Krams
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2012
- 8,042
- 1,982
Buchnevich was injured and didn't play past mid-way through the 2nd
Shattenkirk played behind Pietrangelo and Parayko in STL. Either one of those would be our #1. And he only played behind Parayko after he was on the market. As for DC, he was a deadline pickup. New to the system, and not to re-sign…that speaks volumes for how he was utilized.
Actually he didn't even.Shattenkirk played behind Pietrangelo and Parayko in STL.
Damn, ya'll upset like you expecting the Rangers to win this game?
Because we don't have Parayko or Pietrangelo? Who would also be #1s on just about any team in the league. Also, he's not a rental for us. Not joining us three quarters through a season.OK so you just admitted he was a 3rd pairing D on both teams.
So without playing the blame game on other professional coaches/ORG's please explain to me how exactly he's a 1st pairing D on this team?
Score one for watching the games.Buchnevich was injured and didn't play past mid-way through the 2nd
Score one for watching the games.
I mean, wouldn't have been surprised. I'd play Parayko over Shattenkirk, but that has more to do with the former than the latter. Incredibly deep team on RHD at that time.Actually he didn't even.
He and Parayko got almost identical ice time.
And he was 4th in ice time among Caps D in the 16-17 playoffs.
Literally never third pair. People just make **** up. This is why analytics exist.
Actually he didn't even.
He and Parayko got almost identical ice time.
And he was 4th in ice time among Caps D in the 16-17 playoffs.
Literally never third pair. People just make **** up. This is why analytics exist.
So...somewhere between the tail en of the 2nd pair and top of the 3rd?
This is why people need to develop numerical sense.
Also, his coach in Washington didn't seem to happy about him either.
Note: I like Shattenkirk. I still like the signings, but it's funny how the analytics re-wright a very obvious analysis that he's an elite fourth forward.
Same goes for all the other fairy tales.
AV said they took Buch out after the hit to the jaw..wonder if by they he means concussion protocol?
In seven years on this site, this is the biggest stretch I have ever read. Congrats.
…… so second pairing. Not third.You just said it.
"And he was 4th in ice time among Caps D in the 16-17 playoffs."
Ok so that's somewhere between 3-5.
You just said it.
"And he was 4th in ice time among Caps D in the 16-17 playoffs."
Ok so that's somewhere between 3-5.
So...somewhere between the tail end of the 2nd pair and top of the 3rd?
This is why people need to develop numerical sense.
Also, his coach in Washington didn't seem to happy about him either.
Note: I like Shattenkirk. I still like the signings, but it's funny how the analytics re-wright a very obvious analysis that he's an elite fourth forward.
Same goes for all the other fairy tales.
…… so second pairing. Not third.
Maybe in a fantasy league but in the NHL, THEY HAVE ALWAYS SUCKED!
…at least we can count to four? And divide by two? I mean, if thats analysis, then Im Albert Einstein.How ****ing intentionally dense are you kids?
These quotes are on the same ****ing page of a 5 page thread.
For people so into analysis, you barely want to read ****.
You just want to vent. That's all.
*Irrefutable proof is posted that Shattenkirk played second pair minutes*
"BUT THAT'S LIKE ALMOST THIRD PAIR MINUTES!!!!!!!"
…at least we can count to four? And divide by two? I mean, if thats analysis, then Im Albert Einstein.