View Single Post
02-09-2011, 01:50 PM
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by
I find it funny how people think were better off without Roy. Well people have their agendas and look for anything to justify them. Someone with an anti-Roy agenda sees how well the team is playing and see it as the team being better without Roy. People who aren't looking for any reason to crucify players they don't like see how well the teams playing and realize that guys like Vanek and Pominville are producing and playing the way they should have been when Roy was healthy. Stafford's kept his good play up. Also guys like Ennis, Gerbe, and bottom six guys are playing much better. The D's been much better. Myers has been much better, Morrisonn and Weber are playing well together as a pairing.
Ignore all those facts though and just keep thinking were playing well because Roy's out. As great as your boy Vanek is playing if he wouldn't of had his head out of his ass at the beginning of the season we might not have had such a bad start. I bet that fact is convenient for you to ignore though too.
These people are probably the same people that thought we were better off without Briere in 05-06 as well when the team got hot after he got hurt. Similar circumstances, too. Briere was carrying the offense and no one else was doing much of anything before he got hurt, then the team rallied and went on a tear.
There are so many different things that go into winning and losing that looking at one player's absence/presence is absurd.
View Public Profile
Visit jflory81's homepage!
Find More Posts by jflory81