View Single Post
09-02-2010, 01:29 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somerville, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,177
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by CHGoalie27 View Post
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.
it is. ballard made the same mistakes over and over. and mccabe doesn't have to look around to see if he's the only person at the point. he IS. holy ****. and that has no bearing on whether he can or can't move in and of itself. that's all situation-dependent. Dmen slide down into the O-zone all the time (in case you just started watching hockey).

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.
i'm sure there are plenty of others that remember when that count reached 5-6. maybe they'll chime in. perhaps you ducked out of the discussion at those most embarrassing moments?

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.
i'll concede something i didn't see or was wrong about. but i'll make a fuss about something that doesn't make any sense to me if you don't provide any decent reasoning. and you haven't. sorry.

zeroG is offline   Reply With Quote