As I continue to embark on this journey of blogging, I figured I had a lot to learn in order to get caught up in this new world I've entered. As in any group, blogger or otherwise, it has it's own brand of language, idioms and tendencies. This is no more true than for sports writers! So, like any kid on his first day of class in a new school, I had a look around to see what everyone else was doing so as not to stand out...in a bad way.
Now, it is at this point I think it's important to shed a little light on my computer ability/background. I'm not, as my Mother in Law used to say, "Tech-y Suave-y". Although, I didn't start out that way. In the olden days, before Color Gameboy, my brother and I had a Vic 20 computer (Yes, it was brand new. So yes, I'm that old). We spent hours learning how to create games using Basic language, having all sorts of laughs as our big blinking square cursor bounced around the screen. Then one day the Nintendo Entertainment System came out. I forgot ALL about my game programming once I knew that I could purchase games pre-made. I would never again have to waste my time, painstakingly typing everything up on my own. "What do you mean *syntax error*?! F#@% You Vic!
For the better part of two decades, I left computers alone whilst filling up my free time with video games and music. Later, when I attended university and I had projects due, I would turn to the device and use it as a means to an end. Really, I pretty much neglected it unless it had some way of serving me. Throughout the years, my computer would go through different names like, "music stealing machine" (how I miss you, Napster), "tax submitter" and "pornography box".
Thus, when I began to search for other hockey bloggers to
*NOTE: If you don't know what a newspaper is, its alright. They will soon be obsolete.
As I began to pour over all these new found treasures of Oiler information and insight, three things became very apparent to me. One, that over the years of my absence in the conversations, the hockey blog world had developed and evolved some of its own unique language . Two, there was a very broad base of incredibly informed fans who three, used a brand new type of analytic statistics to argue over and prove their point. I felt lost. I had missed out. I had that same feeling you get when you skip way too many classes and the day you decide to return to get caught up...is test day! Ugh.
Now, normally in cases like these I just end up dropping the class and forgetting the whole thing ever happened. But not this time! I was determined not repeat the mistakes of my past! I was actually going to make a serious effort...for me.
At first this new world of hockey discourse seemed incredibly foreign and overwhelming, but I kept on. Refusing to be daunted by the unknown, I forced myself into the blogosphere and waded through the dark sea until I began to wrap my head around these strange concepts. -ish.
So it is, after a minimum of AT LEAST two and a half hours of half-assed journalism and research, that I would like to present to my fellow dirty bar/man cave hockey fans who have NO CLUE about what's going on in the Oilogosphere or any hockey blog site for that matter - a sample list of some of the new terms and their definitions I have discovered.
I'll start you off with a few pieces of the jargon I picked up on. Feel free to use these with your friends and peers. To the uninitiated, you will appear knowledgeable and hockey savvy. To those in the know, you will seem as one of their own. Plus, I just saved you about 145 minutes of your own time.
Your welcome.
THE NEW TERMINOLOGY
BOXCARS: This is just a players stats for a given time period/number of games played in the simple goals-assists-total points format.
Examples: Jordan Eberle last season 80GP 28-37-65 or Denis Grebeshkov 7GP 0-1-1 *shudder*
or Sir Mix-A-Lot 36-24-36 "Hahaha, only if she's five three..."
Why the term boxcars you ask? Well, I couldn't find any direct link to the terms' origins but I'm assuming someone used it because the string of numbers looks like a little choo-choo train. As an abbreviation, it seems uneccesary because the word stats is shorter than boxcars. In fact, stats is shorter than a lot of words. And its not like it provides any extra meaning either. If you asked the average hockey fan, "Hey, what were Eberle's stats last year?", you would get the same answer. Someone ought to tell these people.
ARROWS: As in 'an indication of direction'. Usually used in conjunction with a particular players stats over a period of time especially with those not yet in the NHL to demonstrate how they are trending in the minors in order to project future NHL success.
Example: 'Over the last two seasons, player X has increased their point production from .55 points per game to .75 points per game. Nice arrows there." or "Arrow up for player X who is now facing tougher competition but still producing 5 on 5." or " My middle finger is an upward arrow every time one of the Sedins score."
PUSH THE RIVER: Although it may sound like poker terminology, the "river" portion of this phrase refers to the flow or direction of the players/game on the ice i.e. towards the offensive or defensive zone. A player who pushes the river is one who can dictate the flow of the game towards the other teams zone and spends little time in his own end. Taylor Hall is a great example of this. Unfortunately, the other 19 players on the Oilers, are not.
CUP OF COFFEE: This is the hottest idiom in all of hockey right now. It was said once somewhere (this person should be shot) and has spread like a bad case of Herpes. Seriously, it's everywhere; it's the LOL or OMG of hockey terminology. This phrase is used in reference to the brief amount of time a player spends on an NHL team during a call-up or some other spot duty action as in 'they were only around long enough to get a cup of coffee' while playing for the team. It's a real good way of making sure those players that are only in the lineup because of divine circumstance (injury or a limited preview) feel that IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM are they actually part of the team. Keeping players feeling ostracized must make them try harder. Dallas Eakins uses this quite a bit in his press conferences and judging by his playing record, loves a good cup of Joe.
COKE MACHINE: A player who is as large as, but is probably just as useful as, a coke machine on skates. It often refers to high risk draft picks, sometimes chosen higher in the draft than their consensus draft ranking, because of their size and not necessarily their ability to play. Why, you may ask? Simple answer: in order to draft the next unicorn, otherwise known as Milan Lucic. The idea that a team can get a player who can skate through people but can make/take a pass/play is just too much to resist in today's large man NHL.
WALKABOUT: NOT what Crocodile Dundee did in Australia. Much like the above term, this refers to any draft player taken higher in draft order than ranked - if that player was even ranked at all. Example: The Oilers went walkabout when they drafted the coke machine Cameron Abney 82nd overall. He was probably ranked 192468394th at the time.
QUALCOMP or QC: You'd never get this one, but it's short for quality of competition. It starts by assigning individual players of opposing teams a "how tough are you to play against" value, often based on amount of ice time. Now knowing these values, you can look at the players on your own team and who they played against and see what the average quality of their competition was when they were on the ice. As the best players more often than not play against the other teams best players, it gives you an idea of who the good players are on a given team and who the coach trusts on the ice. By this metric, you can tell that John Tortorella loved him some Sedins' last year but pretty much hated every other player on his team as much as I do.
This last definition leads us into the new movement of statistical information or "fancy stats" that overwhelm the hockey blogosphere today. It's a great place to stop for now (I've typed a ton of words and I really need a drink) and we'll pick up where we left off next time with some of my shallow analysis in the field in part 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment