Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Which is why Ortio will continue to get plenty of starts down the stretch.
Under certain conditions I would agree. But this presumes that he three healthy Flames goalies are jockeying for position in the lineup right now, which I very much doubt. I think it is more likely that the coaching staff has already outlined a playing schedule, and all three know exactly where they stand. As such, no, I don't believe Ortio, Hiller, or Backstrom are the least bit bothered when they do not start a game in which they were not scheduled to play.
Why does it matter at this point? Ortio is only 24-years-old, and will not be the Flames starter at the beginning of next season, if at all.
I can't agree, because you are wrong.
You are responding irrationally and with incredible short sight to a situation that has not yet played itself out. I and others continue to point to very good reasons why it would make sense to start Hiller in tonight's game in stead of Ortio, and yet you remain obstinately committed to this notion that somehow this is unequivocally a huge mistake. It doesn't make any sense.
|
Oh get over yourself. Me and others have pointed out many reasons why it makes more sense for Ortio to start and you've made selective quotes to counter arguments and have the audacity to believe that you're right, as if your assumptions of written starter schedules, goalies not bothered, or Ortio getting starts down the stretch is somehow more rational than other speculative points introduced.
The fact is you don't know anymore about what Hartley is planning or what goes on in the locker room, and therefore your commitment to your notions are equally flawed. The difference between us is that YOU ARE the only one too proud and irrational to accept an agreeance to disagree. You are the only one to call the other one blatantly wrong, and yet you suggest that I'm "obstinately committed". Hmmmm, sounds like hypocrisy