Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Canes vs Rags Round 2 Game 1 4pm


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, PantherChris said:

I honestly wouldn't call game two critical, (I expect us to take both at home)

Im feeling pretty good about game 2 though.

It's critical because there is only so deep you can dig yourself a hole. Two games down is very bad. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, DavidEng said:

Great analysis of the game imho by Adam Gold- 

 

Gold is a tool... lmao

Team O+G

Forreals tho, if you haven't been watching Ovies and Giglio's OG After Dark breakdowns so far this playoffs, you've been missing out!

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Stumpy said:

Gold is a tool... lmao

Team O+G

Forreals tho, if you haven't been watching Ovies and Giglio's OG After Dark breakdowns so far this playoffs, you've been missing out!

Sounds like some of you guys don’t like Gold lol. First time I’ve listened to his podcast but I agreed with most of his detailed analysis for this game. If you didn’t really listen to it (it’s long) it is worth at least listening to.

OG take on the game was simplified, lost because of special teams, 5 on 5 was “fine”. No, 5 on 5 was not fine.

 Gold pointed out special teams huge failure as well but also pointed out 5 on 5 deficiencies. Only 12 SOG through 2 periods, Canes at times appeared hesitant to shoot (totally agree). Canes scored 2 goals 5 on 5 same as Rags. We didn’t bring in Guentz to only have the team score 2 goals 5 on 5 and he has only one empty net goal through 6 playoff games. Yes he has a lot of assists but we need his goals too. Gold pointed out Jarvis as playing an excellent game, agree.

Not here to debate podcasts but I did enjoy Golds detailed analysis, your mileage may vary but if you haven’t listened to it well that’s up to you.

Edited by DavidEng
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DavidEng said:

Sounds like some of you guys don’t like Gold lol. First time I’ve listened to his podcast but I agreed with most of his detailed analysis for this game. If you didn’t really listen to it (it’s long) it is worth at least listening to.

OG take on the game was simplified, lost because of special teams, 5 on 5 was “fine”. No, 5 on 5 was not fine.

 Gold pointed out special teams huge failure as well but also pointed out 5 on 5 deficiencies. Only 12 SOG through 2 periods, Canes at times appeared hesitant to shoot (totally agree). Canes scored 2 goals 5 on 5 same as Rags. We didn’t bring in Guentz to only have the team score 2 goals 5 on 5 and he has only one empty net goal through 6 playoff games. Yes he has a lot of assists but we need his goals too. Gold pointed out Jarvis as playing an excellent game, agree.

Not here to debate podcasts but I did enjoy Golds detailed analysis, your mileage may vary but if you haven’t listened to it well that’s up to you.

I’m not seeing why people are down on our 5v5. We owned them for most of the game 5v5. See offensive zone time disparity. 

If Svech didn’t get called for a phantom trip at the end we probably would have taken the game to overtime. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Harbingers said:

I’m not seeing why people are down on our 5v5. We owned them for most of the game 5v5. See offensive zone time disparity. 

If Svech didn’t get called for a phantom trip at the end we probably would have taken the game to overtime. 

Goals my friend. OZ time is nice but 12 SOG through first two periods and only 2 goals 5 on 5 is not cup winning play. We said we needed scoring for this team and it wasn’t there this game. Not saying special teams and Freddie’s one leaker didn’t sink us, it did.  But scoring could have overcome even that.

I do believe the game was an anomaly and Canes win game 2. 

Edited by DavidEng
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, DavidEng said:

Goals my friend. OZ time is nice but 12 SOG through first two periods and only 2 goals 5 on 5 is not cup winning play. We said we needed scoring for this team and it wasn’t there this game. Not saying special teams and Freddie’s one leaker didn’t sink us, it did.  But scoring could have overcome even that.

I do believe the game was an anomaly and Canes win game 2. 

We hit like 4-6 posts and whiffed on 3 grade A’s. I’m not worried. Oz time is important because it means we are dictating the game style, not the rags. 

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Harbingers said:

We hit like 4-6 posts and whiffed on 3 grade A’s. I’m not worried. Oz time is important because it means we are dictating the game style, not the rags. 

OZ time is important since it keeps the opposing team away from scoring and gives our team opportunities to score- and scoring wins games. No one ever won a game on OZ time, we didn’t win on it,  it takes goals to win.

Remember we all called for a scorer to be added to this team to have chance at the cup. We added Guentzel to the team and now it’s time for him and all of our top scorers to step up. Posts and whifs don’t count.

I do expect to see some scoring in game 2 and a win because it’s all on the line now.

Edited by DavidEng
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DavidEng said:

Sounds like some of you guys don’t like Gold lol. First time I’ve listened to his podcast but I agreed with most of his detailed analysis for this game. If you didn’t really listen to it (it’s long) it is worth at least listening to.

OG take on the game was simplified, lost because of special teams, 5 on 5 was “fine”. No, 5 on 5 was not fine.

