View Single Post
Old
02-08-2013, 06:33 PM
  #139
RainingRats
Registered User
 
RainingRats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 9,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flapanthersfan View Post
that's a nice attempt to dance around the point i made, but not successful one.

the point was stats do not prove everything in regards to goaltenders. you can keep citing clemmensens record from last year but THAT DOES NOT PROVE HE IS A GOOD GOALTENDER. HE ISN'T

and i think Jacob Markstrom's hype has more to do from, well, you know...scouts ACTUALLY WATCHING HIM PLAY and seeing a 6'6 goaltender who can move like a 5'10 one.

you need to stop, because your arguments are terrible.




agree that it's an apples to oranges comparison, but the point still remains. prior stats are not guarantees of future production.

you knew garrison's production would not continue. why? because you saw him play and knew he was a one-trick pony.

get it?

My arguments are so terrible, they're almost as bad as Clemmer! Clemmer is such a bad goalie he only manages to get points in 20/26 games! Imagine if he was a good goalie! His record wouldn't have been 14-6-6, he'd be undefeated! It's amazing what we could do with a bad goalie!Damn Tallon for not being as smart as you and addressing such a blatant problem! I guess Tallon gave an extension to him because he was so bad! And why do Tallon, and Santos, and Dineen have him as the backup still if he's not good enough!? Thanks for shining light on a situation we are all blind to! Perhaps we can send Tallon and Santos a link to this thread. Clemmer has only been playing regularly since 2008 but you're the first to see he isn't a good goaltender. You should be a scout!Which brings me to my next point... I said statistics are a factor. Those who can read, know that means that other things come into consideration like scouting as you pointed out. I'm sure though if Markstrom had an .800 and a 3.99 GAA he wouldn't have the same hype as an 18 year old leading the league in both categories.

Prior stats don't guarantee anything. Nobody is arguing they do. You can infer ability through statistics. That's why they're used as a factor in evaluating talent.

RainingRats is offline   Reply With Quote