Edit Avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
  • Maximum size: 1MB
Drag image to reposition


Member Since
Mar 29, 2020
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum Threads
Forum: Armchair-GM33 minutes ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KSIxSKULLS</b></div><div>It works the same with defenders. When the forwards are rushing up the neutral zone, it's when the defenders change. Edmundson could just step on the ice and then a goal is scored and he gets a + for literally nothing. The fact his points are so low are a clear indicator of how little +/- means. Turnovers do mean bad at defense because it's the defenders job to get the puck out of the zone, not just sit there and block them (hence being a pylon). You've given me two very bad invalid points that make 0 difference at all.</div></div>

Let’s be clear, defence is without the puck, offence is with the puck. “Not just sit there and block them(hence being a pylon)” pylons are easy to move around, you call someone a pylon when they are bad and people skate around them. What you described is defence. I’m not saying he’s Nicklas lidstrom but he’s good defensively

Your argument for +/- is kinda dumb. Your telling me that he steps on the ice as we score multiple times per game? Also wouldn’t petry also have a huge +/-. Again +/- isn’t fantastic all the time, but in Edmundsons case it is as he doesn’t provide much offensively and he’s a d, meaning no crazy offence he’s providing to mess up the +/-

Your arguments are,
he’s bad at defence because he turns over the puck. NO. Defence is without the puck
We need to score more than the other team to win. We do with him on the ice, again +25

You may not like +/- and that’s fine
He’s been on the ice for 27 goals against this year. Nearly 1 every 2 games
But come up with a logical reason why he’s bad at defence. Not passing but defence
Forum: Armchair-GM48 minutes ago
Forum: Armchair-GMSat at 10:24 pm
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 28 at 11:00