Announcement

**Asher** · January 11, 2007, 22:25

Flames now lead the league with 11 shorties.

**Tingkai** · January 11, 2007, 22:30

Asher, if you're going to ignore what I write than you might as well argue with yourself.

I have repeated said that a lot of injures will reduce a team's ability to fill the gap created by the injuries.

I have never said that a team with lots of injuries will always lose, but rather that it will be more difficult to win. For some strange reason, you claim injuries don't matter.

**Asher** · January 11, 2007, 22:39

Originally posted by Tingkai
Asher, if you're going to ignore what I write than you might as well argue with yourself.

I have repeated said that a lot of injures will reduce a team's ability to fill the gap created by the injuries.

NO ****

No one is arguing with you on common sense, stop acting like that's what this was about.

You were arguing with my comment about good teams still pulling off wins if they're plagued with injuries, due to depth.

/me shrugs.

For some strange reason, you claim injuries don't matter.

I've said that injuries should not be used as an excuse if your team is good. As I said, of course they matter for teams without depth, like Toronto. For teams like Calgary, it doesn't really affect the team's winning frequency.

Comprende?

**Asher** · January 11, 2007, 22:42

See, Tingkai?

Frickin' Mark Giordano just picked up his 2nd point of the game. Amonte scored, too.

Depth, buddy, depth.

**Flubber** · January 11, 2007, 23:53

A`few points on the Calgary win

1. Overall they looked awesome. Its great since they usually suck on the road. Its only one game so no parades LOL but it is a step in the right direction

2. Kipper was good-- none of the goals were his fault.

3. The Flames special teams were just wild. Five goals were score in 6 AV powerplays-- 3 for the Avs and 2 for the Flames . While the shorthanded markers were good -- I would much rather see a more generally efficient PK. The Flames PP was non-existent.

4. My prediction was right-- Lundemark sat with the return of Niilson who looked good. I suspect we may see Godard go down once Iginla/Kobasew gets back. I'd probably keep him around in preference to McCarty though

5. I like Boyd and Moss. Perhaps they go down again but why? They are performing nicely with Yelle

**Tingkai** · January 12, 2007, 00:05

Not bad, given the circumstances, but Toronto has the firepower and depth to win a 10-2 game and beat the top team in the east despite the injuries.

Originally posted by Asher

NO ****

No one is arguing with you on common sense, stop acting like that's what this was about.

Dude, from the very beginning, you have argued that having six/seven players injured doesn't matter.

Now you're admitting that I'm right and you're wrong.

Fantastic. Does that mean you'll stop arguing?

**Asher** · January 12, 2007, 00:08

Originally posted by Tingkai
Not bad, given the circumstances, but Toronto has the firepower and depth to win a 10-2 game and beat the top team in the east despite the injuries.

And then promptly did what?

The 10-2 game wasn't about you, it was about your exceptionally terrible opponents that night.

The leafs are wildly inconsistent, as usual. They've got no heart.

Dude, from the very beginning, you have argued that having six/seven players injured doesn't matter.

Now you're admitting that I'm right and you're wrong.

Fantastic. Does that mean you'll stop arguing?

Hopeless...

I said it should be no excuse if you lose because you've got some injuries. That's not the same thing as saying it "doesn't matter if players are injured", because such a statement implies it makes no difference. It does, but good teams can bootstrap themselves to a win despite of that.

**Flubber** · January 12, 2007, 00:11

Phoenix gets rolled. Oh but Asher I understand that Tellqvist was very good for a while but the Wings just kept coming and coming and coming. After 7 in a row, the Coyotes were due to lapse. The key will be how they rebound against the Sharks, a team against whom they have had great success

They might need a win since it looks like Minnesota may beat Vancouver tonight so Phoenix will lose ground in any playoff hunt. AS I have said repeatedly, I don't like the prospects of a team that has to pass 3 teams to get to a playoff spot. If say a Minny can beat their road woes, they could go on a decent win streak. Ditto the Flames.

**Asher** · January 12, 2007, 00:13

Originally posted by Flubber
Phoenix gets rolled. Oh but Asher I understand that Tellqvist was very good for a while but the Wings just kept coming and coming and coming. After 7 in a row, the Coyotes were due to lapse. The key will be how they rebound against the Sharks, a team against whom they have had great success

Yeah, check out the shots. During the second Tellqvist was 1-26, then they kept going at it...I think they ended with 43 shots on goal. He played well, again...

**Flubber** · January 12, 2007, 00:13

A great night for the eastern Canadian teams!! Two of them solidify their holds on playoff spots while the Leafs move a step closer to getting into one.

I will say that it all remains interesting

**Tingkai** · January 12, 2007, 00:18

Asher, the only person here making excuses is you.

My first comment was that the Leafs injuries would make it difficult for them to win and I would be happy if they can stay in playoff contention.

You disagreed and started arguing about something you now say is common sense.

Fine, you've come to your senses and recognized that I was right.

End of discussion.

**Flubber** · January 12, 2007, 00:21

Originally posted by Tingkai
Flubber: it depends on who is injured, losing a star player is worse than losing a couple of role players.

Me: no kidding

Glad to see you agree . You and Asher were BOTH harping on whether it was 5 or 6 or 7 so much, I thought that one of you thought it might . . . I dunno MATTER.

I knew it was obvious but you two kept duking it out about the quantity so much, I felt it only appropriate to mention the quality of the injured player(s)

The Flames are now 4-0 in their latest string with 4-6 players injuredincluding 3.5 games without their best player

**Asher** · January 12, 2007, 00:22

Originally posted by Tingkai
Asher, the only person here making excuses is you.

My first comment was that the Leafs injuries would make it difficult for them to win and I would be happy if they can stay in playoff contention.

You disagreed and started arguing about something you now say is common sense.

Fine, you've come to your senses and recognized that I was right.

End of discussion.

You were wrong, because the Leafs find it difficult to win without injuries as well. Recall, their record is better without Sundin than with...

**Tingkai** · January 12, 2007, 00:24

Or it shows that Iginla isn't that important.

**Flubber** · January 12, 2007, 00:26

Originally posted by Tingkai

My first comment was that the Leafs injuries would make it difficult for them to win and I would be happy if they can stay in playoff contention.

Asher should agree with that comment given that he says Toronto lacks depth

.

And in fairness, most of Calgary feared how the Flames would fare during Iginla's absence. Thus far they have done well but that doesn't change the fact that most people feared a drop in team performance

This injury to Iggy may actually have an overall beneficial effect on the Flames. Lots of players are seeing more ice and stepping up. Adding Iggy to a high-performing squad is way better than having a group that thinks/fears that they can only perform well with Iggy

Announcement

Fantasy Hockey - Coming up on the Halfway Point

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment