win games that go beyond regulation. Considering how many games go into the extra frame, not having a method to get these points seems like a big concession that will hurt our position in the standings. It’s less of a big deal this year, but with a more competitive team, as Chris said before, those extra points can make the difference between home ice and not or playoffs and golf.
Not to mention that I’d be surprised if the NHL is still giving out points for losing 10 or 15 years from now. At some point, there’s going to be no such thing as an “overtime loss.” It’ll just be called a loss.
about 25% of the posts on this board are borderline illegible. some of you people need to either slow down when you type or proof-read your entries.
i agree that a loss is a loss - when you get no points. but a loss in overtime gains you a point. by extension it is essentially a regulation tie. so in the gordon vernacular, a loss equates to losing after regulation; a tie equates to losing during OT or SO; and a win is getting two points.
i think this contradicts some of his sentiments following the loss to the rags but i can kind of see where he is coming from. nonetheless the fact remains that an OTL is not an RT (regulation tie), it is an overtime loss. therefore, by definition he is wrong.
to clarify: i wrote that “a loss equates to losing after regulation.” the wording is misleading. what i mean is that a loss equates to losing when regulation ends. “after regulation,” could be perceived as overtime or a shootout or the daily show. sorry for the confusion.
Sounds like a loser to me.
There shouldn’t even be an OTL point. Awarding a point for a shootout loss, yes. Losing in OT and getting a point is BS.
bCarey, welcome to the 25%
CB,
Gordon’s perspective on overtime and shootouts was not a surprise. When came to the Booster Club meeting this month, he said the exact same thing during a discussion of how feels about loser points. He came two days before opening night, so it’s not something he just decided to believe recently.
While I can understand that people feel a loss is a loss, OTLs don’t change your win (point) percentage, so I can fully understand his reason.
I don’t have a problem with Scott’s comments, but from a fan’s perspective, it’s getting the win that’s important.
nice…over 100 posts today…CB, looks like this poll is a success anyway you look at it!
I understand the comment to simply mean that no preparation or game plan is designed to win in OT or a shootout. Naturally you strive for victory in either of the two “extra sessions” but we hear all time (especially after losses) about the failure to execute “our game the full 60 minutes.” This is the standard measure of performance to which winning(or not) is most often associated. It is this standard to which he spoke, no more, no less.
This attitude is a slippery slope. If this was youth hockey I would see his point. I’d like to hear him stress the positives more and let the fans come to the point.
The system worked; we forechecked well last night and had to have won the turnover battle.
Say you are happy to get a point and you would have like to have gotten two, say you know what you need your players to work on to get a different result, say something which stresses how impressed you were with a certain aspect of the team’s game.
But do NOT ever give the impression that you would settle for anything else but a win… that is unless a tie against an opponent would give that opponent a playoff spot over the Rangers on the last day of the season.
Gordon must have a hot sister.
as bad as we probably will be this year i am changing my definition of what a loss is too!…If we score just one goal less than our opponents i am putting it in the “MV” column. MV = Moral Victory
While I applaud Gordon for trying to put a positive spin on things, a loss is a loss, whether it be in regulation or overtime.
We stil lost. Although I wouldn’t mind calling it a “production loss”. Progress was made, system worked, we still lost. Believe!
ah, Derek. you slay me. that’s why you avoid criticizing other people’s spelling and grammar. you set yourself up to get served.
i apologize to all of PB for my douchey comment.
A pt is a Pt. They need all the pts they can get. So, ya no win, but still a hard earned pt!! Any news on the lighthouse?
A point on the road is ok with me.
Five points in the month of October is a big problem.
My beef is with the GM, not the coach.
I kind of like this stance. He’s pretty much telling the team that he is not satisfied with unless its a regulation win. Anything can happen in a brief overtime, especially the shootout. Stanley cup champions don’t win because they were good in overtime and shootouts. They won the cup because they are a great regulation team…I think it’s the right message. Of course when they get to overtime he is gonna do everything in his power to win the game. Also, Gordon probably doesn’t like giving division foes 1 point regardless of the outcome.
i think what he meant was, that we gained a point and we played 3 periods and an OT against a much more talented squad who won their last two 7-0 and 6-1. just as good as a tie. i wouldn’t think for a second he believes that a loss in OT is a positive. only positive in the “eh, we got a point” way.
Maybe he thinks the Isles will lose every game in OT and make the playoffs.:)
Listen guys. The man has had the job for what, two months? Maybe a month and a half of practice time. Not to drag out the “S” word again, but his focus in his limited practice time has been teaching a 5-man unit how he wants them to play hockey against another 5-man unit. Of secondary importance is 5-on-4 and 4-on 5. Where do you think 4-on-3 falls in importance when he’s trying to teach a completely different style of hockey?
If this were March, maybe it would be a different story. But one month into his tenure, I for one am happy that our coach cares more about the style of play that is relevant in every game than about the style that will come up in 22% (according to a previous comment).
Also, consider this. In terms of progress over the course of the season, is an OTL better than the depressing 7-1 buffalo game? Better than a 5-3 blowout at home? How about better than a game where we put 60 shots on net but can’t even muster a point? Absolutely everybody agreed that this season will be measured by progress. To me, fighting through a 3rd period deficit and coming away with a point, that is progress, and that’s all we were hoping for this year. I believe that this is what Coach meant. Not that winning is not important, but that in terms of the team’s progress, they took a step forward last night.