Quote:
	
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache  No need for name calling, you’re better than that. 
 I fully acknowledge that most goalies do play no more than 55-60.  I say it’s because of needing to have 2 goalies ready for NHL action, right?
 
 People argue that you can’t play a goalie more than that due to fatigue.  Then  point to the fact that most goalies play no more than 55-60 as evidence.  And say ‘see?’
 
 That’s not evidence of fatigue being an issue, it’s evidence that you need two goalies.
 
 For a place where people can get very pedantic and treat hyperbolic statements as factual statements to be disputed, I would think that nuance would be appreciated.
 
 If you want to call me something, how about ‘black kettle’?  :-)
 | 
	
 
I don't believe I called you a name. 
I described your position as arrogant, which I find it to be.
And I've tried to discuss nuance in this. Nowhere have I stated that a specific raw number is required - but rather I've spoken more about the YoY increase in workload. 
A singular example (Kipper) doesn't mean everyone can do it. 
As discussed earlier its about risk management. And the risk of burning BSD out to me is more important to manage.