|
Post by bookboy007 on Mar 4, 2024 17:22:52 GMT
So I'm going to ignore you.
I am firmly in the camp that things pretty-boy goalscorers are a luxury and not a foundational piece. Yes, you need someone to score. No, you don't need someone to score 100 points and 60 goals, and once you have to pay market rate for that player, in a Cap league, of course you don't have other players who score anywhere near that pace. And of course, once you hold him less accountable for the consequences of bad risks, and let him keep taking high risks because it leads to more rewards, of course he's going to have better offensive numbers than the guys who get stapled to the bench if they tried some of the BS he does. I do not see his elevated level of scoring compared to the rest of the team as some kind of justification for him to play however he wants. I think it's a vicious circle of him being great at scoring, so being more successful than the average player at converting on high risk plays, to getting permission to try more high risk plays no matter what the cost, to scoring more, to getting permission to play outside the defensive structure to create more chances to scoring more.... It's a model that concentrates scoring in one player even more than talent alone would, and when that player has been muted in the playoffs by physical teams, or by minor injuries that keep him from being as effective? Well, now your roster just looks poorly constructed. So I am not keen on giving any player a pass just for being talented.
That said, this whole conversation can be boiled down to the question of whether or not the Bruins are a better team allowing Pastrnak to be a flaneur out there or not, and you can probably boil THAT down to goals for when he's on the ice, and goals against. You want some kind of stat that gives you a sense goals he contributed to by getting points plus the goals that are scored because he's a top notch decoy and just his presence causes the D to play other players more loosely. Until someone comes up with another stat that shows both this and all the goals against from him making high risk plays that blow up or just playing lazy D? Plus/Minus.
But frankly, I don't think plus/minus is going to tell you much for reasons unrelated to whether or not you think it has validity. Going back to 2018-19, Pastrnak is tied with Panarin in points/game by a winger. Only the two Oilers and MacKinnon have more points in that time, and only Kucherov has a better points/game as a winger. Pastrnak is 7th in ES Points, behind Matthews and Marner but still ahead of Kucherov only because of games played. He's third in goals and ES goals and then second in PPG. And his +/- is in that same range. Among the top 15 scorers, he's 5th. A couple of goals ahead of Panarin, but behind Marchand, MacKinnon, Matthews and Marner. In the league? He's 15th. The fact is, most of the top scorers have a +/- of over 90 in the last 400 games or so. McDavid's 8th among the top 15 scorers at +93. Barkov is +79 in 9th, and then it drops quickly to Kaprisov at 47 in 13th. Then it falls off hard to Stamkos (17) and Kane (-39). These are dominant players, even if their dominance is expressed by being 200% surperior on offense and only 75% of average on defense. Their net superiority is enough that they are legitimately dominant no matter what the "eye test" wants to tell you.
So how does that equate to winning/value for the team when McDavid and Draisaitl have been consistently disappointing in terms of first making the playoffs and then beating good teams once they're in? They put up historic first round numbers against a weak first round opponent then get quickly cashiered by a good defensive team. Matthews and Marner have been consistent playoff disappointments until winning one round finally last year. Pastrnak and Marchand have made it to the Finals at the beginning of this period, but haven't won a round the last two years. MacKinnon and Rantanen finally got a Cup with a loaded roster, but have been disappointing in multiple playoff seasons in a similar fashion to the other dynamic duos - run up against a physical team with a solid D structure and lose. I mean, the pattern is just sitting there. You beat these teams with dominant duos with size, strong team D, and timely counter-attacking scoring. Over and over and over again. Florida is also on this list with Barkov and Tkachuk in that top 15 scorers, but the question now is whether last year's finals was a fluke or do they have a loaded roster this year with the way Reinhart and Verhaghe are playing that will allow them to break through like Colorado did?
