I Can't Wait For...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to NeelyOrrBourque's comment:

    Another point to add. Is that some people only come on here to complain & whine. They never have anything good to say unless it's a blow out. I remember times when the B's would win by a 5-1 score & they'd whine about Thomas, or Rask not getting the shut-out. They add nothing, but negativity to the forum. There's nothing wrong with being critical, but there is if there's no pleasing you ever. I don't think it's should be as simple as "the B's won that's all that matters" either, this place would be pretty boring if there was no subject up for debate.

    "Why is a puck called a puck? Because Dirty little bastar d was taken!"- Marty Brodeur



    And those are the people that get called out. Then they whine and complain about that.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Wensink, I'm not sure that anything has been discussed and debated more by the regulars than Seguin's shortcomings.  To suggest that it is anything unusual, is crazy.  I remember starting a thread about his lack of engagement a long, long time ago.  Noting that Seguin had problems was as common here as bad grammer, but most of us still thought he would be an excellent player.  Plenty of criticism, and you're on of the only ones that thinks you're unique for being negative.

    But when people come totally unglued and vent on the board after losing a single game or falling behind in a playoff game, they'll probably get some crap since this is the best 3-run run we've experienced as fans in the past 40 years. 

    Seriously read the link that red posted (pages 16 on) and tell me if you think that "criticism" should be defended...

     



    Fletch, I think this forum is built on debate and I don't know how anyone could see different. I agree with you. It doesn't take a maverick to voice displeasure around here. That's what most people do almost all of the time. I think it's only Stanley and Jwens who think their opinion is making a difference though.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's always been the problem with the complaining...about people complaining.  Wensink (who I am glad is here -- I like variety in posters) plays the martyr and always pats himself on the back for being critical, but when people are critical of his opinion, it's a whole different thing and he objects to it.

    Being critical is just fine, if your comments make sense.  Wensink cites the debate over the Bruins blowing 3rd period leads, and his opinion that they shouldn't sit back and stop playing hard when they have the lead.  Lofty stuff.  Everyone here agrees with that.  The problem is that not everyone agrees with this analysis for why they lose some games they were winning earlier.  Not everyone assumes that when the Bruins lose to another NHL team, after leading earlier in the game, that the solution is as simple as "they must have let up".

    So there is a disagreement in the analysis of what happened, not the right to criticize the team.  Not all fans call the players 'gutless' everytime they lose a game.  Sometimes they just lose, and the other team just plays better.  Although, I agree that sometimes they lose because of a poor effort.  The problem, is that Wensink and others want to take this very strong critical opinion, and they don't want anyone to disagree with them.  If you do, you're trying to censor them and you're a fanboy.  It is the opposite of what they think it is -- they are the ones who struggle with criticism and difference of opinions, not everyone else.

    Like all of the regulars, I am all for criticism of the team here, but it still needs to make sense to be respected.  And, I have seen less to complain about with this team over the past three years than any time I can remember.

    So, let the debate continue.  But let's stop acting like someone is courageous, and buying into some victim mentaity, just because most of the board disagrees with you.  You might just be wrong.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    Wensink, I'm not sure that anything has been discussed and debated more by the regulars than Seguin's shortcomings.  To suggest that it is anything unusual, is crazy.  I remember starting a thread about his lack of engagement a long, long time ago.  Noting that Seguin had problems was as common here as bad grammer, but most of us still thought he would be an excellent player.  Plenty of criticism, and you're on of the only ones that thinks you're unique for being negative.

    But when people come totally unglued and vent on the board after losing a single game or falling behind in a playoff game, they'll probably get some crap since this is the best 3-run run we've experienced as fans in the past 40 years. 

    Seriously read the link that red posted (pages 16 on) and tell me if you think that "criticism" should be defended...

     

     

     



    Fletch, I think this forum is built on debate and I don't know how anyone could see different. I agree with you. It doesn't take a maverick to voice displeasure around here. That's what most people do almost all of the time. I think it's only Stanley and Jwens who think their opinion is making a difference though.

     

     

     

     

     



    That's always been the problem with the complaining...about people complaining.  Wensink (who I am glad is here -- I like variety in posters) plays the martyr and always pats himself on the back for being critical, but when people are critical of his opinion, it's a whole different thing and he objects to it.

     

     

    Being critical is just fine, if your comments make sense.  Wensink cites the debate over the Bruins blowing 3rd period leads, and his opinion that they shouldn't sit back and stop playing hard when they have the lead.  Lofty stuff.  Everyone here agrees with that.  The problem is that not everyone agrees with this analysis for why they lose some games they were winning earlier.  Not everyone assumes that when the Bruins lose to another NHL team, after leading earlier in the game, that the solution is as simple as "they must have let up".

    So there is a disagreement in the analysis of what happened, not the right to criticize the team.  Not all fans call the players 'gutless' everytime they lose a game.  Sometimes they just lose, and the other team just plays better.  Although, I agree that sometimes they lose because of a poor effort.  The problem, is that Wensink and others want to take this very strong critical opinion, and they don't want anyone to disagree with them.  If you do, you're trying to censor them and you're a fanboy.  It is the opposite of what they think it is -- they are the ones who struggle with criticism and difference of opinions, not everyone else.

    Like all of the regulars, I am all for criticism of the team here, but it still needs to make sense to be respected.  And, I have seen less to complain about with this team over the past three years than any time I can remember.

    So, let the debate continue.  But let's stop acting like someone is courageous, and buying into some victim mentaity, just because most of the board disagrees with you.  You might just be wrong.

     

     




    I hope that everybody gets what you're saying Fletch because I'm not sure it's possible to make the point any clearer and as usual, you managed to do it in a respectful manner. Nicely done sir. I'm probably going stick with being a dick though because that's what works for me.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    The premise of this thread is defined in the 1st entry by NAS

    Blow a lead going into the 3rd period - and shut up because if you mention it you're a whining complainer. That point can't be denied. That is followed by the usual backslappers all aligning themselves as the good posters who are the ones who really know what's going on, most of which are sadly predictable.

    Nobody's taking a victim mentality- (get some mew material)and who cares who you think should and shouldn't be here.

    The fact is that they do sit back in the 3rd with a lead. It's worth discussing as a potential problem that might cost them down the road in a big spot. The "yeh, but they won" thing (surprised book)is short sided thinking.

    Sit back, chip it out, clog the neutral zone is not a very good recipe for closing out games- regardless of win in a B S reg season game, and is a valid discussion worth having.

    game 6 - 3rd period shots on goal -  Hawks 16   Bruins 7

    How's that working out for ya? And yeh,it was a disturbing pattern that was well worth addressing. It's what hockey fans do.

    If you two had any credibility or character you would have called out NAS for making such a self serving incorrect post. You're too busy having a stroke fest. You're on the wrong side of the argument as usual - boring



     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to JWensink's comment:

     

    The premise of this thread is defined in the 1st entry by NAS

    Blow a lead going into the 3rd period - and shut up because if you mention it you're a whining complainer. That point can't be denied. That is followed by the usual backslappers all aligning themselves as the good posters who are the ones who really know what's going on, most of which are sadly predictable.

    Nobody's taking a victim mentality- (get some mew material)and who cares who you think should and shouldn't be here.

    The fact is that they do sit back in the 3rd with a lead. It's worth discussing as a potential problem that might cost them down the road in a big spot. The "yeh, but they won" thing (surprised book)is short sided thinking.

    Sit back, chip it out, clog the neutral zone is not a very good recipe for closing out games- regardless of win in a B S reg season game, and is a valid discussion worth having.

    game 6 - 3rd period shots on goal -  Hawks 16   Bruins 7

    How's that working out for ya? And yeh,it was a disturbing pattern that was well worth addressing. It's what hockey fans do.

    If you two had any credibility or character you would have called out NAS for making such a self serving incorrect post. You're too busy having a stroke fest. You're on the wrong side of the argument as usual - boring



     

     




    Yeah, the Bruins lost in game 6 of the Finals because they sat on a 1 goal lead. Obviously it was a lack of coaching that should've been addressed after losing a mid season game to the Pens. That makes lots of sense.......or wait, maybe it's because it was game 6 of the Finals and they were spent. Maybe it was because the Hawks were a better team. One thing is for certain, you need to start using your head for something more than a hat rack. Seriously, have you ever made a point worth paying attention to? Your swings and misses are many but when are you going to get something right? I didn't call out Nas on this thread because I'm aware of the metaphorical speak. I'm aware of what he's laughing at. It's biotches like you. Character isn't measured by calling out someone on line. Jesus man, I just knew we'd have at least one person who wouldn't get what Fletch was saying. Congrats on being so simple so fast. You should just write "LOL" after every sentence you write. You're comedy gold.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to JWensink's comment:

    The fact is that they do sit back in the 3rd with a lead. It's worth discussing as a potential problem that might cost them down the road in a big spot. The "yeh, but they won" thing (surprised book)is short sided thinking.

    Sit back, chip it out, clog the neutral zone is not a very good recipe for closing out games- regardless of win in a B S reg season game, and is a valid discussion worth having.



    I don't disagree that going into kitty bar the door mode is a worthwhile discussion.  I do think that NAS is saying something slightly different.  It's one thing to say "they shouldn't have tried to nurse a one goal lead" and another to question the character of the team or imply something is fundamentally flawed about the team or the coaching the way people do when they go on about a "collapse!"  And the point about "they won, but..." is really similar.  If someone comes on after a win and says something about how prevent mode gives the other team momentum and it wasn't necessary in that game, I have no issue.  When someone posts "they'll never win if they keep doing x, y, z" when they've just won a game in spite of x, y, z, I think the evidence indicates a fundamental flaw in their reasoning.  They don't like what they saw; fine.  But when the team does something all year, and it makes them one of the top teams in the league, then those comments sound like whining, not critical conversation and debate.  Now, if they keep losing because of that pattern, then it truly is an issue.  But saying "they will eventually lose doing this" is just speculation, and sometimes not very informed speculation.

    As for game six, you don't send Lucic, Krejci and Horton over the boards if you intend to sit on a lead.  And there they were.  I think Chicago did what we've seen the Bruins do - play desperate hockey - and they got a couple of breaks.  Nothing to do with "sitting back" as a strategy.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    Good:  Man, I hate when they sit back and defend in the third.  Drives me nuts.

    Here:  There they go again, bunch of bums.  Collapsing like a house of cards as usual...

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to JWensink's comment:

    The premise of this thread is defined in the 1st entry by NAS

    Blow a lead going into the 3rd period - and shut up because if you mention it you're a whining complainer. That point can't be denied. That is followed by the usual backslappers all aligning themselves as the good posters who are the ones who really know what's going on, most of which are sadly predictable.

    Nobody's taking a victim mentality- (get some mew material)and who cares who you think should and shouldn't be here.

    The fact is that they do sit back in the 3rd with a lead. It's worth discussing as a potential problem that might cost them down the road in a big spot. The "yeh, but they won" thing (surprised book)is short sided thinking.

    Sit back, chip it out, clog the neutral zone is not a very good recipe for closing out games- regardless of win in a B S reg season game, and is a valid discussion worth having.

    game 6 - 3rd period shots on goal -  Hawks 16   Bruins 7

    How's that working out for ya? And yeh,it was a disturbing pattern that was well worth addressing. It's what hockey fans do.

    If you two had any credibility or character you would have called out NAS for making such a self serving incorrect post. You're too busy having a stroke fest. You're on the wrong side of the argument as usual - boring





    Yeah, I think you've once again missed the point.  And in doing so you've concluded, again, that I must have some bias against you (victim mentality) and some allegiance to others here.  If you stop the victim routine, I'll probably stop mentioning it.  

    I'm only being hard on you because I think you're wrong.  Wrong about game 6, wrong about the 'prevent strategy', and wrong about the Bruins losing games (more than winning) because of some 3rd period strategy that you refer to as 'sitting back' but fail to really describe.  Book also brings up a fair point that if the Bruins play a firebrand 3rd period every time they have a lead they might actually lose more games.  Perhaps what they are doing works pretty darn well, and one of the 30 other NHL teams just happened to be better last year.

    In coming two games short of the Stanley Cup, the Bruins did lose some games.  You seem to have a theory that this happens because of a certain strategy issue which would seem like a very, very simple problem and solution if that was correct.  I think you're wrong.  Your response is to then get whiny and carry on about the board not recognizing you enough for being so independent and courageous.  I like your instinct to question things.  I wish it was accompanied by better logic and a little more fortitude to debate your ideas without crying about bias or fanboys or some secret conspiracy to gang up on you. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    So, to summarize what Fletch has said:  Keep coming around and questioning stuff but stop acting like such a b*tchy little girl.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to JWensink's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    The premise of this thread is defined in the 1st entry by NAS

    Blow a lead going into the 3rd period - and shut up because if you mention it you're a whining complainer. That point can't be denied. That is followed by the usual backslappers all aligning themselves as the good posters who are the ones who really know what's going on, most of which are sadly predictable.

    Nobody's taking a victim mentality- (get some mew material)and who cares who you think should and shouldn't be here.

    The fact is that they do sit back in the 3rd with a lead. It's worth discussing as a potential problem that might cost them down the road in a big spot. The "yeh, but they won" thing (surprised book)is short sided thinking.

    Sit back, chip it out, clog the neutral zone is not a very good recipe for closing out games- regardless of win in a B S reg season game, and is a valid discussion worth having.

    game 6 - 3rd period shots on goal -  Hawks 16   Bruins 7

    How's that working out for ya? And yeh,it was a disturbing pattern that was well worth addressing. It's what hockey fans do.

    If you two had any credibility or character you would have called out NAS for making such a self serving incorrect post. You're too busy having a stroke fest. You're on the wrong side of the argument as usual - boring



     



    Yeah, I think you've once again missed the point.  And in doing so you've concluded, again, that I must have some bias against you (victim mentality) and some allegiance to others here.  If you stop the victim routine, I'll probably stop mentioning it.  

     

    I'm only being hard on you because I think you're wrong.  Wrong about game 6, wrong about the 'prevent strategy', and wrong about the Bruins losing games (more than winning) because of some 3rd period strategy that you refer to as 'sitting back' but fail to really describe.  Book also brings up a fair point that if the Bruins play a firebrand 3rd period every time they have a lead they might actually lose more games.  Perhaps what they are doing works pretty darn well, and one of the 30 other NHL teams just happened to be better last year.

    In coming two games short of the Stanley Cup, the Bruins did lose some games.  You seem to have a theory that this happens because of a certain strategy issue which would seem like a very, very simple problem and solution if that was correct.  I think you're wrong.  Your response is to then get whiny and carry on about the board not recognizing you enough for being so independent and courageous.  I like your instinct to question things.  I wish it was accompanied by better logic and a little more fortitude to debate your ideas without crying about bias or fanboys or some secret conspiracy to gang up on you. 

    [/QUOTE]

    If you don't think the B's sit back on leads in the 3rd , then that explains the rest of your logic, and sums up your credibility issues . Any honest fan who has a clue as to what's going on out there knows that to be a pattern that they fall into quite often. Obviously the whole honesty thing has caused you trouble...that was never your strong suit as we all know you tend to make stuff up.

    See, there are a lot of great posters on here who I never have a problem with. Then there are the condescending ("that's why I'm being hard on you") bully types who like to jump on a post like this to sign up for the I'm one of the good smart posters who really know whats going on band wagon. So they all jump in on a post in August to tell everyone else how dumb they are and what is acceptable or not. I noticed your insecure azz was one of the first to do so.

    Guess what punk, you aren't the thought police, or the arbiter of the virtual world. It's a f'n hockey forum where anyone can say whatever they want without your pathetic rubber stamp of approval. Get over yourself, because the truth is your superiority complex is born out of weakness.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from asmaha. Show asmaha's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    Good:  Man, I hate when they sit back and defend in the third.  Drives me nuts.

    Here:  There they go again, bunch of bums.  Collapsing like a house of cards as usual...




    Exactly. Not sure why it's so hard for some to understand this.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to JWensink's comment:

    Obviously the whole honesty thing has caused you trouble...that was never your strong suit as we all know you tend to make stuff up.



    This is true.  Fletcher is similar to Bruins8 and Stanley.  He just makes things up all day long.  Complete fraud.  Total liar.

    Yes.  That's Fletcher on the nose.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    What I can't wait for?

    Something real to happen and talk about.

     

     
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to JWensink's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Obviously the whole honesty thing has caused you trouble...that was never your strong suit as we all know you tend to make stuff up.

     



    This is true.  Fletcher is similar to Bruins8 and Stanley.  He just makes things up all day long.  Complete fraud.  Total liar.

     

    Yes.  That's Fletcher on the nose.

    [/QUOTE]

    "So, to summarize what Fletch has said: Keep coming around and questioning stuff but stop acting like such a b*tchy little girl."

    You know NAS...I think there are times when some of your posts are great. And any guy that goes to a Flyer game and holds up a Matt Cooke to jail sign is alright in my book. But, seriously sometimes you can talk right out of ur azz.


    For the record your buddy Fletch has fabricated many posts in my direction that are unmitigated untrue lies. He is dishonest. Take it for what it's worth, but I'm telling you without question he has posted pure dishonest bold faced lies before. And I stand by that 100%.  I seem to remember you going off on somebody for the very same issue yourself. So think twice before defending somebody without knowing the truth. If that kind of thing is important to you.It is to me.

    Secondly, you and Fletch or anybody else doesn't get to decide who can "keep coming around" or not. You can stick that "summary" up your 5 hole. There is no self assigned place of importance. Based on your posts regarding such issues it seems that "whining" is code for disagreeing with you. I agree that there is a difference, but your post was a pretty broad stroke, and 3rd period leads was a very poor choice as an example. You may want to check your motivations - not good.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    Okay.   I'll work on that.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    Fraud? Perhaps.  Liar? Rarely.  Boring? Probably.

    But "Arbiter of the virtual world"?  Oh yeah, all day long.  Just ordered new business cards for that.

    But really, instead of acting like our argument here is some dramatic battle and referendum on truth and decency, let's just call it what it is and stop boring other posters.  Two anonymous internet posters who disagree, a lot.  Your attempts to be a drama queen and make it more than that, within some fantasy that you're being persecuted by 'the regulars', is silly and childish.

    I think you're wrong a lot about the Bruins and I am always happy to debate it with you.  Quit acting like the cavalry is coming after you and you're some modern-day internet version of William Wallace.  I'm sitting at a keyboard 2000 miles away from you and I just spilled coffee on my pants.  I don't know why you always seem to feel so threatened by distant internet posters pointing out their objections to your logic.  It happens to everyone else, without this dramafest.

    I bet we agree on the Seguin trade being a good thing...

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    "liar Rarely"

    You only get one shot at that one

    Threatened ? You and Duz are the last two in the known universe that could achieve that. You do realize the "calvary" you refer to is you and that little freak ?Those are the "regulars" you mention? Once again aligning yourself...pathetic. Maybe the one that feels threatened is you considering that you would resort to making false disgusting accusations from " 2000 miles away" as a way to promote yourself. Pretty sick behavior from the self appointed voice of authority. Speaks volumes.

    Truth and decency are pretty good indicators on someones character and credibility. You should be proud.

    I'm all set

    I'll let you get back to editing the board for approval now

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    OY a freakin' vey.

    This is one of the more annoying exchanges I've read on here for quite sometime, and that's saying something.

    How about we drop the name calling and persecution complex here for a moment and maybe talk hockey for a second?

    JW, you say the Bruins drop their play in the third, and you attribute this to a defensive strategy of sitting on a lead. I agree that this occassionally happens, as it does with every team in the league when the lead is substantial, but where is your evidence that this is something routinely done by the Bruins specifically?

    Because I have a completely different explanation for why this occurred on occassion last season - conditioning. It wasn't strategy, it was the legs and the wind. On the few occassions where they really blew it in the third, you could tell the team was gassed. This could partly be attributed to the shortened and condensed season, and the lack of a real camp.

    The exhaustion was definitely on display in the third of game six. Chicago still had more in the tank. It's my poiont that what you see and and get upset about as sitting back, is not sitting back at all.

    Now for arguments sake, let's say you're right and it is an actual strategy. What would be more effective? Continuing to press? Sounds ok on paper maybe, but a continuos press also makes you defensively vulnerable and open to a counter rush. What evidence do you have that they wouldn't get scored on more by a counter punch vs. what they would get scored on in defensive mode? Explain why the strategy you propose is better than the one you perceive the Bruins to be using.

    How about we talk hockey for a bit, and you can talk about your actual point and back it up with facts/evidence.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    It's funny to see someone lighting up Fletcher.  As if any of it makes sense.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    I agree, NAS.  Fletch makes no sense at all.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    I can't wait for someone to bring up players we need to deal for from the Panthers.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    It's funny to see someone lighting up Fletcher.  As if any of it makes sense.

     



    It's so puzzling to me.  I literally have no idea what where all of the drama came from.  The feeling isn't mutual, as I am moving towards indifference to all the Wensink noise. 

    I also don't know why the irony is being missed -- that the guy who complains that people aren't allowed to disagree on this board, is the one coming utterly unglued when people disagree with him.

    And why is dez "little"?  See, this is what I mean.  You're making up a fantasy drama out of this whole thing in your imagination like we're in a steel cage death match.  We're on the internet.  We don't know each other.  Internet flexing doesn't work.

    If I tell you that some 3rd period collaspses were very frustrating to me last year, yet I agree with red's argument above, does that mean that she and I are coercing in the plot to destroy you, or just that I find her logic to be more reasonable?

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    I agree, NAS.  Fletch makes no sense at all.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!



    Yes, I'll settle for the polite brush off over the character lambasting any day...

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    The irony this thread contains is delightful. I guess it's only funny if you realize it's there though.


    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I Can't Wait For...

    In response to red75's comment:

    OY a freakin' vey.

    This is one of the more annoying exchanges I've read on here for quite sometime, and that's saying something.

    How about we drop the name calling and persecution complex here for a moment and maybe talk hockey for a second?

    JW, you say the Bruins drop their play in the third, and you attribute this to a defensive strategy of sitting on a lead. I agree that this occassionally happens, as it does with every team in the league when the lead is substantial, but where is your evidence that this is something routinely done by the Bruins specifically?

    Because I have a completely different explanation for why this occurred on occassion last season - conditioning. It wasn't strategy, it was the legs and the wind. On the few occassions where they really blew it in the third, you could tell the team was gassed. This could partly be attributed to the shortened and condensed season, and the lack of a real camp.

    The exhaustion was definitely on display in the third of game six. Chicago still had more in the tank. It's my poiont that what you see and and get upset about as sitting back, is not sitting back at all.

    Now for arguments sake, let's say you're right and it is an actual strategy. What would be more effective? Continuing to press? Sounds ok on paper maybe, but a continuos press also makes you defensively vulnerable and open to a counter rush. What evidence do you have that they wouldn't get scored on more by a counter punch vs. what they would get scored on in defensive mode? Explain why the strategy you propose is better than the one you perceive the Bruins to be using.

    How about we talk hockey for a bit, and you can talk about your actual point and back it up with facts/evidence.




    Red

    Disagree ...you say you'd like facts to back it up, and then point to conditioning as the main culprit. Something that you apparently know factually from your HDTV. My facts or evidence is from watching them struggle late in games. It's just an issue that I feel is worth discussion, even though I never brought it up. It was used as an example of fans making statements that they shouldn't on this board by NAS. I just presented a reasonable explanation for why such an issue is valid, and nobody on this board should be able to determine what is and isn't acceptable comments.

    Sorry, but my opinion is that it flows from the top down, and CJ tends to focus on stopping people more than staying aggressive offensively thereby taking chances that might lead to opportunities for the opponent. Also, everybody had a shortened season including the Hawks in the 3rd of game 6 -

    I'm sure there's some stat somewhere showing leads going into the 3rd, don't have the pateience to find it. But it's my observation and opinion that it was an issue.

    There you go, an exchange of differing opinions- it's all good.

    Sorry if you disagree with any thing I've just stated, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't, but it does mean it's ok if you do - something that seems to be overwhelming to some

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share