2 weak, smaller, not physical, horrible in their own zone D-men are just as good as any other 2nd pairing in the NHL?
Right, here are teams 2nd pairings, you tell me which ones they better then.
ANA - Visnovsky / Lydman
BOS - Boychuk / Andrew Ference,
BUF - Leopold / Regehr
CAL - Giordano / Hannan
CAR - Allen / Harrison
COL - Hunwick / Johnson
CBJ - Nikitin / Johnson
DAL - Daley / Souray
DET - Kronwall / Stuart
EDM - Sutton / Petry
FLA - Kulikov / Weaver
LAK - Mitchell / Voynov
MIN - Foster / Spurgeon
MON - Markov / Campoli
NSH - Klein / Josi
NJD - Salvador / Zidlicky
NYI - Hamonic / MacDonald
NYR - Del Zotto / Staal
OTT - Cowen / Gonchar
PHI - Coburn / Grossman
PHO - Ekman-Larsson / Klesla
PIT - Martin / Letang
SAN - Murray / Burns
STL - Shattenkirk / Polak
TAM - Clark / Lee
TOR - Liles / Schenn
VAN - Hamhuis / Bieksa
WAS - Alzner / Carlson
WIN - Stuart / Bogosian
I can find about 7
Letang is a 2nd pair Defenseman. I stopped reading once you got that far. Hawks 2nd pair is probably around League Average. Probably a little lower actually Leddy should have played less.
yeah, blame the D for goals the goalie failed to save
No goalie is going to stop every shot. If the dmen are letting guys into good scoring positions and not doing anything about it, pucks are going to hit the back of the net.
this still doesn't change the fact that Crawford let in soft goal after soft goal that he has to stop - that other starting goalies stop game after game after game.
Add to those bad goals that it was always the worst possible timing and you have the worst starter in the NHL last year (with Mason)
Wait a minute. You just said yesterday in the other thread that it was good that we locked up Emery since other goalies are getting signed and it's good that we have our two guys locked up.
ALSO, you have been a defender of Bowman.
And you come out and say if we had a good goalie, we'd be top 5 in GAA. I'm not saying I agree with you but I can't say you are wrong either because it is a major issue. The point I'm trying to make though is that knowing we already a top 5 scoring team, if we were also top 5 in GAA, we'd be easily the best team in the NHL. So if we are only ONE MOVE away from reaching that point, why the hell are you ok with Bowman locking up the guys we had and we are you defending him???
what I want and what is realistic is 2 different things.
It was good that he singed Emery. It looks better and better with every resigning that is happening.
Still doesn't force us to go with this tandem. If we have the chance to upgrade it for a fair price, Bowman is going to pull the trigger. Problem is and this is something many don't understand... what if we let Emery go, he signs somewhere else and we DO NOT get an upgrade in net. We would be ****ed more than we are already.
what I want and what is realistic is 2 different things.
It was good that he singed Emery. It looks better and better with every resigning that is happening.
Still doesn't force us to go with this tandem. If we have the chance to upgrade it for a fair price, Bowman is going to pull the trigger. Problem is and this is something many don't understand... what if we let Emery go, he signs somewhere else and we DO NOT get an upgrade in net. We would be ****ed more than we are already.
Sorry buddy, there are plenty of guys in the AHL and other leagues who would love to come here for half of Emery's price and would have little problem putting up .900 SV%. ****ing Turco just did it here in 10-11 and he was washed up as can be. Nevermind the fact he had to play with Boynton and Cullimore and other garbage players that made it even harder on him. There's a reason only Mason, Montoya and Roloson finished behind Emery last year.
Hutton would most likely play just as well with at least the possibility of doing better.
We don't need a gamble. We know what we have in Emery. He was able to step it up a bit while Craw was at his worst last year. I'm really not a fan of Emery, but there is no better option available as Free Agent to pick up
You are on a game show, the host gives you two options, take a pair of brand new tennis shoes or take the mystery prize, which is either the same pair of tennis shoes or a new car.
You are on a game show, the host gives you two options, take a pair of brand new tennis shoes or take the mystery prize, which is either the same pair of tennis shoes or a new car.
what about the missing option c? Option C would be a this
You are on a game show, the host gives you two options, take a pair of brand new tennis shoes or take the mystery prize, which is either the same pair of tennis shoes or a new car.
A, because the mystery prizes chances of being something far better than the shoes is very slim in this case.
