and so the Chicago Blackhawks are the BEST team in Hockey

[Phightins]

Whatever. I'm done here.

[Universe]

When discussing hockey with your friends do you steal my points to look smarter?

 

Edited June 11, 2010 by Universe

[Phightins]

When discussing hockey with your friends do you steal my points to look smarter?

 

 

No, because I realize that constantly changing my points and sounding like an overall condescending douchebag is not the best way to win an argument. But, in this instance, if it gives you the satisfaction of thinking that you won a debate, then I am happy for you. I have things to do though, have spent enough time for one morning fighting a pointless battle. No matter what I say, you will find a way to spin it and say "bow down to me, my wealth of hockey knowledge should be worshiped".

[Universe]

No, because I realize that constantly changing my points and sounding like an overall condescending douchebag is not the best way to win an argument. But, in this instance, if it gives you the satisfaction of thinking that you won a debate, then I am happy for you. I have things to do though, have spent enough time for one morning fighting a pointless battle. No matter what I say, you will find a way to spin it and say "bow down to me, my wealth of hockey knowledge should be worshiped".

It's not spinning it when it's right? And why do you consider it fighting when we are in a discussion? I seem to have hurt your feelings and if you'd like I post something in the baseball forum so you can get me.

[NomarFachix]

It's funny to watch Universe change the point he's making every time another retort is made.

 

U: Pizza is blue.

P: No way, never seen a blue one.

U: Yeah, well it's square.

P: Not all the time, can be round.

U: So.. Well pizza has moose tenders on it.

P: lol, maybe in Canada, not in the US.

U: PIZZA HAS CHEESE, BOW DOWN TO MY WEALTH OF PIZZA KNOWLEDGE!

[fly3rs18]

^^^hahahaha. very true

 

Yes and you guys said Osgood is the same as him, the product of good defense but look, his numbers are better which I've been saying all along!

 

I assume you'll try and post something else about how he's better but the facts are all there. Yes Ogood has good defense but he gets it done as well while Mike clearly even with one of the leagues best defensive teams like Flyers18 said, still allowed over 3 GAA.

 

You can try and "roast" me with this but I'm done with this topic as it won't go anywhere. We will never know unless they make the trade.

 

 

 

 

so if leighton isnt clutch at all then how do you explain the entire playoffs up to the finals, where leighton had to be incredibly clutch to come back against boston, and then completely shut down the montreal offense? leighton didnt have a good finals, and that is mostly because the flyers D didnt have a good finals either

Edited June 11, 2010 by fly3rs18

[Universe]

[Universe]

Let me slow this down for you:

 

Osgood and Mike are both great examples of team defense making him look better, yes?

 

Team defense never means zero shots on net, yes?

 

Stopping a puck when it comes your way makes you a good goaltender, yes?

 

In the finals, Osgood posted a 1.87 GAA, yes?

 

This year Leighton posted a 3.33 GAA, yes?

 

In order to make a good goalie you have to give your team the best shot at winning, yes?

 

Osgood gives his team the better shot at winning, yes?

 

The end. [expletive]ing idiots.

[Universe]

^^^hahahaha. very true

 

 

 

 

 

so if leighton isnt clutch at all then how do you explain the entire playoffs up to the finals, where leighton had to be incredibly clutch to come back against boston, and then completely shut down the montreal offense? leighton didnt have a good finals, and that is mostly because the flyers D didnt have a good finals either

Montreals offense is ranked 25 out of 30 for the regular season. Wanna know who was 30th? Boston. Heck, the Devils were ranked 19th but when he faces the third best offense in the league, what happens? They lose.

 

[Phightins]

Let me slow this down for you:

 

Osgood and Mike are both great examples of team defense making him look better, yes?

 

Team defense never means zero shots on net, yes?

 

Stopping a puck when it comes your way makes you a good goaltender, yes?

 

In the finals, Osgood posted a 1.87 GAA, yes?

 

This year Leighton posted a 3.33 GAA, yes?

 

In order to make a good goalie you have to give your team the best shot at winning, yes?

 

Osgood gives his team the better shot at winning, yes?

 

The end. [expletive]ing idiots.

 

There is one pretty big difference. Lidstrom, Rafalski, Kronwall etc. didn't hit a wall like Pronger, Timonen, and Carle did in the Finals. All of the minutes took a toll on the Flyers guys, not the Red Wings guys. If Osgood's defensemen weren't getting to most loose pucks and clearing most rebounds, I'd be willing to bet that GAA would be right on par with Leighton's.

 

You really are not as smart as you think you are.

[Universe]

You really are not as smart as you think you are.

Sad part is I know I'm not. You are just clueless when it comes to this.

 

[Phightins]

I knew you wouldn't address the actual point I made.

[Universe]

I knew you wouldn't address the actual point I made.

I've addressed it many times in this thread. Players are never perfect and that's why there are goalies. Watching last years finals Lindstrom and the Red Wings did hit a wall and you could tell it was from playing back to back 120 plus games but Osgood kept him in it. Simple?

 

You aren't going to address my point of NJ, Montreal and Boston being some of the lowest scoring teams in the league and suddenly Chicago finds a way to score? Truth is Flyers would have been eaten up by Pittsburg or the Caps but instead played against low scoring teams and out weaponed them. Yes Mike played great in some games but the fact is he's a waiver goalie while Osgood isn't.

[Phightins]

Also, truthfully, I would take just about any NHL goaltender over Chris Osgood at this point. This is a side point, because obviously this discussion is about Chris Osgood from 1 and 2 years ago, but Chris Osgood today is as bad of an NHL goaltender as there is. Very nice career, but time to hang it up.

[Universe]

Also, truthfully, I would take just about any NHL goaltender over Chris Osgood at this point. This is a side point, because obviously this discussion is about Chris Osgood from 1 and 2 years ago, but Chris Osgood today is as bad of an NHL goaltender as there is. Very nice career, but time to hang it up.

I'm talking about todays Chris Osgood and I even put why he faultered but you passed over that too I assume.

[Phightins]

I was not talking to you directly there, jerkoff. That was a separate observation.

 

But really, did you see Chris Osgood play at all this year? He was horrific.

Edited June 11, 2010 by Phightins

[fly3rs18]

You aren't going to address my point of NJ, Montreal and Boston being some of the lowest scoring teams in the league and suddenly Chicago finds a way to score? Truth is Flyers would have been eaten up by Pittsburg or the Caps but instead played against low scoring teams and out weaponed them. Yes Mike played great in some games but the fact is he's a waiver goalie while Osgood isn't.

 

you make it seem like those low scoring teams are horrible teams. there is a reason why those low scoring teams like boston and montreal beat those high scoring teams like the caps. chicago beat us, because yes they are a great scoring team, but they also have one of the top defensive units in the league. and thier defense was just as much, if not more of a reason of why they won the stanley cup

[Universe]

Here are the list of teams Mike won against this year and there rank offensively:

 

Blackhawks 3

Islander 20

Maple Leafs 26

Lightning 23

Canadiens 25

Canadiens 25

Devils 19

Devils 19

Stars 12

Lightning 23

Penguins 5

Maple Leafs 26

Rangers 16

Islanders 20

Hurricanes 13

Lightning 23

 

TWO teams in the top ten. I just don't get why you still are posting when you clearly know nothing?

[fly3rs18]

thanks for the useless stats. good to see you have nothing better to do

Edited June 11, 2010 by fly3rs18

[Universe]

thanks for the useless stats. good to see you have nothing better to do

Your reading it? Maybe learn something while you have nothing better to do. It would make a WORLD of difference in these discussions.

[fly3rs18]

Your reading it? Maybe learn something while you have nothing better to do. It would make a WORLD of difference in these discussions.

 

learn something? what school and what are you majoring in again? oh yeah, a completely bull[expletive] major. lemme know when you learn something

[Phightins]

Here are the list of teams Mike won against this year and there rank offensively:

 

Blackhawks 3

Islander 20

Maple Leafs 26

Lightning 23

Canadiens 25

Canadiens 25

Devils 19

Devils 19

Stars 12

Lightning 23

Penguins 5

Maple Leafs 26

Rangers 16

Islanders 20

Hurricanes 13

Lightning 23

 

TWO teams in the top ten. I just don't get why you still are posting when you clearly know nothing?

 

Very relevant. As a Flyer, he only faced 3 top 10 offensive teams (and he beat all of them).

Edited June 11, 2010 by Phightins

[Universe]

learn something? what school and what are you majoring in again? oh yeah, a completely bull[expletive] major. lemme know when you learn something

I just posted stats backing up my claim and you said "thanks for the useless stats".

 

Someone is a baaaaaaaaad loser!

[fly3rs18]

I just posted stats backing up my claim and you said "thanks for the useless stats".

 

Someone is a baaaaaaaaad loser!

 

nice changing of the topic there. i was talking about your bull[expletive] major and you are failing at life

[Universe]

Very relevant. As a Flyer, he only faced 3 top 10 offensive teams (and he beat all of them).

What? Those were his wins this year?