View Single Post
06-07-2013, 04:55 PM
Registered User
bigbuffalo313's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,061
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
Your reading comprehension needs a ton of work, and this is some of the most blatant examples of straw-manning I've read in this sub-forum.

Saying that the 05-13 Rangers would suck because the 04 and before Rangers did, when those teams had completely different players and coaches (sans 20 games of Renney at the end of 04) is completely and utterly nonsensical.
Well maybe I said that the Rangers would suck because they actually do and I have actually watched the games. I only brought up the pre-lockout teams to say how bad the team would actually be.

Moving on, I never said it was impossible, I'm saying between his statistical comparables (Smith and Quick, who each played five more games) and the history of his career, it is incredibly likely that his league-leading save percentage is driven down to even/slightly below his competition, and given the popularity of that stat, the entire Vezina narrative last year changes. All of a sudden, Quick is posting "better" numbers on the second worst offensive team in the league, while Smith is doing the same while facing a bunch more shots.
Likely=/=would have. He could have easily kept his sv% up or increased it if he played more.

And yes, your Kings/Devils anecdote is equally nonsensical and terrible.
So you admit that saying his sv% would have definitely gone down is nonsensical and terrible?

bigbuffalo313 is online now   Reply With Quote