Samsquanch
Raging Bull Squatch
My point is, that in a thread talking a lot about his point totals, there was no mention that he's been a bit on the lucky side. That should be mentioned. No more and no less. Unless you're arguing he's directly responsible and can maintain the 15% on ice shooting percentage and 66% 2nd assist rate, i'm not sure why you're getting so disgruntled.
Me noting the fact that he's getting a lot of secondary assists isn't even negative, it just is. It's a fact. A fact that that historically has shown to be unsustainable, but the flip side of that is if his primary point percentage was in the normal range he'd still have 8-11 points and on pace for 50+ points. Heaven forbid i disparage him by pointing out he's probably 50+ point D long term and not a 80 point D.
This is the most of thought about Chabot in my life, and it seems like enough for now.
I'll just say, in the future, maybe don't come to the main board with threads if you can't handle people critically thinking about them, instead of just blowing rainbows up their bums.
I didnt see you make that point until just now.. Your entire 1 sentence first post was a bit vague...
And now that you've made a real point, you wont get anyone disagreeing with you on that either.. So heaven forbid I take exception to the point that puck luck is the only reason he has a thread on the main boards, and not his exceptional play.
I'll accept critisim of him when its valid. But people for many years also tried (and failed) to discredit Karlsson on the basis of him racking up lots of secondary assists, and its always been a completely dumb argument that I will never give the time of day to.
He is a dman. Most hockey fans will understand that Dmen are going to get more more secondary assists due to the nature of the position. If he was a forward this argument could have some merit, but even then, probably not much...
Last edited: