SIU LAW wrote:
SIU LAW wrote:
Using your own two eyes and common sense should help you see that Mason’s play has not been the issue.
The common sense tact. If that's the best argument you have there's no point in continuing.
Why you getting so dismissive if someone tells you to beyond the stats and actually watch the game and critically think about what is going on?
It doesn’t take a learned hockey mind to evaluate Mason’s performance thus far.
Have you actually seen these games with your own two eyes? Yes or no?
Yes I have watched games. I have been to games, thank you.
I get dismissive because when one uses the common sense tact, it's shows that any conclusion I come to, would be stupid, if it differs from yours.
I have evaluated it, and I see it differently.
What does that mean to you?
I have concerns that he's going to falter, like he did in Nashville, and those concerns are being shown in the results.
Conklin, seems to be largely unaffected by this 'shoddy play' of the Blues.
The problem is you seem to be basing your opinion on stats alone...and stats rarely tell the whole story, especially with goaltending.
With goalies, their stats can be heavily influenced by the play of the team around them.
Therefore, actually analyzing his play instead of just looking at the stats, would give you a better idea of how well Mason has played. Hence the "common sense" comment.
I'm not sure how actually analyzing Mason's play, instead of focusing solely on stats, can be criticized. It's the best way to evaluate any player.
So, you say you have watched the games...if so, then would you say he is a victim of the way the team is playing around him, or is he actually playing as bad as his stats are saying right now?