at this point, I think I’m going crazy.
I’m far from a McAvoy fanboy, but I think he’s looked fine pretty much throughout these playoffs so far. Even the games where he wasn’t great, it was more “trying to do too much” than it was “stupid” errors.
Im just not seeing this alarming shitty play from McAvoy so many tell us about after every game. I’m so confused.
Meanwhile, I’ve read numerous posts from leads fans lamenting how much better than they’d be if they only had McAvoy over Reilly.
Again, I just don’t get it.
Did you see it last night?
I say that mostly in jest, because as I've said elsewhere I give the players mostly a free pass for that game on account of fatigue, and that has to include McAvoy. But at the same time, some of the sloppy play that's been evident from him for a little while was very much on display here.
As someone who's offered some mild criticism of Charlie of late, I think in the first instance you can immediately discount the extreme - on the whole I don't think he's been bad even though he's made some
bad plays. I'd say he's been mostly good alongside stretches of great mixed with some pretty poor patches and very occasional errors that a player of his calibre shouldn't be making. And people have really started to notice those, which draws more attention and more collective heat whenever another even half a gaffe happens. It's a vicious and admittedly unfair circle.
Beyond that, it's a question of what do you expect out of the guy? A solid, pretty consistent 1D who can play lots of minutes and in multiple roles? Tick. Shouldn't be much reasonable argument about that. But if you think he could or should be capable of more, especially in the playoffs when it matters most, in terms of being outright elite either through being a dominant shutdown defender, transitional playmaker, or offensive whiz, or some combination of them, all topped by a razor sharp hockey IQ and clear thinking under pressure at all times, it's not happening. If there's an extra gear he hasn't found it yet.
Is that asking too much? Answer that and you'll have your perspective on whether the criticism is valid, overblown or completely out to lunch.