GDT: Game #14 || "Choker Awards" || Capitals @ Canucks || Mon Oct 28/13 7PM SNET-VAN

Status
Not open for further replies.

BB6

Registered User
Feb 14, 2012
2,398
64
Canada
After reading all the soothsayers on the mainboard saying how Vancouver is on their way down, this good of a start to the season makes me pretty happy.
 

Hammer79

Registered User
Jan 9, 2009
7,365
1,202
Kelowna
Question for you advanced system guys.

Is the system that's currently being employed the reason for the lack of physicality? So they're not out of position?

They're sure hitting a lot less

We're outshooting them 39-18. Opponent has to have the puck to hit them or you risk the interference/roughing call.
 

YouCantYandleThis*

Guest
you dont understand?

hes telling me theyre getting alot of shots and the players can't truly be that bad of players

im telling him that their shot percentage being poor right now doesn't mean that their powerplay is good , hes suggesting that their shot percentage will go up and the shots will stay high

instead of considering the idea that when their shot percentage goes up , shots could lower, keeping their PP% the same.

still dont understand? can't help you if so

on top of his theory being flawed...

im being shown stats of why their PP is going to be good this year. lol after 10 games.

Yeah, you totally cleared things up. :laugh:

Your entire argument has been a straw man, goal-post shifting mess since it started. You can't use the argument of small sample size when the same thing applies to your side, for example.

The Canucks powerplay by all accounts should be much better than it is, and statistics back it up. You claim that because of some very bad puck luck, and forwards seemingly flubbing some good opportunities, our PP is awful, and will continue this way.

Which one of these arguments sounds more logical?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad