Barry_Wilkins, on 13 December 2010 - 08:10 PM, said:
This is definitely one of the funniest posts yet from a Bieksa apologist.
If Bieksa makes the easy play, there are no other factors that come into play.
Not many "great options at the time".
You're right. There was only one option. The easy one. Which was to simply stay in front of Stamkos so's to prevent a clear path to the net for him or for a pass to a dangerous area. This is something that all Dmen are taught in midget hockey. The "Stamkos is a great player" excuse is nonsense, because in that position it doesn't matter who the opponent is, all the Dman has to do is stay between him and the front of the net, and there is no great option for Stamkos.
But as usual, Bieksa makes the routine defensive play a hair-raising adventure.
I also like the argument that well, Bieksa had a "so-so" game (but so did many other players, too!!), he and Hamhuis played much better in Edmonton. (So did the other players.) This feeble-minded wishy-washy grasping at straws to level the ice is incredible.
Bieksa made a boneheaded play. Again. But the important point is that these boneheaded boo-boos are unforced. There's never a safe moment on the ice when Bieksa's in the vicinity. He'll fall down, unprovoked. He'll deflect the puck at Luongo, unforced, as he did in the Tampa game in the first period. (The similar play by Alberts was actually Torres' fault since he made a rushed bad pass to Alberts.)
He played well in Edmonton. Hooray. Who knows what kind of game we'll get from him against Columbus.
Barry, if that is the funniest post from an apologist, then as a foaming at the mouth hater, you're a barrel of laughs and have been one from the outset. The laughs you provide on a consistent basis with your inane posts and blind hate are the stuff of slapstick legend.
I wasn't grasping at any straws....as I also thought it was a poor result from a poor decision. But, i didn't respond to Duo, in order to make excuses....but to talk the options he had through to some semblance of a conclusion.
You know hat's really wishy washy and feeble minded? The fact that you are going on about a play two games and three days ago. You haters are hilarious...like a bunch of dogs clamouring over the same small chew toy. If that's the worse thing he's done in a couple of games....then have at it. Keep re-living that mistake...whatever helps you fester your hate. His mistakes are like too much viagra for you guys....like a boner that lasts two days too long.....you really should go consult a doctor.
And to get to your assertion that the onle 'easy' play Bieksa had was to get in front of him....is exactly what he tried to do. He tried to get in front of where he thought Stamkos was going to be and meet him there, with a hit. Well, Stamkos stopped up with his body towards the net, instead of towards the boards, knowing that if he avoided the hit, he'd have a play to make by either going to the front of the net, or perhaps a passing option play. Well, things worked out for him, as his sudden stop, allowed a passin play to come to fruition because NO ONE was checking Purcell. Now does Bieksa earn some criticism for missing the hit? In my mind, yeah. It won't be the first time a dman has missed a hit, and it won't be the last. ALl this panty twisting is kinda ridiculous though....but it seems you guys must "beat" that horse or appendage to death. Well, give'r, if that's what gives you your collective jollies.
The rest of us will just point and laugh, as usual....you know......like the girls do.
And I doubt if Bieksa never made a mistake again (which won't happen) that you'd ever give him any credit, anyways. So you keep stroking that hate and whatever else you can get your tiny hands and mind on.