penscup wrote:
Thibault with an F of course -- after facing 39 shots and keeping us in the game until midway through the 3rd period with a number of big saves, and yet you continue to give him no credit at all. At least give him a friggin D for the love of God! And you blame a PP goal scored on him on a 100+ mph slapshot from the top of the circle through a screen which he had no chance of stopping??? 2 goals came on amazing deflections at the last second, and the other was on a pitiful giveaway by Nasraddine directly in front of our own net, but I guess that was all Thibault's fault right? The success of a goaltender on any given night is usually strongly connected to how well his D and the whole team is playing in front of him that night, so if you think our D and the whole team played so terrible overall, why don't you seem to understand that this has something to do with how many saves a goalie can make that night???
What part of this statement differs from what you said:
MCM wrote:He actually kept them in the game with some great saves, but the two long-range shots he let in drag the grade down.
The slap shots were not screened at all. I watched them several times on the TiVO, and they were neither screened nor deflected. They are saves a decent goalie makes every time. When a goalie lets in two bad goals like that, it's hard to give him anythuing other than an F, even if he did make some other great saves when the Pens were being dominated. Goals like thatd eflate a team.
penscup wrote:Why not give Crosby an F since he failed to score on a wide open breakaway at a crucial part of the game - think that may have "deflated" the team a little bit.
Sid certainly deserved something lower than his usual A, and that was indeed a pathetic shot right into Auld's glove.
you blame a PP goal scored on him on a 100+ mph slapshot from the top of the circle through a screen which he had no chance of stopping??? 2 goals came on amazing deflections at the last second, and the other was on a pitiful giveaway by Nasraddine directly in front of our own net, but I guess that was all Thibault's fault right? The success of a goaltender on any given night is usually strongly connected to how well his D and the whole team is playing in front of him that night, so if you think our D and the whole team played so terrible overall, why don't you seem to understand that this has something to do with how many saves a goalie can make that night???[/quote]
What part of this statement differs from what you said:
MCM wrote:He actually kept them in the game with some great saves, but the two long-range shots he let in drag the grade down.
The slap shots were not screened at all. I watched them several times on the TiVO, and theyw ere neither screened nor deflected. They are saves a decent goalie makes every time. When a goalie lets in two bad goals like that, it's hard to give him anythuing other than an F, even if he did make some other great saves when the Pens were being dominated. Goals like that deflate a team.
penscup wrote:Our offense with an F -- even though they scored 2 goals -- brilliant deduction once again!
One was a goal in garbage time.
penscup wrote:Officiating with an F -- of course of course its all the refs fault. No game recap of a Pens loss would be complete without whining and crying about the officiating. But I'm confused, if you give the team an F and the refs an F, who's really at fault for the loss???
Again, find anywhere in my post where I blamed the refs for the loss. All I said is they were horrible, which they were. But in no way do I blame them for the loss. Their ineptitude cut both ways equally.
penscup wrote:If this team was giving so little effort throughout the whole game why was it such a close game until midway through the 3rd period?
Because Florida stinks? Even the players said they didn't work hard enough, but if I say it, I'm crucified