I would be a huge leap of faith for a team to walk away from any of those players. Of the top 15 scorers since 2018-19, only Panarin and Kane have been traded as the Hawks decided to implode. Everyone else is with the team that drafted them. But that doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't trade one of them IF you could get the return that helps you build a winner rather than a flashy highlight machine.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 19:16:40 GMT
So I'm going to ignore you. I am firmly in the camp that things pretty-boy goalscorers are a luxury and not a foundational piece. Yes, you need someone to score. No, you don't need someone to score 100 points and 60 goals, and once you have to pay market rate for that player, in a Cap league, of course you don't have other players who score anywhere near that pace. And of course, once you hold him less accountable for the consequences of bad risks, and let him keep taking high risks because it leads to more rewards, of course he's going to have better offensive numbers than the guys who get stapled to the bench if they tried some of the BS he does. I do not see his elevated level of scoring compared to the rest of the team as some kind of justification for him to play however he wants. I think it's a vicious circle of him being great at scoring, so being more successful than the average player at converting on high risk plays, to getting permission to try more high risk plays no matter what the cost, to scoring more, to getting permission to play outside the defensive structure to create more chances to scoring more.... It's a model that concentrates scoring in one player even more than talent alone would, and when that player has been muted in the playoffs by physical teams, or by minor injuries that keep him from being as effective? Well, now your roster just looks poorly constructed. So I am not keen on giving any player a pass just for being talented. That said, this whole conversation can be boiled down to the question of whether or not the Bruins are a better team allowing Pastrnak to be a flaneur out there or not, and you can probably boil THAT down to goals for when he's on the ice, and goals against. You want some kind of stat that gives you a sense goals he contributed to by getting points plus the goals that are scored because he's a top notch decoy and just his presence causes the D to play other players more loosely. Until someone comes up with another stat that shows both this and all the goals against from him making high risk plays that blow up or just playing lazy D? Plus/Minus. But frankly, I don't think plus/minus is going to tell you much for reasons unrelated to whether or not you think it has validity. Going back to 2018-19, Pastrnak is tied with Panarin in points/game by a winger. Only the two Oilers and MacKinnon have more points in that time, and only Kucherov has a better points/game as a winger. Pastrnak is 7th in ES Points, behind Matthews and Marner but still ahead of Kucherov only because of games played. He's third in goals and ES goals and then second in PPG. And his +/- is in that same range. Among the top 15 scorers, he's 5th. A couple of goals ahead of Panarin, but behind Marchand, MacKinnon, Matthews and Marner. In the league? He's 15th. The fact is, most of the top scorers have a +/- of over 90 in the last 400 games or so. McDavid's 8th among the top 15 scorers at +93. Barkov is +79 in 9th, and then it drops quickly to Kaprisov at 47 in 13th. Then it falls off hard to Stamkos (17) and Kane (-39). These are dominant players, even if their dominance is expressed by being 200% surperior on offense and only 75% of average on defense. Their net superiority is enough that they are legitimately dominant no matter what the "eye test" wants to tell you. So how does that equate to winning/value for the team when McDavid and Draisaitl have been consistently disappointing in terms of first making the playoffs and then beating good teams once they're in? They put up historic first round numbers against a weak first round opponent then get quickly cashiered by a good defensive team. Matthews and Marner have been consistent playoff disappointments until winning one round finally last year. Pastrnak and Marchand have made it to the Finals at the beginning of this period, but haven't won a round the last two years. MacKinnon and Rantanen finally got a Cup with a loaded roster, but have been disappointing in multiple playoff seasons in a similar fashion to the other dynamic duos - run up against a physical team with a solid D structure and lose. I mean, the pattern is just sitting there. You beat these teams with dominant duos with size, strong team D, and timely counter-attacking scoring. Over and over and over again. Florida is also on this list with Barkov and Tkachuk in that top 15 scorers, but the question now is whether last year's finals was a fluke or do they have a loaded roster this year with the way Reinhart and Verhaghe are playing that will allow them to break through like Colorado did? I would be a huge leap of faith for a team to walk away from any of those players. Of the top 15 scorers since 2018-19, only Panarin and Kane have been traded as the Hawks decided to implode. Everyone else is with the team that drafted them. But that doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't trade one of them IF you could get the return that helps you build a winner rather than a flashy highlight machine. Luxury??? Unfuckingbelievable...Take 88 away and this team fucking stinks...end of story. They have zippo support in scoring...he's it. If he's gone tomorrow, 74,18,13 and the rest are fucked
