View Single Post
09-02-2010, 01:06 PM
CHGoalie27's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SoFLA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,883
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by zeroG View Post
should've, schmould've. this game is not played stationary. sometimes there's a communication breakdown and a guy thinks he has a play but doesn't. the ice changes very quickly, mistakes happen all the time. i don't remember that particular play but maybe mccabe recognized it as a 2v1 up high and with the defensive F too high, thought he could cut to the net? that kinda stuff happens (though there are general rules coaches mention over and over again to help prevent those types of egregious breakdowns).
Every time Gretzky stopped behind the net...proved what a schmuck (your logic says) he was just by being stationary. Tell me what sense it makes to move from a good or open position (for the sole sake of moving???). MAAAAAAYYBE McCabe (blah blah blah more zeroG being argumentative for the sake of himself).
Maybe McCabe didn't look around to see if he was in fact the only player around and had no business moving forward AT ALL.
Or obviously don't remember the play, so just the ignorance for once.
You saying 'that kinda stuff happens' to defend McCabe but not for Ballard is just showing your typical side.
Like mistakes are ok as long as it's a player YOU'RE defending!?! What a joke.

Originally Posted by zeroG View Post
your diagram above really doesn't make any sense either. on a set breakout, a winger who has a support role would not vacate that spot to skate right into the forecheck. not unless the other forward was swinging to his spot and even that doesn't look like any type of real pattern as he would be skating right into a trap. lballard would have NO other play other than over to his partner. i think that's a bad example. in any case, these are not the types of plays i have issues with. if the puck makes it out of the zone, you at least get a reset. ballard too often was guilty of telegraphing his passes and having them intercepted in OUR end. we were keeping count here on the boards and there were at least a handful of games that turned on unforced turnovers by ballard. *at least*.
LOL THERE'S THE CLASSIC OG "Something someone else said makes no sense"! What a character!
The diagram makes as much sense as the Panthers game play (even me forgetting a player lol.)
What doesn't make sense?
Supposed I included one more blue dot(his partner) and he passed it...what would his partner do with it?
...or the guy just didn't move accepted the pass and then, well...only YOU would know for sure what happens next, so I can't say.
The turnovers in his own zone? Didn't seem to be noticbly more (or less for that matter) than the others...but at least "we here on the boards" (you) kept accurate count. How many again? A handful? Nice.

Originally Posted by zeroG View Post
regarding your larger point, you have to keep in mind that many of us have been to hundreds of games and watched thousands of games on tv (some of us coach and play as well) and understand what's going on beyond the screen even when we don't see it.
I know, that's why you don't have to see something to tell the people who saw it how it REALLY is...because you can make an educated guess based on what you've seen happen before. Thank god you're here.
Difference between us? If I didn't see something, I find no shame in conceding(if I even had the guff you have to argue something I didn't see in the first place) to someone who did.

Last edited by CHGoalie27: 09-02-2010 at 01:11 PM.
CHGoalie27 is offline   Reply With Quote