Uchiha
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2014
- 2,612
- 289
I already said it, but the reason his post wasn't meaning full is because of what he was directly responding to. It's all well and good that he only posted facts, but those facts added nothing because of what he was responding to.
Again; Bonk says, "hey, under the more beneficial circumstances Phaneuf will have on Ottawa vs Toronto, I think he can outperform past results", to which 417 replies with stats with an implied implication of "but his past results suggest he hasn't outproduced past results very often!"
Now, if you think that's meaningful or adding to the conversation, that's great. I strive for higher standards myself.
If he wanted to add to the conversation while coming from the belief that 40+ pts is unattainable for Phaneuf, he could have suggested that behind Karlsson, Phaneuf isn't likely to get the PP time he did in Toronto, or that he might not get as much time with the top lines. Or maybe he might have suggested that Ottawa is only more potent offensively than Toronto because of Karlsson, and Phaneuf is unlikely to benefit from that because he won't be paired with Karlsson, and even if/when he is, he'll be relied on far less offensively than he would have in Toronto. It's not hard to find reasons for being pessimistic that actually add to the conversation, but if your a fan of another team coming to a rival board, you should probably expect a bit of hostility when you come over with no relevant substance behind your post.
Yes, it's the facts that people had a problem with, none of the stuff I mentioned or the fact that bringing up past results really doesn't bring all that much value to the conversation when responding the premise was that under new and better circumstances exceeding past results by a small margin is attainable, particularly when those facts are used as some sort of misguided attempt to prove that a marginal improvement over previous results is unattainable, or at the very least unlikely.
Honestly, you'd think Bonk suggested Phaneuf would hit 20 goals again (sorry guy who made that thread, that was nuts) or that he'd hit a career high or anything.
I don't really care to be honest. You've taken this discussion on a different tangent that I have no desire to be in all because a Habs fan posted some stats about Phaneuf's scoring
If you want to discuss Phanuef's deployment in Ottawa vs Toronto and reasonable expectations I'm open to that because I think that 30 points is reasonable for him in his new found role here IE: being sturdy defensively for Ceci.
But, that's just my opinion man.