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Mar 4, 2024 19:57:13 GMT
So I'm going to ignore you. I am firmly in the camp that things pretty-boy goalscorers are a luxury and not a foundational piece. Yes, you need someone to score. No, you don't need someone to score 100 points and 60 goals, and once you have to pay market rate for that player, in a Cap league, of course you don't have other players who score anywhere near that pace. And of course, once you hold him less accountable for the consequences of bad risks, and let him keep taking high risks because it leads to more rewards, of course he's going to have better offensive numbers than the guys who get stapled to the bench if they tried some of the BS he does. I do not see his elevated level of scoring compared to the rest of the team as some kind of justification for him to play however he wants. I think it's a vicious circle of him being great at scoring, so being more successful than the average player at converting on high risk plays, to getting permission to try more high risk plays no matter what the cost, to scoring more, to getting permission to play outside the defensive structure to create more chances to scoring more.... It's a model that concentrates scoring in one player even more than talent alone would, and when that player has been muted in the playoffs by physical teams, or by minor injuries that keep him from being as effective? Well, now your roster just looks poorly constructed. So I am not keen on giving any player a pass just for being talented. That said, this whole conversation can be boiled down to the question of whether or not the Bruins are a better team allowing Pastrnak to be a flaneur out there or not, and you can probably boil THAT down to goals for when he's on the ice, and goals against. You want some kind of stat that gives you a sense goals he contributed to by getting points plus the goals that are scored because he's a top notch decoy and just his presence causes the D to play other players more loosely. Until someone comes up with another stat that shows both this and all the goals against from him making high risk plays that blow up or just playing lazy D? Plus/Minus. But frankly, I don't think plus/minus is going to tell you much for reasons unrelated to whether or not you think it has validity. Going back to 2018-19, Pastrnak is tied with Panarin in points/game by a winger. Only the two Oilers and MacKinnon have more points in that time, and only Kucherov has a better points/game as a winger. Pastrnak is 7th in ES Points, behind Matthews and Marner but still ahead of Kucherov only because of games played. He's third in goals and ES goals and then second in PPG. And his +/- is in that same range. Among the top 15 scorers, he's 5th. A couple of goals ahead of Panarin, but behind Marchand, MacKinnon, Matthews and Marner. In the league? He's 15th. The fact is, most of the top scorers have a +/- of over 90 in the last 400 games or so. McDavid's 8th among the top 15 scorers at +93. Barkov is +79 in 9th, and then it drops quickly to Kaprisov at 47 in 13th. Then it falls off hard to Stamkos (17) and Kane (-39). These are dominant players, even if their dominance is expressed by being 200% surperior on offense and only 75% of average on defense. Their net superiority is enough that they are legitimately dominant no matter what the "eye test" wants to tell you. So how does that equate to winning/value for the team when McDavid and Draisaitl have been consistently disappointing in terms of first making the playoffs and then beating good teams once they're in? They put up historic first round numbers against a weak first round opponent then get quickly cashiered by a good defensive team. Matthews and Marner have been consistent playoff disappointments until winning one round finally last year. Pastrnak and Marchand have made it to the Finals at the beginning of this period, but haven't won a round the last two years. MacKinnon and Rantanen finally got a Cup with a loaded roster, but have been disappointing in multiple playoff seasons in a similar fashion to the other dynamic duos - run up against a physical team with a solid D structure and lose. I mean, the pattern is just sitting there. You beat these teams with dominant duos with size, strong team D, and timely counter-attacking scoring. Over and over and over again. Florida is also on this list with Barkov and Tkachuk in that top 15 scorers, but the question now is whether last year's finals was a fluke or do they have a loaded roster this year with the way Reinhart and Verhaghe are playing that will allow them to break through like Colorado did? I would be a huge leap of faith for a team to walk away from any of those players. Of the top 15 scorers since 2018-19, only Panarin and Kane have been traded as the Hawks decided to implode. Everyone else is with the team that drafted them. But that doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't trade one of them IF you could get the return that helps you build a winner rather than a flashy highlight machine. Luxury??? Unfuckingbelievable...Take 88 away and this team fucking stinks...end of story. They have zippo support in scoring...he's it. If he's gone tomorrow, 74,18,13 and the rest are fucked FFS danny, are you twelve? Of course you take the top paid player off of any