Quote:
Originally Posted by GranteedEV
Hey Cali, I'm the one who doesn't understand context?
|
Yes, absolutely you have difficulty with it sometimes.
You like certain players and hate certain players. Often, you intensely dislike lower-skilled physical players even when there's no good reason to dislike them, and then you try and use stats to justify your narrative.
In the case of a Brodie-Engelland pair, I can tell you without a doubt that THIS SEASON Brodie has been one of our worst defensemen at both ends of the ice. I don't expect that to continue, and he's given us reason in the past to see that he CAN be an elite defenseman, but he's playing nowhere close to that this year.
As for Engelland, there were times in the first 15 games that he seemed like our ONLY capable defenseman. He was even jumping up on the rush down the middle of the ice and taking shots that were often our only decent shots from a defenseman during the game. Is Engelland highly skilled? Hell. No. I will never argue that he should be getting a lot of ice time per game either (well, maybe ahead of Wideman). But if you couldn't see that Engelland has been very steady all year and a positive force on the ice overall, and if you didn't see Engelland immediately pick up and implement Gulutzan's system, then you weren't paying attention.
I don't know what it is, it seems hard for you to give certain players credit if you dislike them, yet will fall all over yourself to justify the poor play of other players that you like. It's annoying. You need to get over your preconceptions and let the game tell you who to appreciate. Anything else is confirmation bias.