• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Hockeytown0001

1/2 GDT: Flyers 3 at Red Wings 2

Rate this topic

554 posts in this topic

Open your eyes, buddy.

Realizing that this post has no substance but yet your's just oozes it as well so....

You have to gotta be f***in s***tin me laugh.gif

First LOL of the new year. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean former All-Star goaltender Tim Cheveldae?

Yes The same one who couldn't stop a beach ball after losing to Toronto in the first round of 1993, then was traded...

Basing it on winning alone is silly; if one goalie faces 15 great chances and stops 13 but loses, while the other goalie only faces 13 shots and wins, how do you determine who deserves the starts based on that?

I get it, so let the guy who stops 13 quality shots but still loses get the nod over the guy who stops 12 quality shots and wins... Wins = Starts, just ask Scotty Bowman

A deal for a goalie would happen before the deadline. As far as last year; it was a rookie and a vet who wasn't playing at all.

I concur, but Osgood wasn't playing because Howard WAS WINNING..... (hmmmmm, great concept.)

Use up the box of tissues yet?

No, I have some left over for you to use to wipe Hudler's jizz off your chin....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes The same one who couldn't stop a beach ball after losing to Toronto in the first round of 1993, then was traded...

I have to figure that the "couldn't stop a beach ball" part comes more from the fact that his starting job was stolen by a rookie, as his save percentage over his career did not vary by much.

I get it, so let the guy who stops 13 quality shots but still loses get the nod over the guy who stops 12 quality shots and wins... Wins = Starts, just ask Scotty Bowman

I said one guy stops 13 great chances, and the other guy only faces 13 shots. Unless you think every shot is a quality chance, which completely changes the hypothetical situation around.

I concur, but Osgood wasn't playing because Howard WAS WINNING..... (hmmmmm, great concept.)

Osgood sat for 20+ games last season without interruption. Howard went 37-15-10; that's twelve more wins than losses. Certainly Howard wasn't playing every game due to winning the previous game.

But you seriously don't think there were points in there where Osgood could have reasonably been inserted for a game here and there, do you?

No, I have some left over for you to use to wipe Hudler's jizz off your chin....

Not my style, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now