WATCH HIM PLAY! He doesn't do anything on the PK at all! One person says he does and it catches on and then a bunch of parrots repeat it on every Sens board until everyone believes it. He just stands there in gingerbread man-stance hoping the puck hits him, he barely ever gets the puck out. If you're a hockey player and you say you aren't here to score, you are benched. That isn't an excuse for no contribution on the scoresheet whatsoever. He is the worst forward on the team, bar none [except Kassian- who actually has the tools to be a
role (not roll) player]
How convenient, Condra isn't here to score! I wonder why when this happens when he gets a chance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm0RH37WRQg
He's not going to be a fixture here, he's going to go the way of Butler and Daugivins at some point (both of whom I'd likely pick over Condra any day).
Annnnd paradigm blah blah blah onus.
i do watch him play, lol. that's exactly what i said. you're arguing with people that are just as knowledgeable as you, and who watch him just as much as you do. the "watch him play" doesn't work for you, because we watched him and came to a conclusion. you completely ignored the last part of my post, which points out the mistake you've been making this entire time. you have to prove your point. you have to find clips, you have to have stats, you have to have something that shows your point because you are in the minority. that's the way it is.
condra is a great pk'er WATCH HIM PLAY (see, it doesn't work on you because you've watched him play and came to a different conclusion). the reason why i don't have to prove my point with stats or video is because informed people agree with me. they watch the games, and have made their own opinion. when more informed people reach the same conclusion, that conclusion is more likely to be right. but it's not always right, which is where you come in. if you can prove that we are wrong, then we'll accept that we are wrong, and change our opinion. you have not come even close to doing that. you have provided no evidence.
condra is better than daugavins because he is actually a better penalty killer and is a better forechecker than him. he backchecks harder, is better defensively, breaks up more plays, and is better in the neutral zone.
condra is better than butler because butler was a one-dimensional player that wasn't good enough at his forte to succeed.
as for his offense: he plays a roll, and is extremely effective in that roll. neil plays a roll, and is extremely effective in that roll. they have the same amount of points, while neil gets power play time. condra has four less points than zack smith. his offense is right there in the fourth line range. he's just frustrating in that sense because he could get more points if he had any finish. i do think he has better playmaking skills than he has shown this year from watching him last year though. i wonder if he can find that offense again. i might be in the minority in that opinion, but i'm not going to argue with anyone because i don't have proof, it's an observation i made that could very well be wrong.
