Last summer you asked me how much money Bernier should be worth. In the end Leafs paid over 6M for one year of Bernier. Sure I wouldn't have taken him to arbitration, I said from the start that that was a big mistake.
You and all the other Bernier fans had sleepless nights because Reimer kicked ass. You should still eat your crow.
Babcock threw the medical staff under the bus when they brought Reimer back too early. But he's the head coach and responsible for running him down in the first place, played him much more than Lundqvist played. How can someone be so foolish, that's why I complained at that time.
Read back, after Reimer's last game before the injury I said the damage is done. But Babcock didn't let him rest even after 3 games in 4 nights twice and Reimer had to show up in practise. Where is the accountability for these moronic mistakes.
On the goalie front Babcock showed that he isn't in the winning business, running down 2 goalies in the first 2 months.
Leafs should pay me peanuts for my experience, they would save millions LOL
So you are not only going to portray unsubstantiated theories as proof flaunting an unwarranted, absurd arrogance, you are also going to start with the 'fanboy' comments as well?
I loved it when Reimer kicked ass, for your information. I gave up on Bernier when I felt it objectively reasonable to do so. I don't base my opinions and evaluations on emotions. And I don't post continuously on one topic using one argument for half a year to try and make myself sound good, either.
Here's a list of assumptions made by you:
1) That the medical staff didn't clear Reimer to Babcock.
2) That it wasn't the prudent choice, with all information, to ride the hot Reimer.
3) That his groin injury was caused by work load, which isn't a given.
4) That you weren't just lucky calling the injury.
5) That Reimer showing up for practice wasn't for on-ice rehabilitation.
6) That the alternatives for any choice made wasn't worse.
7) That you are more capable calling injuries from your TV than the Leafs medical staff.
8) That the injuries wouldn't have happened regardless of use.
9) That Reimer would have played as well if his usage had changed.
10) That Bernier wouldn't have done just as bad if his usage had changed.
11) That different actions would have resulted in a worse goaltending situation now.
And that's just assumptions. You also make logical leaps, and mistake correlation for causation. You also seem to think that you know the situations better than the professionals that are actually involved does, despite having very limited insight.
Also, I hate to break it to you, but usage and work load of your goaltenders are not what makes or breaks a management team or a coach. Very, very far from it. In fact, I'd say you are pretty alone in getting so hung up on it.