BVicious
Registered User
- Jun 15, 2012
- 1,774
- 0
This. Just because Brouwer hasn't been good doesn't mean you sub him out for no reason
Just repeat this a few times out loud and tell me it makes any sense at all.
This. Just because Brouwer hasn't been good doesn't mean you sub him out for no reason
Just repeat this a few times out loud and tell me it makes any sense at all.
Burkie even said in that interview he did a week ago on the Fan 960; the lineup will not be tinkered with until the winning streak ends. The only reason the Widedog drew in was because of injury.
Lazar will get his opportunity. I don't think Calgary will win another 14 games straight. Additionally, at a certain point, we might even clinch to be able to play some youth.
Yes I am suggesting taking out a player who has not played good, as you even said, for a player that can play equally as good (or bad) or better.
The philosophy you are using suggests Wideman replacing Stone creates Shutouts.
[citation needed]
No, because Wideman did not play against Montreal. But good effort.
But he did yesterday. WPG. 3-0. Shutout
That doesn't mean Wideman "creates shutouts", it means Wideman played in a shutout. He didn't play in the previous shutout, so whether Wideman is on the ice or not does not "create" a shutout.
I'm also not sure how "the philosophy" I'm using suggests this. What I'm saying is that you should not tinker with a lineup that's won nine straight any more than you have to. That shouldn't be that indefensible of a position, no matter how much you hate Troy Brouwer.
gawd I love Bennett. That's twice now he's fought a guy way bigger than him and stood his ground. Kid is fearless. Honestly, his biggest problem this year is trying to dance through the defence. If he would just make simple plays and cycle which is his game, he'd start seeing results. Can't wait for him to figure it all out, he's gonna be a beauty.
The lineup WAS tinkered, due to an injury. A Top 4 Dman, was substituted by a #7 Dman, and the results were the same. To suggest Brouwer being scratched will result in a loss (show me some fancy stats that show is contribution to our win streak) is crazy.
I'm not suggesting scratching a top line forward, a top Dman (which JUST HAPPENED) or anyone with actual contribution to the Win.
You said, even though he isn't playing good, there is no reason to sit him.
- he isnt playing good.
- he isn't earning minutes, they're gifted.
Obviously you don't agree with my opinion, and I don't care about that.
But to say the lineup should be tinkered (again, it was and at a much more important position than 3rd line RW) then that isn't enough for me to change my mind. Show me why Brouwer shouldn't be sat for not playing good.
Really just wish they'd give him some line-mates that fit. More or less gave him our PP specialist and a corpse to drag around.
That toughness though is something else. Him and Lazar could make a really interesting 'pairing' as Hartley used to put it. That being said, I wouldn't mind Chucky and Bennett together either.
The lineup WAS tinkered, due to an injury. A Top 4 Dman, was substituted by a #7 Dman, and the results were the same. To suggest Brouwer being scratched will result in a loss (show me some fancy stats that show is contribution to our win streak) is crazy.
I'm not suggesting scratching a top line forward, a top Dman (which JUST HAPPENED) or anyone with actual contribution to the Win.
You said, even though he isn't playing good, there is no reason to sit him.
- he isnt playing good.
- he isn't earning minutes, they're gifted.
Obviously you don't agree with my opinion, and I don't care about that.
But to say the lineup shouldn't be tinkered (again, it was and at a much more important position than 3rd line RW) then that isn't enough for me to change my mind. Show me why Brouwer shouldn't be sat for not playing good.
The main point is though, it was tinkered due to injury and out of necessity as a result. If we take Brouwer out as you are suggesting, it would be due to the coaches choice. If you take the Flames words at face value, this is unlikely to happen.
Really just wish they'd give him some line-mates that fit. More or less gave him our PP specialist and a corpse to drag around.
That toughness though is something else. Him and Lazar could make a really interesting 'pairing' as Hartley used to put it. That being said, I wouldn't mind Chucky and Bennett together either.
Other than the fact Lazar has shown absolutely no reason this season to think he'd be better than even a bad Brouwer? Don't fix what ain't broke.
This. Just because Brouwer hasn't been good doesn't mean you sub him out for no reason
Just like Wideman for most of the year, if you actually want to move negative value players, you have to keep them in the lineup for the faint hope that they'll impress someone enough that you can con them into taking your dumps.
It's going to be really tough ti convince Vegas to take a guy that is a regular healthy scratch (granted, Ottawa just did that with Lazar lol). Both Hamilton and Hathaway are upgrades on Brouwer, and they're not even any good.
Any drastic moves regarding Brouwer should definitely wait until the off season though. He does have an A so I imagine that he commands at least some respect from the team, and benching him could have a pretty adverse effect on morale I think. Wait for the summer and hope you can move him.
To me that's about perspective. Sitting Brouwer after a 9 game winning streak can be explained to the GM in Vegas as we simply wanted to play our new acquisition while we were hot. Arguably, Las Vegas has the same access to the same stats that see he is struggling, even on a winning streak. Sitting him doesn't decrease or increase those chances. What it DOES do is tell Brouwer he needs to be better. It tells the team that no matter how well you are doing in the standings , you still need to earn your spot. It's about Merit. That's my argument. Sitting Brouwer does not disrupt this teams abilitiy to win games, the numbers don't lie, neither do our eyes.
I can see that people would hate to play Lazar and we finally lose and it could easily be blamed on that. So fine, keep Brouwer in while it's been agreed upon by many he stinks, and has no real evidence of him contributing to these wins.
not just that, but last night was the first in a while where I'd say any line was "bad". No, the third line isn't producing lots, but they're contributing to special teams and have played with energy. Would we like then to be better? Of course, but they have been adequate and not bad.The thing is, what have Lazar and F. Hamilton contributed to these wins? What makes them a better option right now? Are they a big enough upgrade to risk rustling feathers in a tight, clicking, lockerroom?
Didn't think so.