Post-Game Talk: Game 8 - BRUINS play 60 Minutes and are rewarded - BRUINS 2 Sharks 1 - FINAL

[GloryDaze4877]

You were saying ???

Yes, because I base my assessments of players on small sample sizes, which is the best way to evaluate them

Every time Krug makes a good play, I will make sure I reply here with:

“You were saying??”

I remember when you could actually have a reasonable, intelligent hockey conversation here. Sadly, those days are long gone.

 

[JP Nolan]

Yes, because I base my assessments of players on small sample sizes, which is the best way to evaluate them

Every time Krug makes a good play, I will make sure I reply here with:

“You were saying??”

I remember when you could actually have a reasonable, intelligent hockey conversation here. Sadly, those days are long gone.

You can have an intelligent conversation any time. You think i am the only one on this board who see's what i see. And what you somehow dont see or better yet, dont want to see?

All the proof is right in front of you. It was on display right there for you to see. Arrogance and poor decision making in one swoop. No regard for the pass and he just continues to do it and do it and do it....

Yet you want to have an intelligent conversation, yet you claim the guy is an "average' defensive player. How intelligent is that ? He is a spectacular offensive player in the O zone and a wonderful passer in tight space.....Other then that, there is not much here. Especially at 5.5 M........I mean....why, because he gets 20-25 secondary assists a year ?

You made a great point yesterday i must say....Give me Kevin Miller at his 1. whatever...then this guy at 5.5......Now thats intelligent. I know he will turn it around. I get that, but at the end of the day this type inconsistency says alot and says he may not be smart enough to change.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

You can have an intelligent conversation any time. You think i am the only one on this board who see's what i see. And what you somehow dont see or better yet, dont want to see?

All the proof is right in front of you. It was on display right there for you to see. Arrogance and poor decision making in one swoop. No regard for the pass and he just continues to do it and do it and do it....

Yet you want to have an intelligent conversation, yet you claim the guy is an "average' defensive player. How intelligent is that ? He is a spectacular offensive player in the O zone and a wonderful passer in tight space.....Other then that, there is not much here. Especially at 5.5 M........I mean....why, because he gets 20-25 secondary assists a year ?

You made a great point yesterday i must say....Give me Kevin Miller at his 1. whatever...then this guy at 5.5......Now thats intelligent. I know he will turn it around. I get that, but at the end of the day this type inconsistency says alot and says he may not be smart enough to change.

Conversion with you is one-sided based on your agenda with Krug and pointless. You say you know Krug will turn it around and then in the same sentence say he’s inconsistent and not smart enough to change.

Give me a f***ing break.

Krug has been the model of consistency the past 3/4 seasons and the primary reason for his inconsistent start is that he took a puck to the jaw and missed most of training camp. You act like this has zero effect on a player’s performance

Was that a bad play by Krug yesterday? Absolutely, but how do you get “arrogance” out of that? This is what I’m talking about with the “intelligent conversation”. There is zero evidence that Krug is an arrogant player or that he’s one of the worst defenders in the league, yet you spew it out as if it’s carved in stone because it’s suits your agenda.

Ignore stats.

Make outrageous, unsupported claims.

Judge players on small sample sizes (sometimes one play).

Yup, these are the cornerstones for intelligent conversation.

It seems to me that your definition of intelligent conversation begins and ends with people who agree with you.