 Gold pointed out special teams huge failure as well but also pointed out 5 on 5 deficiencies. Only 12 SOG through 2 periods, Canes at times appeared hesitant to shoot (totally agree). Canes scored 2 goals 5 on 5 same as Rags. We didn’t bring in Guentz to only have the team score 2 goals 5 on 5 and he has only one empty net goal through 6 playoff games. Yes he has a lot of assists but we need his goals too. Gold pointed out Jarvis as playing an excellent game, agree.

Not here to debate podcasts but I did enjoy Golds detailed analysis, your mileage may vary but if you haven’t listened to it well that’s up to you.

The swipe at Gold was mostly tongue in cheek, playing off the long history of the two (now) rivals.

I do find that the 2 Joe's seem to get better access to guests despite 99.9 being the "Official" Canes partner. Unfortunately, Capitol Media Group has burnt a lot of bridges with a huge number of talented local sports professionals. (Some of which are currently employed by our favorite hockey team.)

Ultimately it comes down to style though. Gold tends to be a bit doomerish while the OG boys always err towards optimism with the Canes. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Purpose This study investigates the interplay between strategic goals and calculative practices, specifically Customer Profitability Analysis (CPA). Drawing on practice-based theories, the research aims to understand how managers strategize with CPA, including the balancing of financial and strategic objectives and the interplay of institutionalized practices with individual practitioners’ actions. Design The study uses a qualitative, revelatory, and exploratory case study approach at the sub-organizational level in a manufacturing company. The researchers compare CPA practices across six departments, guided by a phenomenological research design. Data collection methods include informal conversations, qualitative observations, written documentation, numerical evidence from the accounting system, and interviews. Findings The study offers four novel findings to the field. First, it highlights how managers employ procedural and interactive strategizing to reframe CPA practices. The sophistication of CPA practices increases with unevenly distributed customer volume, high customer-specific, controllable overhead, customer-to-customer interaction, and service complexity. Conversely, the sophistication of cost-focused CPA practices tends to decrease with diverse strategic goals. Additionally, CPA become more effective through the utilization of non-financial information, employee empowerment, localization, and strategic alignment. Second, CPA can be adapted through integrative strategizing where managers avoid using it as a financial benchmark for strategic initiatives. Third, accountants actively seek intermediary roles to incorporate arguments from strategy and marketing to balance strategic objectives–contrary to their portrayal as myopic guardians of profitability. Fourth, the localization of CPA practices to front-line employees compensates for a lack of sophisticated CPA practices. Future research Future research should, investigate the adaptation of calculative practices in different cultures, and industries. Exploring additional contextual factors such as uncertainty, management characteristics, and linguistic framing of practices would be beneficial. Examining the interactions in utilizing CPA practices between front-line staff and customers would shed light on their effectiveness. Lastly, investigating the role of consultants in diffusing such practices would offer valuable perspectives.
    • Management accounting for strategic decision making takes center stage in the business world. Dive into the intricate realm of financial data analysis and its pivotal role in shaping organizational strategies for success. Learn how key performance indicators, budgeting, and cost-volume-profit analysis drive informed decision-making, leading to sustainable growth and competitive advantage. Overview of Management Accounting for Strategic Decision Making Management accounting plays a crucial role in helping organizations make strategic decisions by providing valuable financial information and analysis. It involves the process of identifying, measuring, analyzing, interpreting, and communicating financial information to support management in making informed decisions. Importance of Management Accounting in Guiding Strategic Decisions, Management accounting for strategic decision making Management accounting is essential for guiding strategic decisions as it provides insights into the financial health of the organization, helps in assessing performance, and aids in forecasting future outcomes. By utilizing management accounting techniques, organizations can effectively allocate resources, identify areas for improvement, and evaluate the impact of strategic decisions on profitability and growth. Cost analysis: Management accounting helps in analyzing the cost structure of the organization, identifying cost drivers, and determining the profitability of products or services. This information is crucial for making pricing decisions and optimizing the use of resources. Budgeting and forecasting: Through budgeting and forecasting, management accountants can help organizations set realistic financial goals, monitor performance against targets, and adjust strategies as needed to achieve desired outcomes. Performance measurement: Management accounting enables organizations to track key performance indicators (KPIs), measure performance against benchmarks, and evaluate the effectiveness of strategies in achieving organizational objectives. Examples of How Management Accounting Influences Strategic Planning Management accounting influences strategic planning in various ways, such as: Scenario analysis: Management accountants can create different scenarios based on varying assumptions to help organizations evaluate the potential outcomes of different strategic decisions and choose the most favorable course of action. Capital budgeting: Management accounting techniques like net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR) are used to evaluate investment opportunities, assess their long-term financial impact, and prioritize projects that align with strategic goals. Variance analysis: By comparing actual performance against budgeted or expected results, management accountants can identify areas of concern, investigate deviations, and recommend corrective actions to ensure strategic objectives are met.
×
×
  • Create New...