Sojourn
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2006
- 50,523
- 9,377
So basically what your excuse is referring to is Powerplay time. So we have age, we have Powerplay Time. Anymore excuses on why Penner should be compared to Ritchie? Because Ritchie doesn’t even deserve Powerplay time because he has no shot, nor can he pass like our PP unit.
Carlyle coached Penner and he’s also coaching Ritchie. If the coaching staff saw any Penner esk in ritchie he would be on the PP unit. But he’s not. So those are facts. Y’all are speaking hyperboles and spewing nonsense when facts are being laid out in front of you.
What do you think Penner did on the PP? He stood in front of the net. That was it. Penner had a good shot, but he didn’t have a quick release. It took him half a period to get it off. He wasn’t out there for his playmaking ability, or his shot. He was out there to be a big body in front of the net, front the goalie and the defense, and go into the corners to try to body up and help win the puck. He was a 2nd PP unit player, who got a buttload of PP time because there was so much available.
No, I’m talking facts. You just don’t want to hear them. Like age. A two year difference at this stage is quite large. You just don’t want to hear it, because then you run the risk of looking foolish if Ritchie takes these next two years and improves. You talked about how you were laying out facts, but when people bring up other facts it’s just nonsense? Make up your mind, man.
I gave you evidence that the difference between Ritchie and Penner is smaller than you’re suggesting. The evidence came from facts. Do you understand that in 2006-2007 the Ducks had 5 players who averaged 4 or more minutes per game on the PP? Penner was not one of those players. Getzlaf was not one of those players. Perry was not one of those players. And yet, despite those players averaging 4+ minutes, guys like Perry, Penner, and Getzlaf still averaged 3 minutes of PP time per game. That’s how much PP time was available then.
Penner wasn’t getting big PP minutes because he was “that” much better on the PP. He was getting big PP minutes because there were a shit load of PP’s every game and Anaheim’s top unit was already spending 4-6 minutes per game out there. Contrast that with this season, where Getzlaf lead the team with just under 3 minutes of PP time per game. That was the difference between 2006-2007 and now. The difference is massive. A player like Niedermayer or Pronger would be out there on the PP more than both of Anaheim’s current units combined, and that still allowed a player like Beauchemin to average more minutes on the PP than even Getzlaf played this last season. I bring up Beauchemin to show that, even though Pronger and Niedermayer were out there more than anyone else, there was still plenty of time for a player like Beauchemin to average 3 minutes of PP time per game. 3 minutes.
These are facts. It isn’t hyperbole, because there is no exaggeration. Those numbers are accurate. Penner’s advantage comes primarily on the PP, and there aren’t enough PP’s for that to happen in the current NHL. The actual even strength difference between the two of them was marginal. Again, fact. The evidence is there. I’ve shown it to you.
The issue here isn’t that you’re talking facts, and no one else is. The issue is you’re plugging your fingers in your ears and trying to shout down any facts that dispute your whole “Penner is so much better” argument. You’re so focused on trying to prove that this is the case, that when there is actual evidence in front of you that proves it isn’t, you’re not willing to acknowledge it.
Last edited: