Shady Machine
Registered User
- Aug 6, 2010
- 36,704
- 8,141
while I do agree that if you put up 0 goals you can't put all that much blame on the goalie. I will just throw this out there. When a team doesn't believe in it's goalie they either don't try, or they over try (see the early part of the season). I have no idea if that is what happened last night. But I'm just saying how you can put some blame on the goalie because the team plays differently in front of him.
That said let's get real here, we put 2 pucks through the opposing goalies wickets, out the other side but not in the net. He was good but he some good puck luck as well. We put one of those in and Murray makes a routine glove save and we are at least going to OT, and more likely we get some wind in our sails and just win it in the 3rd.
It is a bit deflating though from a fan's perspective. On the other hand you see Vegas-Tampa last night, Vegas goes down by 2 and they just keep coming and end up winning in a shoot out. I remember when we would do that, good times...
Yeah I feel like there is some intellectual dishonesty here. I specifically recall, and I know because I argued this as well, when Fleury was letting in shitty first period goals many people arguing how deflating it is for a team and blaming Fleury (rightly IMO). Now Murray does similar and it's "you can't blame the goalie when the team doesn't score".
This isn't me saying Murray is playing as bad as WTF Fleury (and admittedly I didn't watch the game last night), but giving Murray a pass when he has a mediocre to poor game just because the team doesn't score seems inconsistent at best.