GDT: Game 27: Capitals @ Coyotes - 7PM - FSAZ+ - Annoyed I had to remake my graphic edition

[TheLegend]

It's flat out poor coaching and there is no excuse. No need for stats, or consideration to the side of the ice and whether the center is on his backhand, or not.

Whatever.....

Most every team in the league does what Tocchet did (uses side of ice vs which hand the centerman uses) in selecting who goes in. I suppose they’re all bad coaches too.

Had Schmaltz won his draw nobody would be complaining. But he didn’t so every keyboard GM out there has to have some sort of excuse to lay blame somewhere.

 

[Coyotedroppings]

Whatever.....

Most every team in the league does what Tocchet did (uses side of ice vs which hand the centerman uses) in selecting who goes in. I suppose they’re all bad coaches too.

Had Schmaltz won his draw nobody would be complaining. But he didn’t so every keyboard GM out there has to have some sort of excuse to lay blame somewhere.

I questioned it as it happened, that's why my op

 

[Jakey53]

Whatever.....

Most every team in the league does what Tocchet did (uses side of ice vs which hand the centerman uses) in selecting who goes in. I suppose they’re all bad coaches too.

Had Schmaltz won his draw nobody would be complaining. But he didn’t so every keyboard GM out there has to have some sort of excuse to lay blame somewhere.

And most teams have more than one C who can win a f------ FO. If you think Schmaltz was the right player for that FO I don't know what to say. You had your best FO man on the ice and you use your worst FO man on that draw is beyond me. I guess RT had his reasons. In six games with the Yotes, Schmaltz is 22.9% in the dot, so the odds at him winning that draw is laughable.

 

[TheLegend]

And most teams have more than one C who can win a f------ FO. If you think Schmaltz was the right player for that FO I don't know what to say. You had your best FO man on the ice and you use your worst FO man on that draw is beyond me. I guess RT had his reasons. In six games with the Yotes, Schmaltz is 22.9% in the dot, so the odds at him winning that draw is laughable.

It doesn’t matter what *I* think.....

I’m not saying anything other than running to stat sheets every time to blame whomever for possibly costing the team a win and then spend days whining about it is pointless.

There are at least a dozen events during every 60 minute game which could change the outcome. Some subtle.... some no so. To focus squarely on one of them as the de facto reason is silly.

 

[Name Nameless]

It doesn’t matter what *I* think.....

I’m not saying anything other than running to stat sheets every time to blame whomever for possibly costing the team a win and then spend days whining about it is pointless.

There are at least a dozen events during every 60 minute game which could change the outcome. Some subtle.... some no so. To focus squarely on one of them as the de facto reason is silly.

Losing face-offs willingly fits your last description for me.

 

[Coyotedroppings]

It doesn’t matter what *I* think.....

I’m not saying anything other than running to stat sheets every time to blame whomever for possibly costing the team a win and then spend days whining about it is pointless.

There are at least a dozen events during every 60 minute game which could change the outcome. Some subtle.... some no so. To focus squarely on one of them as the de facto reason is silly.

It really wasn't focused on at all, until YOU started coming up with lame excuses. One of which claimed the intent of icing the "top line" when in reality that line was iced and Richardson was the extra skater for a pulled goalie. It was merely brought up as puzzling originally.

 

[TheLegend]

It really wasn't focused on at all, until YOU started coming up with lame excuses. One of which claimed the intent of icing the "top line" when in reality that line was iced and Richardson was the extra skater for a pulled goalie. It was merely brought up as puzzling.

Actually it was a counterpoint to the someone’s assertion that Schmaltz had no business taking the FO at all solely because the stats say so....

... another point was also made the with the FO suddenly moving to the opposite side from Ritchie would normally take an O-zone FO... because if you have a certain play drawn up you want to run it makes more sense to have the guy who shoots with the proper hand for it taking the draw.

... and even another point was made that had Schmaltz won that draw nobody would be bitching about that and probably would found something else to blame the loss on.

Note during this discussion I never asserted I agreed with what Tocchet decision was.... even though I was accused of such. If that’s a “lame excuse” in your world so be it.

Anything else???

 

[Coyotedroppings]

Actually it was a counterpoint to the someone’s assertion that Schmaltz had no business taking the FO at all solely because the stats say so....

... another point was also made the with the FO suddenly moving to the opposite side from Ritchie would normally take an O-zone FO... because if you have a certain play drawn up you want to run it makes more sense to have the guy who shoots with the proper hand for it taking the draw.

... and even another point was made that had Schmaltz won that draw nobody would be *****ing about that and probably would found something else to blame the loss on.

Note during this discussion I never asserted I agreed with what Tocchet decision was.... even though I was accused of such. If that’s a “lame excuse” in your world so be it.

Anything else???

No, thanks for proving my point, as those were nearly all your assertions and yours (nearly) alone.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

No, thanks for proving my point, as those were nearly all your assertions and yours (nearly) alone.

Man, shit just follows you, don't it kid?

 

[TheLegend]

No, thanks for proving my point, as those were nearly all your assertions and yours (nearly) alone.

Is this your way of saying you’re fresh out of snappy retorts???

Thanks for playing..