roster for nothing and that team is going to struggle, especially if that player is making nearly twice as much as the next highest paid player in his position group - unless the contract is a total albatross. But nowhere is anyone saying they'd be better off with nothing than with Pastrnak. I don't even thing M. Hulot is going that far. Second, saying that I wouldn't pay for a pretty boy goalscorer except as a luxury item presumes that I'm going to spend money elsewhere to construct the best possible roster, and hey, if I'm happy at all other positions, maybe I would pay the premium to upgrade my 30-40-70 RW to a 60-50-110 guy. We're talking about roster construction, not some knee jerk "trade Pastrnak! I'll drive him to the airport" reaction. Read the whole argument, and the previous post, or just write TL:DR so I know whether you're lazy or just juvenile.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 20:20:13 GMT
Luxury??? Unfuckingbelievable...Take 88 away and this team fucking stinks...end of story. They have zippo support in scoring...he's it. If he's gone tomorrow, 74,18,13 and the rest are fucked FFS danny, are you twelve? Of course you take the top paid player off of any roster for nothing and that team is going to struggle, especially if that player is making nearly twice as much as the next highest paid player in his position group - unless the contract is a total albatross. But nowhere is anyone saying they'd be better off with nothing than with Pastrnak. I don't even thing M. Hulot is going that far. Second, saying that I wouldn't pay for a pretty boy goalscorer except as a luxury item presumes that I'm going to spend money elsewhere to construct the best possible roster, and hey, if I'm happy at all other positions, maybe I would pay the premium to upgrade my 30-40-70 RW to a 60-50-110 guy. We're talking about roster construction, not some knee jerk "trade Pastrnak! I'll drive him to the airport" reaction. Read the whole argument, and the previous post, or just write TL:DR so I know whether you're lazy or just juvenile. You can't even rationalize this argument...I get everything you are saying, it's off base and it's not happening and worse, tell me how you are going to replace 88 with 3 middle range scorers...it's never going to work that way...Neely was a top heavy offense player for B's but he also had for a time Oates...Middleton played with Pederson...Allison played with Carter...Horton with Krejci..Bergeron with Marchand...Pasta is PLAYING WITH NO ONE...NO ONE...AND HE SCORES, AND HE SCORES, AND HE'S VALUABLE AND FUCK HIS SALARY...HE'S WORTH EVERY FUCKING PENNY. Listen, you can write 10 paragraphs, and I'll read them all the way through and this is still a fucking joke thread, it's disgusting and questioning Pasta for what this guy has done is unbelievable...he's a star, and he's awesome and the B's are lucky to have him...he is not a NEGATIVE...You can try but if you removed him at some point and get 3 guys who scored 20..this team would not win...it just doesn't work that way. Pasta is so underappreciated by fans...I give up.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 20:26:59 GMT
I hope the B's somehow win the Cup and Pasta is carrying the hardware and then I'm taking names.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 20:27:54 GMT
I'll let OC,jwalters, and a few others here explain it better...I give up....this isn't god worshipping either...this is flat out watching this guy perform at ridiculous levels on a team that has so very little scoring outside of him..he scoffed at the loss of 37 and 46...he more or less predicted that while it was great playing with both, it wasn't going to affect his production...and he was right.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 20:30:29 GMT
If he played side by side with Draisitl or McDavid in an 82-game schedule he'd shatter records for points.
|
|
|
Post by pletchner on Mar 4, 2024 20:44:54 GMT
I hope the B's somehow win the Cup and Pasta is carrying the hardware and then I'm taking names. I'd like to see that, too Danny. But I don't think it happens unless Pasta is "on" for the vast majority of the playoffs. And by "on," I mean that the he plays something approaching a complete game, and he isn't responsible for more than one bad turnover leading to a scoring chance per game.
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 20:46:23 GMT
I hope the B's somehow win the Cup and Pasta is carrying the hardware and then I'm taking names. I'd like to see that, too Danny. But I don't think it happens unless Pasta is "on" for the vast majority of the playoffs. And by "on," I mean that the he plays something approaching a complete game, and he isn't responsible for more than one bad turnover leading to a scoring chance per game. I believe you have lost your limbs, young man.
|
|
|
Post by pletchner on Mar 4, 2024 20:54:01 GMT
I'd like to see that, too Danny. But I don't think it happens unless Pasta is "on" for the vast majority of the playoffs. And by "on," I mean that the he plays something approaching a complete game, and he isn't responsible for more than one bad turnover leading to a scoring chance per game. I believe you have lost your limbs, young man. And yet I still make fewer dumb passes than Pasta does. Imagine that!
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 21:05:35 GMT
I believe you have lost your limbs, young man. And yet I still make fewer dumb passes than Pasta does. Imagine that! He'll score and make it all better.
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Mar 4, 2024 21:42:14 GMT
FFS danny, are you twelve? Of course you take the top paid player off of any roster for nothing and that team is going to struggle, especially if that player is making nearly twice as much as the next highest paid player in his position group - unless the contract is a total albatross. But nowhere is anyone saying they'd be better off with nothing than with Pastrnak. I don't even thing M. Hulot is going that far. Second, saying that I wouldn't pay for a pretty boy goalscorer except as a luxury item presumes that I'm going to spend money elsewhere to construct the best possible roster, and hey, if I'm happy at all other positions, maybe I would pay the premium to upgrade my 30-40-70 RW to a 60-50-110 guy. We're talking about roster construction, not some knee jerk "trade Pastrnak! I'll drive him to the airport" reaction. Read the whole argument, and the previous post, or just write TL:DR so I know whether you're lazy or just juvenile. You can't even rationalize this argument... I get everything you are saying, it's off base and it's not happening and worse, tell me how you are going to replace 88 with 3 middle range scorers...it's never going to work that way...Neely was a top heavy offense player for B's but he also had for a time Oates...Middleton played with Pederson...Allison played with Carter...Horton with Krejci..Bergeron with Marchand...Pasta is PLAYING WITH NO ONE...NO ONE...AND HE SCORES, AND HE SCORES, AND HE'S VALUABLE AND FUCK HIS SALARY...HE'S WORTH EVERY FUCKING PENNY. Listen, you can write 10 paragraphs, and I'll read them all the way through and this is still a fucking joke thread, it's disgusting and questioning Pasta for what this guy has done is unbelievable...he's a star, and he's awesome and the B's are lucky to have him...he is not a NEGATIVE...You can try but if you removed him at some point and get 3 guys who scored 20..this team would not win...it just doesn't work that way. Pasta is so underappreciated by fans...I give up. So you get the part where I wrote that he's dominant player on par with the top 5-6 players in the league over the last 5-6 years no matter what people's eyes are telling them? You read that? And then you read the part where I said that the problem is that the teams those top 5-6 players are on - predominantly - have a whack of disappointments? And that in every case, there's two guys from the same team in those scenarios and Marchand is Pastrnak's running-mate? And yet they still have a history of regularly and consistently disappointing in the playoffs because heavy teams with solid defensive structure shut them down? Because the teams are so dependent on those two players for offense? Huh. Sure doesn't seem like going all caps to repeat that "he scores" is necessary if you actually read it. Wait, let me try this I DON'T CARE HOW MUCH HE SCORES IF THE TEAM DOESN'T WIN!!! I DON'T CARE!! I DON'T!! BECAUSE IF HE'S SCORING AND 'DOING HIS JOB' AND THEY STILL LOSE IT MEANS SWEET FUCK ALL!!! DON'T CARE, DANNY, I DON'T!!
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Mar 4, 2024 21:44:57 GMT
If he played side by side with Draisitl or McDavid in an 82-game schedule he'd shatter records for points. Draisaitl for Pastrnak. Who says no? Holland or Sweeney? [trick question - the answer is M. Hulot]
|
|
|
Post by bookboy007 on Mar 4, 2024 21:53:13 GMT
I hope the B's somehow win the Cup and Pasta is carrying the hardware and then I'm taking names. I'd be happy with him having a great playoff. He hasn't been a point/game playoff scorer for a couple of years now, and he's only been better than a point a game once in the last 5 playoffs. Among players who have played more than 25 playoff games in the last five years, Pastrnak is 19th in points/game at 0.93. He also has only 27 points at even strength in 59 games; more than half his points have come on the PP. So if he has a great playoff, and they fall short of rings, I will happily give him credit where it's due...but if they play the Leafs and he racks up 10 points in 6 games, then they play Detroit and he racks up another 8 in 5 games, and then he goes 0-fer in a six game series against the Rangers, I will point out that I don't care that he can score against teams that lack defensive structure and goaltending if he's a ghost when they have to get by a heavy team with a legit goalie.
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Mar 4, 2024 21:57:03 GMT
PASTA GOOD!!!!
BOOK BAD!!!!
|
|
|
Post by islamorada on Mar 4, 2024 22:06:14 GMT
Recalling the search for a center thinking back in the fall, it was stated that Pasta and Marchand's passing will compensate for the loss of Bergeron and Krejci to some degree. Well, it hasn't. The whole Pasta debate is a matter of watching his play on ice, the illusive butterfly now being caught with double teamed defense and no center to pass the puck to when pinched. Coupled that thought to only McAvoy and Carlo as legitimate defensemen. It is a team game Pasta does not do it alone on a line. I need to remind myself at times recently that Kucherov has Point, and Tampa has LTIR again to procure help. I see Pasta as a plus.
|
|
|
Post by islamorada on Mar 4, 2024 22:06:42 GMT
PASTA GOOD!!!! BOOK BAD!!!! He knows his whiskey. Not so bad. Bowmore was a good suggestion Book.
