View Single Post
04-03-2012, 10:50 AM
Registered User
jml87's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,912
vCash: 500
So the main arguments against Quick seem to be wins (LOL) and harder competition. The wins argument is such a fail, it's like factoring in wins for a pitcher. This argument becomes defunct in 1-0 games. Goalies cannot score goals. So giving up one goal results in a loss. Even if Quick made a 99/100 saves that night, it still goes down as a loss. It is a team stat, not an individual stat.

Secondly, competition. It is true that the Pens and Flyers score a ******** of goals, but now Quick is punished for that? What stat says that Quick wouldn't have gotten the same numbers if he were on the Rangers this year? I remember people giving that argument in the debate of Kershaw vs Halladay for the Cy Young. In the end Kershaw won with better stats. If Quick has better numbers than Lundqvist at the end of the year then Quick should win also.

jml87 is offline   Reply With Quote