Post-Game Talk: Avs at Yotes l 4-0 L l "Avs Y U No Win With All The Patience?"

[Foppa2118]

Because he clearly was? You watch him go to stop a shot from the point, it goes in and he just shrugged his shoulders and paddled the puck to the ref. Then he talked bad about the organization on his way out.

There is no similarity. Varly is getting hung out to dry by our team and losing confidence over that. Was that not obvious when he said he hasn't been playing well?

Because Anderson was purposely giving away games, because he was throwing a hissy fit about not getting the contract he wanted. Which forced our hand in trading him.

Varly on the other hand, has no reason to be giving games away, and doesn't appear to be purposely tanking, he looks tired and has had a stretch of bad games.

He wasn't trying to sabotage himself. He knew if he tanked hard enough and long enough we'd have no choice but to ride out the year with him and watch him walk or trade him and at least get something for him.

The proof of him tanking was there as he was like .850 save percentage for the last 8 games or so of being here and then we traded him to an equally as bad Ottawa team and magically he was back to being a .920 goalie trying to earn a contract with them.

Anderson didn't throw games or purposely tank. That would be the dumbest thing in the world. Why on earth would he do such a thing in a contract year and potentially cost himself millions of dollars?

He could walk at the end of the year either way, why would it be better to walk into free agency with ****** numbers and no wins? He may have played like crap, and become emotionally detached from the team, but he wasn't purposely letting in goals or losing games.

 

[Iceberg]

He wasn't trying to sabotage himself. He knew if he tanked hard enough and long enough we'd have no choice but to ride out the year with him and watch him walk or trade him and at least get something for him.

The guy was going to be with another organization any way after the season. No reason to make his stat look worse, risking to lose a lot of money in the process.

The proof of him tanking was there as he was like .850 save percentage for the last 8 games or so of being here and then we traded him to an equally as bad Ottawa team and magically he was back to being a .920 goalie trying to earn a contract with them.

Obviously the guy lost his motivation after getting lowballed by the Avs and the team was playing like crap just like they are playing like crap again this year. But to suggest that the guy was tanking on purpose is kind ridiculous IMO.

 

[Foppa2118]

Agreed, effin Varlamov's been a let down more often than not. He'll put together a game where he steals it once in a while.

What we shoulda done was moved Giguere for a 3rd or 4th pick at the deadline and given the AHLers (Pickard especially) rotating back-up duties. I'd love to see Pickard get some games in and be ready because I doubt Giggy is coming back this season unless this club is dumb enough to make the mistake of bringing back a has-been veteran for another season after it was clear they should've retired (Hejduk/Foote).

Pickard's numbers are fairly better than Varlamov's too, I know it's the AHL but I believe scoring there is a bit higher than in the NHL anyways and LE's not exactly a good AHL team. Giguere doesn't threaten Varlamov's starting job...he's old but maybe Pickard or Aito could give Varlamov a kick up the ass.

I don't think you want to throw rookie goaltenders into this **** storm. That's not putting them in a very good situation to succeed.

 

[Iceberg]

Anderson didn't throw games or purposely tank. That would be the dumbest thing in the world. Why on earth would he do such a thing in a contract year and potentially cost himself millions of dollars?

He could walk at the end of the year either way, why would it be better to walk into free agency with ****** numbers and no wins? He may have played like crap, and become emotionally detached from the team, but he wasn't purposely letting in goals or losing games.

This.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Anderson didn't throw games or purposely tank. That would be the dumbest thing in the world. Why on earth would he do such a thing in a contract year and potentially cost himself millions of dollars?

He could walk at the end of the year either way, why would it be better to walk into free agency with ****** numbers and no wins? He may have played like crap, and become emotionally detached from the team, but he wasn't purposely letting in goals or losing games.

Just like I said to Ivan when the topic was brought up if Sherman is intentionally tanking.

What is the difference between doing nothing to improve the team (firing Sacco) and intentionally tanking?

In this case, what is the difference between doing nothing to help the team (stopping shots) and intentionally tanking the team's season?

There is no difference, just another name for the same thing. Whether Andy was letting goals in or just not trying, the result was the same. He stunk up the joint so that he would be traded to another team and to give back a little hate towards the team he felt slighted him by not extending him.

Look at this goal by Recchi. It cannot be ignored.

http://video.avalanche.nhl.com/vide...11,2,714&event=COL299&cmpid=embed-share-video

"Oh, it's in the net." "Oh well."

He over-challenges Marchand by about five feet and then just hunches his shoulders and skates away like it didn't even matter.

Also, that Shattenkirk goal was pure money. I had forgotten just how good he was for us.

 

[Iceberg]

Just like I said to Ivan when the topic was brought up if Sherman is intentionally tanking.

What is the difference between doing nothing to improve the team (firing Sacco) and intentionally tanking?

In this case, what is the difference between doing nothing to help the team (stopping shots) and intentionally tanking the team's season?

There is no difference, just another name for the same thing. Whether Andy was letting goals in or just not trying, the result was the same. He stunk up the joint so that he would be traded to another team and to give back a little hate towards the team he felt slighted him by not extending him.

Look at this goal by Recchi. It cannot be ignored.

http://video.avalanche.nhl.com/vide...11,2,714&event=COL299&cmpid=embed-share-video

"Oh, it's in the net." "Oh well."

He over-challenges Marchand by about five feet and then just hunches his shoulders and skates away like it didn't even matter.

Also, that Shattenkirk goal was pure money. I had forgotten just how good he was for us.

Oh, i see you found proof... and seeing the other goals i now realize that Budaj was also tanking... did you see how he reacted on that last goal?? He didn't even break his stick in frustration, what a punk!!

 

[avs1dacup]

Oh, i see you found proof... and seeing the other goals i now realize that Budaj was also tanking... did you see how he reacted on that last goal?? He didn't even break his stick in frustration, what a punk!!

It's not even how he reacted after the goal to me. He didn't even TRY to make a save. He didn't go down in the butterfly, didn't try two pad stacking, did NOTHING. Once the pass was made, he put ZERO effort into making a save.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Oh, i see you found proof... and seeing the other goals i now realize that Budaj was also tanking... did you see how he reacted on that last goal?? He didn't even break his stick in frustration, what a punk!!

Well what else do you want me to do?

Hold on, I'll get on the phone with Andy and ask him personally. You seem extremely opposed to the concept that a professional athlete would dare intentionally perform at a level that is not their best. I can go around and around with you on this, but you'll never see the situation the same way I do.

As far as I am concerned and will remain concerned from the day he was traded until the day I die, Andy was intentionally playing at a level not his best. Which might as well be tanking. Varlamov on the other hand has never once given up on a play that I have seen and that is all the proof I need to know that there is a distinct and obvious difference between the two goalies and their respective seasons.

And yes, even if Andy let in that fluke goal I could sit back and go 'Well, that's not a good representation of Andy tanking, that just takes a weird bounce off his stick and in. Every good goalie has let those in before.'

 

[Iceberg]

Well what else do you want me to do?

Hold on, I'll get on the phone with Andy and ask him personally. You seem extremely opposed to the concept that a professional athlete would dare intentionally perform at a level that is not their best. I can go around and around with you on this, but you'll never see the situation the same way I do.

As far as I am concerned and will remain concerned from the day he was traded until the day I die, Andy was intentionally playing at a level not his best. Which might as well be tanking. Varlamov on the other hand has never once given up on a play that I have seen and that is all the proof I need to know that there is a distinct and obvious difference between the two goalies and their respective seasons.

And yes, even if Andy let in that fluke goal I could sit back and go 'Well, that's not a good representation of Andy tanking, that just takes a weird bounce off his stick and in. Every good goalie has let those in before.'

I'm opposed to this concept. I'm opposed to the concept that a professional athlete would intentionally perform at a level that is not their best, while potentially losing a few million dollars, on a contract year. He didn't have to force a trade as he was going to be an UFA at the end of the year.

You are right, we are not going to see the situation the same way.

 

[chet1926]

The guy was going to be with another organization any way after the season. No reason to make his stat look worse, risking to lose a lot of money in the process.



Obviously the guy lost his motivation after getting lowballed by the Avs and the team was playing like crap just like they are playing like crap again this year. But to suggest that the guy was tanking on purpose is kind ridiculous IMO.

Oh so a professional athlete has never purposely tanked. If you believe that you are crazy. They tank all the time. Some cases are just more pronounced than others.

You have a bunch ego maniacs who will do whatever it takes to get their way. This happens more in other sports but still occurs in hockey.

Anderson didn't get his way, so he quit on the team and stopped trying. The stats prove this cause as soon as he didn't get the contract the numbers went down drastically. I understand the motivation/anger with not getting a contract make an immediate impact but after 3 or 4 games the effort should have returned and it didn't he just threw it into complete tank mode. Anderson figured at worst I play out the year with the Avs and even if my numbers stink someone will take a chance maybe another 1-yr prove it deal then get big contract after I try hard and post solid numbers, best case I get traded and then try hard again and get an extension with my new team. Obviously the latter is what happened.

 

[Iceberg]

Oh so a professional athlete has never purposely tanked. If you believe that you are crazy. They tank all the time. Some cases are just more pronounced than others.

You have a bunch ego maniacs who will do whatever it takes to get their way. This happens more in other sports but still occurs in hockey.

Anderson didn't get his way, so he quit on the team and stopped trying. The stats prove this cause as soon as he didn't get the contract the numbers went down drastically. I understand the motivation/anger with not getting a contract make an immediate impact but after 3 or 4 games the effort should have returned and it didn't he just threw it into complete tank mode. Anderson figured at worst I play out the year with the Avs and even if my numbers stink someone will take a chance maybe another 1-yr prove it deal then get big contract after I try hard and post solid numbers, best case I get traded and then try hard again and get an extension with my new team. Obviously the latter is what happened.

I cannot pretend i know what goes inside Anderson's head. But if you are right and that was his line of thought, then he is really DUMB.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

I cannot pretend i know what goes inside Anderson's head. But if you are right and that was his line of thought, then he is really DUMB.

They are just people in the end. How many people do you know that don't try very hard at things they do in life? How many people do you know that spitefully try to sabotage people they feel have slighted them? Probably not a lot for the last part, but we're talking a numbers game... so Andy fits the probability of it occurring.

His decisions didn't really prevent him from getting the contract he wanted, now did it? So it couldn't have been too "dumb" from his point of view.

 

[Iceberg]

How many people do you know that spitefully try to sabotage people they feel have slighted them?

Not many that would risk losing a few million dollars in the process.

so Andy fits the probability of it occurring.

I see a bigger probabillity of fans on a hockey board having their fellings hurt that their netminder didn't want to take the offer their favorite team put on the table, and characterizing that said goalie's struggles as him trying to tank out of spite.

His decisions didn't really prevent him from getting the contract he wanted, now did it? So it couldn't have been too "dumb" from his point of view.

Yeah, maybe he is not dumb but an evil genius.

 

[Foppa2118]

Just like I said to Ivan when the topic was brought up if Sherman is intentionally tanking.

What is the difference between doing nothing to improve the team (firing Sacco) and intentionally tanking?

In this case, what is the difference between doing nothing to help the team (stopping shots) and intentionally tanking the team's season?

There is no difference, just another name for the same thing. Whether Andy was letting goals in or just not trying, the result was the same. He stunk up the joint so that he would be traded to another team and to give back a little hate towards the team he felt slighted him by not extending him.

Look at this goal by Recchi. It cannot be ignored.

http://video.avalanche.nhl.com/vide...11,2,714&event=COL299&cmpid=embed-share-video

"Oh, it's in the net." "Oh well."

He over-challenges Marchand by about five feet and then just hunches his shoulders and skates away like it didn't even matter.

Also, that Shattenkirk goal was pure money. I had forgotten just how good he was for us.

The conclusions you're drawing are not rational. He played a goal like crap so that means he's tanking and wants to go into free agency with a 3+ GAA and 800 save percentage? Are you kidding me?

So you're telling me he's sitting there thinking, "Those ******** don't want to give me the long term big money deal I deserve. I'll show them. I'll play like absolute crap and destroy their season and get even less money as a UFA than they're offering right now while I'm playing well."

And Sherman who's been pinching pennies at the bidding of his superiors chooses to (right or wrong) go with stop gap D men instead of big money long term guys, and then not upgrade the team during the season when they're clearly not a playoff team, because he wants to tank the season and lose out on the multi millions they'd earn with a playoff bid, and go another year without giving UFA's reason to believe this team can be competative if they sign here.

What does this "the results are the same" idea have to do with anything either? You're aware that you can have two completely different mindsets, let alone have hundreds of different reasons for doing something, and end up with the same result?

This season is making you paranoid my friend.

 

[CantTouchThis]

Look at this goal by Recchi. It cannot be ignored.

http://video.avalanche.nhl.com/vide...11,2,714&event=COL299&cmpid=embed-share-video

The thing that stands out the most from this goal is ROB. 4th round pick looks like from my perspective.

 

[Foppa2118]

The thing that stands out the most from this goal is ROB. 4th round pick looks like from my perspective.

Clearly ROB was tanking so he'd get traded to Toronto.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

The conclusions you're drawing are not rational. He played a goal like crap so that means he's tanking and wants to go into free agency with a 3+ GAA and 800 save percentage? Are you kidding me?

