View Single Post
Old
06-08-2012, 03:15 PM
  #153
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post
No one called Martin bad so I don't even know why it's being brought up. I'm pretty sure the argument is, the team was not good and was not going to make the playoffs with or without Martin. Kriss E and the other posters can spin the stats however which way they want. The fact of the matter is the Habs won 3 games in their last 10 with him. They were also 3 points out while having played more games than everyone they were chasing
How did I spin the stats? I brought forward our ACTUAL record.
3-1-2 ACTUAL RECORD.
3-3-4 ACTUAL RECORD.

3 Wins, 7 losses, NOT PRECISE.
1 Win, 7 losses, FICTITIOUS.

So, how am I spinning the stats??

Ya, we were 3pts out of the POs, we were also close to 8th. Why do we have to look in one direction???
Bottom line is, POs were still reachable. That's a fact. No matter how skeptical you were of it happening, or how little you believe it possible, we were still very much in the running.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post

L to Philly
OT Loss Pitt
L to Anaheim
SO Loss San Jose
W LA
SO Loss Columbus (worst team in the league)
SO Loss to Vancouver
W NJ
W Islanders
L Philly
L Jersey

That's 3 wins in 10 games. Not to mention the blown leads in fantabulous Martin fashion.

The team was in 12th frigging place 3 points out of 8th and every team ahead of them had 2-3 games in hand.

These are all FACTS!
Yes, we won 3 of our last 10. We also gather 4 extra points, which means we had 10pts in last 10gp, so .500. Keep that pace up, with a hot streak at a certain point, and things can be on the upswing.
Does this mean we were in a super great position? Nobody ever argued it.
Were we going to make the POs? No way of knowing, but the possibility was there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post
The team did worse with Cunney, no one is denying that (but people also deny the **** storm around the team along with injuries and trades). So I'm not sure what people are trying to expose here.
If the injuries are true for RC, then shouldn't people give credit to Martin for how the team performed under the crap storm around the injuries he had to deal with over the past two years?? He had to deal with them just as much as RC, if not more, and he managed to keep the boat afloat, unlike RC.


I don't care much about this debate. It's pretty clear which of the two is the worse.
But there's no point in trying to make the other appear worse than he actually was.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote