Post-Game Talk: ROUND TWO | GAME FIVE | Rangers vs. Senators |

[2CHAINZ]

Here's another suggestion: watch and cheer for the Sens without posting on this forum. It's so much better.

I prefer to watch the Senators play and not get upset when the opposing team doesn't feel how I feel when they win.

 

[DrEasy]

Look, my problem is with defeatist pessimists (or the "Eternal Eeyore" personality, so to speak) in all walks of life, not just hockey fandom.

And let's not assume here that my reaction towards it is fine - it's my cross to bear, and I need to deal with it. My personal solution is that I just can't be around it. That's how I cope.

I'm not telling anyone how they need to act in life or as fans, I'm a big proponent of the "you do you" mentality and people can live or cheer however they want, but I'll be damned if I'm going to sit around and partake in that pity party.

But you are, when you call the GDT pathetic before you leave it.

I like to be exposed to all sorts of point of views, positive or negative, because they help me form an opinion. Doesn't mean I weigh every opinion equally, of course. But I don't crap on the people who don't share mine. Either I discuss with them if they're reasonable (it's the point of a forum after all) and civil, or I ignore them if they're not.

When you come to participate in a forum you should expect to read opinions or attitudes you don't agree with. If all you want is reinforcement of your own opinion you are going to be disappointed.

 

[utah]

I'm much calmer when I'm watching games with friends and drinking beer....

but, when I watch by myself.....I'm very high strung. Lots of yelling at the TV, and a steady parade of profanity.

I know I'm nuts, but I think I got it from my old man who was just the same when I was a kid!

 

[Baby Ryan]

More like a cold wet blanket...

Which would be fine if such folk would keep it to themselves. Unfortunately Sens pessimists seem to be more like the vegan stereotype; have to cram it down everyone's throat at every opportunity.

The reality is that optimism is a way to look at all things. The highs are better, and lows are never that bad as there is always a bright side.

Not necessarily. Like Pete said somewhere along this thread, everything needs to be balanced.

Everything in moderation. It pretty much is never good to go to the extreme on one end.

Too optimistic and you may be avoiding criticism or be suspect to bias. You may miss minor, but vital errors and details that could be catastrophic. You may be suspect to one form of opinion as a result. Or that one form of opinion results in a sequence of errors that a bit of a pessimistic outlook for just a bit may have helped you realize.

Similar things can be said of pessimism as well.

I just finished certification in Fire Alarm industry, and I can tell you that there is a degree of pessimism required to assess and predict the worst outcomes. There is also a degree of optimism required to have confidence in the code and standards and follow procedures accordingly among many other things.

With that being said, I get emotional sometimes as well especially when I see discrediting. It is my most disliked aspect of life is when someone discredits the work of another. I've been over the edge sometimes on the mainboards.

 

[BonkTastic]

But you are, when you call the GDT pathetic before you leave it.

I like to be exposed to all sorts of point of views, positive or negative, because they help me form an opinion. Doesn't mean I weigh every opinion equally, of course. But I don't crap on the people who don't share mine. Either I discuss with them if they're reasonable (it's the point of a forum after all) and civil, or I ignore them if they're not.

When you come to participate in a forum you should expect to read opinions or attitudes you don't agree with. If all you want is reinforcement of your own opinion you are going to be disappointed.

Oh, I expect to read opinions and attitudes that I don't agree with. And I will call people out on their crap, and I'm sure I'm on enough ignore lists to prove it, lol. Always have, always will. That won't ever stop until I'm six feet under the earth. I do it in real life when I see people's bullcrappery, there's no way I'm going to abstain from doing it here. If your opinion can't hold up to scrutiny, it is a bad opinion - if you're not willing to defend your point of view, then don't offer it. That's how I was raised, and that's how I see it. I'll respect the fact that a person has an opinion, but that in no way means I have to respect that opinion itself.

The eternal pessimist, I choose not to be around that type of personality. That's my choice. It's why I haven't really participated in GDTs for the past year and a half, why I stepped down as a mod, and why I'm increasingly less enthused to participate in discussions here at all. I love discussing hockey, and I love hearing opposing opinions, but I know the extreme pessimism will tilt me, so I usually know better than to set myself up like that. Yesterday's game was the aberration. I know what my faults are, and I try to manage them as well as I can. If that means I have to eventually remove myself entirely, I'm totally fine with that.

 

[SanderSen]

Not necessarily. Like Pete said somewhere along this thread, everything needs to be balanced.

Everything in moderation. It pretty much is never good to go to the extreme on my one end.

Too optimistic and you may be avoiding criticism or be suspect to bias. You may miss minor, but vital errors and details that could be catastrophic. You may be suspect to one form of opinion as a result. Or that one form of opinion results in a sequence of errors that a bit of a pessimistic outlook for just a bit may have helped you realize.

Yup, all rah, rah with no analysis does not make a discussion forum. GDTs tend to get a wee panicky!

 

[Baby Ryan]

Yup, all rah, rah with no analysis does not make a discussion forum. GDTs tend to get a wee panicky!

As much as it is annoying sometimes, I do like being a part of it. It's fun especially when no one close to you is really a hockey fan. It's better than watching by myself.

 

[DrEasy]

As much as it is annoying sometimes, I do like being a part of it. It's fun especially when no one close to you is really a hockey fan. It's better than watching by myself.

I agree. Watching with a bunch of die hard fans, and emotions running high. Hating on the opponent, yelling at the coach's decisions, cheering when we score, being down when we're behind, etc. That's fun.

 

[SilverSeven]

It was very strange indeed.

He got the W and made some huge saves at key times while allowing a not so great goal against.

But for our usual suspects unless a player plays a mistake-free game he is mediocre and needs to be replaced.

I am the BIGGEST goalie apologist on this board (literally thousands of posts defending Gerber and Leclaire on here) and a HUGE Andy fan (easily our best goalie ever). I also don't think we should start Condon.

But Anderson has been BAD this series. Not "oh he made a few mistakes", he has been bad. The odd big save doesn't change that. He is losing his net constantly, over committing, and putting up horrible numbers.

To make matters worse, the Rangers arent actually getting very many high percentage shots off. Even in the two games in NY we matched them in high percentage shot attempts.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

I would say Anderson has been more inconsistent than bad. One moment, he's making Hasek like saves, the next he's so far out of position that he might as well be up in the stand buying a hot dog and lets in a terrible goal.

This is a guy who is a big game performer. I don't think his head is in it. I'm not blaming him, we all know the situation.

I'm willing to say that I would start Condon for game 6. The team has shown all year they can win with Condon in net, and the Craig Anderson we've been seeing has not been the Craig Anderson we're used to getting in the playoffs. 3 straight bad games by Anderson is enough where I'd be willing to take that risk. If we were down 3-2, I wouldn't have the balls to do it because if you're the head coach it sets you up to take the fall if the team loses the series based on you choosing to put the number 2 goalie in. But within the context of the situation, and with us having a margin for error, I think starting Condon for game 6 gives the Sens the best chance to win.

 

[The Lewler]

I get the debate you guys are having, but do you really Boucher is going to go to the backup goalie when they just went up 3-2 in the 2nd round of the playoffs?

It's never going to happen. Unless Anderson pulls himself.

 

[SilverSeven]

I would say Anderson has been more inconsistent than bad. One moment, he's making Hasek like saves, the next he's so far out of position that he might as well be up in the stand buying a hot dog and lets in a terrible goal.

This is a guy who is a big game performer. I don't think his head is in it. I'm not blaming him, we all know the situation.

I'm willing to say that I would start Condon for game 6. The team has shown all year they can win with Condon in net, and the Craig Anderson we've been seeing has not been the Craig Anderson we're used to getting in the playoffs. 3 straight bad games by Anderson is enough where I'd be willing to take that risk. If we were down 3-2, I wouldn't have the balls to do it because if you're the head coach it sets you up to take the fall if the team loses the series based on you choosing to put the number 2 goalie in. But within the context of the situation, and with us having a margin for error, I think starting Condon for game 6 gives the Sens the best chance to win.

He has been consistently allowing 4+ goals and posting well below .900svp

But you dont start Condon.

 

[BUCKLE UP]

Tommy P. What a beauty

 

[Super Cake]

If Boucher was going to put in Condon, then game 5 would have been the game to do it.

With game 6 being a elimination game, there is just no way Boucher doesn't put in Anderson.

 

[Langdon Alger]

It's possible Anderson could be in a short leash, but he's starting. No question about it.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

If Boucher was going to put in Condon, then game 5 would have been the game to do it.

With game 6 being a elimination game, there is just no way Boucher doesn't put in Anderson.

I think he pulled Anderson in game 4 in order to try and light a fire under him and create a bounce back effect similar to the one we saw in the first round when Anderson came back and stole a game after the whole fiasco with him being upset about the media. I'm not gonna pretend to have any idea what Boucher is gonna do but it clearly didn't work, which is why I think we might now see Condon despite not seeing him start game 5.

 

[Super Cake]

I think he pulled Anderson in game 4 in order to try and light a fire under him and create a bounce back effect similar to the one we saw in the first round when Anderson came back and stole a game after the whole fiasco with him being upset about the media. I'm not gonna pretend to have any idea what Boucher is gonna do but it clearly didn't work, which is why I think we might now see Condon despite not seeing him start game 5.

Maybe the media should criticize him again so that he can play great in game 6.

 

[Novak Djokovic]

I don't know how some of you guys can do that.

I take a break from HF when the Sens are playing, haha. It's just much better that way. Try it.

 

[Blotto71]

It's possible Anderson could be in a short leash, but he's starting. No question about it.

I feel that is the most likely scenario.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

I take a break from HF when the Sens are playing, haha. It's just much better that way. Try it.

I do during the Playoffs. Its way too intense to go back and forth.

 

[Tundraman]

I get the debate you guys are having, but do you really Boucher is going to go to the backup goalie when they just went up 3-2 in the 2nd round of the playoffs?

It's never going to happen. Unless Anderson pulls himself.

You are 100% right.

Imagine if Boucher goes with Condon and they lose. The reaction would be even worse. I don't even believe that if Andy lets in 2 bad goals early in game 6 that Boucher would pull him even though he'd be tempted. However 3 quick easy ones with lots of time left and Boucher would probably do it and then game 7 could become a question mark if they lost and Condon played lights out.

Even though I'm not totally happy with Andy's propensity to give up soft goals if it was my choice I'd play Andy. The Sens seem quite able to score against the NYR when they need to. Andy might surprise us and play his strongest game of the season in NY but it's also up to the team in front of him to want to close it out and play aggressively with a strong fore check putting the pressure on their D, forcing them to play desperation hockey and open up. They can't keep backing up deep in their zone and allowing point blank shots and close in plays like they have done. The Sens sat back and were much too passive in the 2 NY games.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Switzerland sucks if you're not from Switzerland. Especially if you are like my wife and I -without EU passports- and get lost in the bottomless pit of black holes that is the Swiss Bureaucracy that deals with residency permits for non-Swiss. Also: it's the most expensive place I have ever lived in or been to, by a huge margin.

We can't wait to GTFO of here. As soon as we can find suitable jobs elsewhere, we're getting the **** out of Dodge.

That's really a shame. Switzerland is so damned gorgeous. I'm envious whenever I see the travel photos of friends who have gone there.

Of course, looks are deceiving. It's one thing to visit or have a pretty photograph, and another to live in it.

....still such a gorgeous country.

 

[L'Aveuglette]

That's really a shame. Switzerland is so damned gorgeous. I'm envious whenever I see the travel photos of friends who have gone there.

Of course, looks are deceiving. It's one thing to visit or have a pretty photograph, and another to live in it.

....still such a gorgeous country.

Looks like they are all too well aware of their country's beauty, and want to keep the riff-raff away.