So you're telling me he's sitting there thinking, "Those ******** don't want to give me the long term big money deal I deserve. I'll show them. I'll play like absolute crap and destroy their season and get even less money as a UFA than they're offering right now while I'm playing well."

And Sherman who's been pinching pennies at the bidding of his superiors chooses to (right or wrong) go with stop gap D men instead of big money long term guys, and then not upgrade the team during the season when they're clearly not a playoff team, because he wants to tank the season and lose out on the multi millions they'd earn with a playoff bid, and go another year without giving UFA's reason to believe this team can be competative if they sign here.

What does this "the results are the same" idea have to do with anything either? You're aware that you can have two completely different mindsets, let alone have hundreds of different reasons for doing something, and end up with the same result?

This season is making you paranoid my friend.

I have no idea why people are focusing on the first video highlight I found to demonstrate my point (in fact, it was the FIRST game I checked that Andy started in). If you're going to get upset I tried to find some evidence to support my point of view, then you're starting off your rebuttal on the wrong foot.

My point, that you so eloquently said was me being paranoid, was quite founded in logic.

Whether we are tanking or not, the decisions Sherman have made essentially caused the same conclusion. So by NOT improving the club in the least bit (firing Sacco) we are clearly not attempting to win and therefore might as well be tanking.

By Andy NOT attempting to play well he was clearly not attempting to help the club and therefore might as well have been tanking. He did enough to keep his image relatively intact and left the rest of the blame on the club for his failures. When in fact the guy had a '**** it' attitude not long into the season with us his final year.

Whether he wanted to tank is irrelevant, he was deliberately not trying to win for this club and might as well have been tanking. He got his mega contract elsewhere in spite of his decisions with us, not because of his decisions and everything 'worked out' for him in the end.

You can disagree with my opinion that he wasn't trying hard enough, you can disagree with the notion that he wasn't trying to win games, but there's no disagreeing with the conclusion I've made based on my assumptions. That's simple logic.

The quote above is childish as well. Prove me wrong, don't dance around the subject.

 

[Drij]

The guy was going to be with another organization any way after the season. No reason to make his stat look worse, risking to lose a lot of money in the process.



Obviously the guy lost his motivation after getting lowballed by the Avs and the team was playing like crap just like they are playing like crap again this year. But to suggest that the guy was tanking on purpose is kind ridiculous IMO.

The 1919 "Black Sox's" say Hello.

 

[Foppa2118]

I have no idea why people are focusing on the first video highlight I found to demonstrate my point (in fact, it was the FIRST game I checked that Andy started in). If you're going to get upset I tried to find some evidence to support my point of view, then you're starting off your rebuttal on the wrong foot.

My point, that you so eloquently said was me being paranoid, was quite founded in logic.

Whether we are tanking or not, the decisions Sherman have made essentially caused the same conclusion. So by NOT improving the club in the least bit (firing Sacco) we are clearly not attempting to win and therefore might as well be tanking.

By Andy NOT attempting to play well he was clearly not attempting to help the club and therefore might as well have been tanking. He did enough to keep his image relatively intact and left the rest of the blame on the club for his failures. When in fact the guy had a '**** it' attitude not long into the season with us his final year.

Whether he wanted to tank is irrelevant, he was deliberately not trying to win for this club and might as well have been tanking. He got his mega contract elsewhere in spite of his decisions with us, not because of his decisions and everything 'worked out' for him in the end.

You can disagree with my opinion that he wasn't trying hard enough, you can disagree with the notion that he wasn't trying to win games, but there's no disagreeing with the conclusion I've made based on my assumptions. That's simple logic.

The quote above is childish as well. Prove me wrong, don't dance around the subject.

Who's dancing around the subject? Nothing you are saying is logical. I explained as such and you then say the same thing again, and say it is logical. Your "evidence" and this theory that whether Sherman or Andy wanted to tank, their actions resulted in tanking is completely ridiculous. What does that even mean?

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make, because you keep saying tanking which is an intentional act. Are you trying to say that whether or not Sherman wanted to have a losing season, his non action resulted in having a losing season, and that even if Andy didn't deliberately lose on purpose, he still lost?

If so you realize your stating the obvious right, and there was no reason to point this out? You're confusing me when you keep mentioning they're tanking, or when you say Andy deliberately tried not to win, which is the same as intentionally losing. Which he would not be doing and risking millions of dollars.

He didn't get a mega deal either. He got barely above $3M and only did so because he played well in Ottawa, and they took a gamble that he would be able to sustain that. It's probably very similar to the number the Avs were offering. If he would have stayed on the Avs, and continued to "deliberately try not to win" he would be a backup somewhere making $1.5M or so on a short term deal. It would be absolutely Pejorative Slured for anyone to do that.

 

[Iceberg]

The 1919 "Black Sox's" say Hello.

What? Was that a joke? i didn't get really...

 

[shadow1]

Varlamov is fragile mentally. He's either red-hot and ice-cold, with almost no in-between. I knew the game was over after the Boedker goal practically seconds into the game.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Who's dancing around the subject? Nothing you are saying is logical. I explained as such and you then say the same thing again, and say it is logical. Your "evidence" and this theory that whether Sherman or Andy wanted to tank, their actions resulted in tanking is completely ridiculous. What does that even mean?

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make, because you keep saying tanking which is an intentional act. Are you trying to say that whether or not Sherman wanted to have a losing season, his non action resulted in having a losing season, and that even if Andy didn't deliberately lose on purpose, he still lost?

If so you realize your stating the obvious right, and there was no reason to point this out? You're confusing me when you keep mentioning they're tanking, or when you say Andy deliberately tried not to win, which is the same as intentionally losing. Which he would not be doing and risking millions of dollars.

He didn't get a mega deal either. He got barely above $3M and only did so because he played well in Ottawa, and they took a gamble that he would be able to sustain that. It's probably very similar to the number the Avs were offering. If he would have stayed on the Avs, and continued to "deliberately try not to win" he would be a backup somewhere making $1.5M or so on a short term deal. It would be absolutely Pejorative Slured for anyone to do that.

You seem to understand what I'm saying just fine yet continue to say it makes no sense.

Come on now, why keep arguing when you already understand my conclusion?

Tanking and losing without attempting to improve one's club are virtually the same topic.

Whether it makes sense to you or not, the evidence on the ice speaks for itself as far as I'm concerned. While I would never do it, I have seen plenty of people like that in my brief time to not put it past them. He risked plenty but got what he wanted.

 

[Foppa2118]

You seem to understand what I'm saying just fine yet continue to say it makes no sense.

Come on now, why keep arguing when you already understand my conclusion?

Tanking and losing without attempting to improve one's club are virtually the same topic.

Whether it makes sense to you or not, the evidence on the ice speaks for itself as far as I'm concerned. While I would never do it, I have seen plenty of people like that in my brief time to not put it past them. He risked plenty but got what he wanted.

I still don't get your point. You're saying the Avs have a ****** D core and coach and are having a losing season, and Andy sucked that season? Which didn't need to be said. Or are you saying Sherman and Andy intentionally did things to lose games?

These are in no way shape or form the same thing.

 

[Bubba Thudd]

It's clear to me that he is saying that Anderson deliberately lost games that season.

Furthermore, I agree with that. I believe Anderson played poorly, only putting forth a minimal effort, intentionally. I believe he wanted to be traded ASAP, and was willing to throw games to force a trade.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

I still don't get your point. You're saying the Avs have a ****** D core and coach and are having a losing season, and Andy sucked that season? Which didn't need to be said. Or are you saying Sherman and Andy intentionally did things to lose games?

These are in no way shape or form the same thing.

I made a reference to another discussion where I said by not improving the team (firing Sacco or attempting something meaningful) that Sherman is intentionally not trying to win this season anymore and whatever happens happens. This is in essence the same concept as tanking without actually going about the act.

Using the same logic I applied there which I deemed acceptable I posited that because Andy was not trying to win games or keep our club in games (on ice demeanor, poor attitude towards the club, being denied what he wanted and his overall terrible play) that while he may not have said explicitly "I am going to **** over this team for what they did to me." he might as well have said that because the end result of HIS actions were the same.

It's simple logic. If A + B = C and A + D = C then B = D. Applied to human reasoning it becomes much more difficult to judge and is generally frowned upon, so you need to account for more variables. Which I did in evaluating Andy's play versus Varly's play, there is a clear and distinct difference between Varly trying to keep us in games and Andy not trying to keep us in games. Varly's scenario makes my logic invalid, Andy's just further facilitates it.

Thus, I brought out some video evidence to help support my claim. But that was quickly mocked (amusing how when one tries to bring hard proof to the table people are so quick to cry foul, but when they don't people are equally as quick to challenge them) and denounced.

So here's my question to you. Do YOU have any evidence to prove Andy was not trying to lose games for our clubs beyond assuming he was doing what any logical human being might do?