Isn't scoring empty net goals indicative of being able to hold onto leads or...?
Game 1 | Up 1-0, 2-1, 4-2, Flames made it 4-3 but we held on, won with ENG |
Game 2 | Up 2-0, Wild came back to 2-2, we still won with ENG |
Game 3 | Weird game that would have been out of reach if it wasn't for coach's challenge, but we came back nonetheless and this one doesn't support what I'm saying (but still needed ENG to put it away) |
Game 4 | Blew a 2-0 lead with 10 mins left, won in OT |
Game 5 | 4-0 lead in the first should be a blowout, but the Capitals clawed back in and it would have been 5-4 if not for coach's challenge. We still needed the ENG to be comfortable. |
I don't want to nitpick because I know what you are trying to say but we didn't win with the ENG. The ENGs were insurance.I just meant it would be nice to win a game without needing the ENG. And we aren't blowing leads in terms of losing games, but we consistently let leads slip away.
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Game 1 Up 1-0, 2-1, 4-2, Flames made it 4-3 but we held on, won with ENG Game 2 Up 2-0, Wild came back to 2-2, we still won with ENG Game 3 Weird game that would have been out of reach if it wasn't for coach's challenge, but we came back nonetheless and this one doesn't support what I'm saying (but still needed ENG to put it away) Game 4 Blew a 2-0 lead with 10 mins left, won in OT Game 5 4-0 lead in the first should be a blowout, but the Capitals clawed back in and it would have been 5-4 if not for coach's challenge. We still needed the ENG to be comfortable.
And again, we're 5-0 so I'm hardly complaining. All I'm trying to say is that in 4/5 games, our leads have been slipping away but we managed to hold on.
Good point, however, the other point is well made. We are letting teams close the gaps late in games with Arizona being the only real nail biter in my opinion.I don't want to nitpick because I know what you are trying to say but we didn't win with the ENG. The ENGs were insurance.