bcblues Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 41 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said: Dave Starman always says the team with the most talent wins 95% of the time. But according to people here, it's mostly luck. "Talent" includes coaching and senior leadership. Maybe it was "just a bad day." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeytherapy13 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 23 minutes ago, Benny Baker said: My comment was tongue-in-cheek, Brendan Morrison. ‘97 Sioux deserved their title just as much as the Bulldogs deserved theirs, but certainly more than your Wolverines did, even if you were “the best team” out there that year! Hey, I like listening to Starman, too. But I also believe he’s a goalie coach for an NA3HL team, so I’m not granting him the word of gospel when it comes to hockey just quite yet. He was a scout for the Montreal Canadiens. The NHL is the top league in the world, in case you were wondering. The guy knows hockey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 2 minutes ago, hockeytherapy13 said: He was a scout for the Montreal Canadiens. The NHL is the top league in the world, in case you were wondering. The guy knows hockey Of course he does! After all, I think I pointed out he scouted for Hak—in the same NHL you’re talking about. I just disagree that a winner in hockey is 95% determined by talent on the ice. I think it is much more a combination of talent, luck, mentality and determination, teamwork, goal-setting, leadership, coaching, physical endurance, etc. than any one predominant factor. Some nights, some factors play a larger role in who wins a hockey game. And that’s what makes hockey fun, and that’s why they play the game instead of deciding the winner based upon roster talent alone, or at least just for 95% of the games. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeytherapy13 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 1 hour ago, Benny Baker said: Of course he does! After all, I think I pointed out he scouted for Hak—in the same NHL you’re talking about. I just disagree that a winner in hockey is 95% determined by talent on the ice. I think it is much more a combination of talent, luck, mentality and determination, teamwork, goal-setting, leadership, coaching, physical endurance, etc. than any one predominant factor. Some nights, some factors play a larger role in who wins a hockey game. And that’s what makes hockey fun, and that’s why they play the game instead of deciding the winner based upon roster talent alone, or at least just for 95% of the games. Yeah it seriously seems more like 75-80% of the time if you ask me haha 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxFanSince1990 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 6 hours ago, Goon said: Then could also drink himself into a Stuper with Keystone Lites. He's only here to stir the post and get a reaction out of people. Some would say the same thing about me. Although I prefer Natural Ice, and a little constructive criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Just now, SiouxFanSince1990 said: Some would say the same thing about me. Although I prefer Natural Ice, and a little constructive criticism. I'd rather drink Keystone Lights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxFanSince1990 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, Goon said: I'd rather drink Keystone Lights. The ABV/calorie ratio doesn’t suit me. lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 hour ago, Goon said: I'd rather drink Keystone Lights. No bitter beer face! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.