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Mar 4, 2024 22:10:29 GMT
Look, take Pasta out of this lineup and the team would be struggling for a wild card position, or need to shut the other team out almost every night. That's just reality.
Wanna know why he has so many giveaways or does what seems to be crazy high risk things? Look who he is fucking playing with most nights. Jake "one foot out the door "Debrusk and Pavel "the robot without a soul" Zacha. Move him to Marchand and Coyle that is only marginally better.
So, the counter-theory is the team can use his bloated salary to get two, perhaps three NHL regulars. Sure, great. More JDB's and Zachas....and the team loses a pile of skill and still will be challenged to score. Once again, fighting for a wild card spot if they are lucky.
Best case scenario, get Pasta some actual high end talent he can play with and pass to without other teams simply pressuring him and rubbing him out (yes I went there), knowing he is playing with stiffs.
Fin
BOOK STILL BAD
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Mar 4, 2024 22:10:53 GMT
PASTA GOOD!!!! BOOK BAD!!!! He knows his whiskey. Not so bad. Bowmore was a good suggestion Book. He has his uses....I guess
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Mar 4, 2024 22:11:39 GMT
Recalling the search for a center thinking back in the fall, it was stated that Pasta and Marchand's passing will compensate for the loss of Bergeron and Krejci to some degree. Well, it hasn't. The whole Pasta debate is a matter of watching his play on ice, the illusive butterfly now being caught with double teamed defense and no center to pass the puck to when pinched. Coupled that thought to only McAvoy and Carlo as legitimate defensemen. It is a team game Pasta does not do it alone on a line. I need to remind myself at times recently that Kucherov has Point, and Tampa has LTIR again to procure help. I see Pasta as a plus. We just said the same thing.....you are more concise (and likely more sober at the moment)
|
|
|
Post by The OC on Mar 4, 2024 22:29:30 GMT
The problem with this thread and the whole idea a few of you have that there is a problem with Pasta is that it's based on "He's a talented scorer" but is it worth him being "Selfish, lazy, poor defensively and a bad teammate". While the first part is obviously true, the second is mostly feelings unsupported by any facts or data. But yet a few state it as fact and say is it worth it, where the conversation should wind back and say is there any truth to what you just said? The answer is simply no.
Selfish? No, in comparing him to other elite star players he makes at least $1-2 million less per year despite his contract in some cases signing later. He's also the 312th best rate of $$ per point in the entire league, meaning his production is well above average per cost despite the big contract. He also plays 1-2 minutes less per game compared to other elites. Lazy? I see no sign of it. He trains hard, is in great shape, scores from the dirty areas, takes hits to make plays, gives hits and backchecks hard. Poor defensively? No, his positioning is great. He was on the "Perfection Line" for a reason, and all of the stats say he's not a liability (+/-, possession, goal diff). Turnovers? Nope. He does have turnovers, but so do all players who make plays and even moreso take a lot of shots. He's only turned the puck over 14 times this season in his own end. But how's this for a number: He's #1 on the Bruins, 28th in the league in TAKEAWAYS with 44. Let that sink in. He has broken up the opposition attack more than any other player on the Bruins. He's not just "not bad" defensively, he's actually a standout. Bad teammate? As every coach has said, "everyone wants to play with Pasta". So... no.
This topic is a mirage of arguing reality vs a fictional perception. A few posters don't like Pasta's body language or that he looks like he's having fun, and have attached some stereotypes of high end scorers to him without justification. Those posters aren't living in reality.
|
|
|
Post by sandogbrewin on Mar 4, 2024 22:31:27 GMT
PASTA GOOD!!!! BOOK BAD!!!! Book would be burned down here in FLA.
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Mar 4, 2024 22:44:05 GMT
PASTA GOOD!!!! BOOK BAD!!!! Book would be burned down here in FLA. BURN HIM
|
|
|
Post by sandogbrewin on Mar 4, 2024 23:12:53 GMT
Lucky to have Pasta al Dente!
|
|
|
Post by dannycater on Mar 4, 2024 23:51:58 GMT
so actual fans do like Pasta...3 out of 4 prefer Crest too.
|
|