View Single Post
11-14-2012, 03:42 PM
semantic romantic
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 25,746
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
A Gallagher situation would be Canada using a guy best suited to a bottom six role in a top six role, instead of someone clearly better suited to the top two lines. Last year Canada stuck with Gallagher (who I thought was terrible to mediocre throughout the tournament) instead of Connolly, even though it was obvious that Connolly belonged in the top group much more than Gallagher did. This would be similar to using Hudon on a top line instead of someone like MacKinnon/Rattie/Drouin.
I can't say I agree at all with your assessment of Gallagher (at all), but I understand what you mean to a point. I imagine you don't remember who pretty much almost brought Canada back in the 3rd period of the semi-final against Russia.

If you go back to some of the threads, I also shared the sentiment that Connolly was being mis-used as a checker, but I thought the disappointments were Schwarz, Scheifele, and most of all Pearson (that guy was a bum until the bronze game).

But that's another debate.

arsmaster* is offline