View Single Post
04-05-2013, 12:32 PM
Registered Smut User
deytookerjaabs's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nashville
Posts: 7,501
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
I don't care what Kane did away from Bolland. Bolland wasn't even close to being responsible for the GA last night, and he's a -2. It's a BS stat. If +/- reflected who was responsible for a GA, Bolland would of been 0 last night.
This is just nonsense. He's a 2C, yet you have NO PROBLEM with him being ineffective at cycling the puck, awful on the offensive boards especially down low, ineffective at creating scoring opportunities, ineffective at cashing on opportunities given by an elite playmaker, and ineffective in the neutral zone. BUT, since he didn't make some awful turnover at the blue line that led directly to the goal then he isn't responsible. Meanwhile, I think it's safe to conclude that when you give him a pass for spending most of his time in the defensive zone that there's a good chance the rest of us can come to terms with the simple fact that more time in your own zone is a bad thing, leads to goals against, and is reflected in his +/- when compared to the rest of the team.

deytookerjaabs is offline   Reply With Quote