View Single Post
01-25-2013, 03:54 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,258
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
This is the logic of so many people and it baffles me. The D didn't play perfectly what do you want the goalie to do? STOP THE PUCK! It's his job, again if Crawford didn't turn almost every defensive mistake into a goal then it wouldn't be an issue.

So we are going to bash our D because if they don't play perfect our goalie can't bail them out, that makes perfect sense and puts no pressure on them. "Hey guys if you don't play 100% perfect it's a goal because our goalie isn't very good" But why change anything with the goalie position it's perfect.
At least what I used is logic....

On the other hand, your argument holds no water because it can be used in just the opposite way....

So we are going to bash our G because if he doesn't play perfect our D can't play well enough to keep the other team from having multiple breakaways or open looks in front of the goalie?

Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
he isn't wrong with what he said. If Keith wouldn't save his ass twice, we are not a 4-0-0 team. Yesterday we would have gone into the 3rd being 3 goals behind
Yet another dreadful argument where you are creating a narrative to what happened. And Crawford came up very large with a 32-save evening against the Blues. Without that excellent effort the Hawks probably lose. T

hat's a nonsense argument because it's a team effort yet when a goal goes in, the Crawford haters jump on him and blame him entirely. I guess it probably has something to do with so many Hawks fans' unwillingness to pin anything on the fan favorites Seabs & Keith....

BronYrAur is offline   Reply With Quote