View Single Post
06-03-2011, 04:38 PM
We're Touched
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 14,266
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Uh, Bergenheim didn't score the OT goal in game 2. It was Lecavalier on a 2-on-1, which was caused by Schultz taking an eternity to get on the ice.
You're correct that it was Vinny not Bergenheim, that was my mistake.
The play was at least as much Hannan's fault as Schultz's (more in my opinion, as I don't think Hannan should have gone for a change in that situation, and his speed getting to the bench was just as much at fault as Schult'z getting off). To pin it all on Schultz is ignoring a large portion of the problem. Schultz was already screwed by the time he stepped onto the ice.
“It was a bad change,” Hannan said. “I thought the puck was going in behind. When you make mistakes, it costs in the playoffs. I was a little tired and thought I could get off in time, but obviously, I couldn’t. It was a bad play.”

Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
There's absolutely no comparison between peripherals in baseball and in hockey. You can't compare a sport with discrete events and one with continuous play. That's why I don't get the comparison. I understand the point you're trying to make, but baseball is not the sport to use. I disagree with your point anyway, in the context of the playoffs. Schultz is the player you described in the regular season. He's been that player for one short period in the playoffs.
I'm very much aware of the differences between stats in baseball and hockey. I was simply using that analogy to show that peripherals don't directly correspond to performance. My analogy was not ment to be a direct comparisson between baseball and hockey in any way.

Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Again, it might hurt the team in the regular season moving Schultz for futures, but I think it's addition by subtraction in the playoffs. Other than that stretch in the Rangers' series, can you point to any other time in his playoff career when Schultz has been remotely effective?

I mean, Green is perceived as one of the biggest playoff goats in the league, but at least he has 25 points in 36 playoff games.
He's had, what, three post-season series at this point? Just three games played in the other two years combined. Having one good series among three is about on par for what the Capitals do in the post-season. Not that it's desirable, but I just don't think he's the root of the problem.

Like I said, limit his role to what he's good at and we get a much better product out of him. Bringing in fiesty players who aren't "passengers" doesn't automatically mean eliminating useful complimentary players from your arsenal. And his salary isn't so large that we need cap relief from it.

Hivemind is offline