Player Discussion Galchenyuk

[WeThreeKings]

Is this a sick joke? There are a number of neuroscientist who disagree with you, including the renowned Marc Davis. And to think that you think people should be punished on this board because they disagree with you on something that is at least, vey debatable (and something that many neuroscientist debate over)is just sickening. What an absolute joke.

Yes, I think people should be disciplined for not taking a mental illness/disorder seriously. Spreading ignorance and insulting an individual who is going through an affliction and seeking help for it is absolutely abhorrent.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

This has to be a joke right? If Galchenyuk did go to rehab, you should be praising him not attacking his character.

The fact that you attack him and his charter for this just shows the type of person you are .

You're being offended at your own fertile imagination. Did you actually read my post ? In no way am I attacking Galchenyuk's character for seeking help. Good for him if he actually did.

And yes, the fact I am assessing Galchenyuk's long history of being a headcase does indeed show the kind of person I am: Someone who actually knows what he is talking about, instead of following weird narratives that hold responsible absolutely everybody around Galchenyuk for his problems, except him.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Sure, there are people out there who will never have a drink in their lives and if they did, would have a high chance of becoming an alcoholic.

But we are talking about alcoholism in Galchenyuk's case, how many people in their lives never try alcohol? I'd say a very small percentage of the population. No one has a drink for the first time thinking they would get addicted to it, especially if the majority of the population doesn't get addicted to it.

Are there not people with low risks of becoming addicts who become addicts simply because of reoccuring recreational use and abuse?

Are celebrities more prone to being addicts or are they just victims of their own opulent lifestyles?

Ultimately the individual bears some responsibility in most cases.

 

[BlackStar]

Yes, I think people should be disciplined for not taking a mental illness/disorder seriously. Spreading ignorance and insulting an individual who is going through an affliction and seeking help for it is absolutely abhorrent.

LOL. This is utterly ridiculous. By that reasoning, I guess you should be disciplined for not taking cancer seriously. You are spreading ignorance and insulting people my like relatives who are going through affliction and seeking chemotherapy.

Don't try me with this nonsense.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Are there not people with low risks of becoming addicts who become addicts simply because of reoccuring recreational use and abuse?

Are celebrities more prone to being addicts or are they just victims of their own opulent lifestyles?

Ultimately the individual bears some responsibility in most cases.

When you are talking about diseases of the mind, which also have genetic components which create predispositions toward certain issues, it's hard to say.

Some celebrities may not have a genetic predisposition, but they may have triggers such as pressure or their career is on the down swing where mentally they don't know how to cope and alcohol becomes a crutch. Then the escape of that substance fuels the addiction and it becomes harder and harder to face every day life without that crutch.

We can't know the reasons why someone is an alcoholic or is dependent on alcohol. That is a private and personal matter. Some of it is genetics, some of it is lifestyle choices, some of it is coping. But the point I am making is, that it is obviously severe, there's AA programs, there's a substance abuse program in the NHL, we've seen players careers ruined over it, lives ended over it. People have lost everything from it. Alcoholism has fueled abuse and domestic assault.

It's a very sensitive subject and I don't think we need to get into a discussion about which mental illness is worse or in which illnesses/disorders is someone culpable and should take accountability for it.

I, for one, would hate to think that someone suffering from this affliction would come into this thread and read some of the thoughts being posted about alcoholics and have it further their depression or further the stigma of publicly seeking help for such an illness, so fearing that reaction of those they know personally, they keep it hidden and don't seek treatment.

 

[WeThreeKings]

LOL. This is utterly ridiculous. By that reasoning, I guess you should be disciplined for not taking cancer seriously. You are spreading ignorance and insulting people my like relatives who are going through affliction and seeking chemotherapy.

Don't try me with this nonsense.

Where haven't I taken Cancer seriously? I'm not in here saying someone with lung cancer should take some personal accountability for smoking cigarettes, or being near people who did, or living in areas with poor air quality, or doing jobs that had them breathing in particles that could have contributed to it.

If I said something like that, then yes, f***ing infract me.

 

[dinodebino]

Tremblay was lambasted today by the 'english' media. Haven't heard anything on the other 'solitude's side.

Me being the paranoid ex-journalist that I am wouldn't be surprised that Tremblay got the cue from within the organisation. Bergevin could have played the Gainey-defending-Brisebois card and be appalled by the story. But he looked anything but the part today.

It is peculiar that Tremblay went on a rant BEFORE leaving for some vacation time. Timing is everything, eh?

But that's just me being paranoid. Don't mind me.

 

[Wats]

From my uneducated point of view a disease such a substance abuse should never be lumped into the same category as depression, cancer etc for the simple reason that there is a 100% effective method of prevention - don't drink or do drugs. Substance abuse is brought on by a series of decisions, why people make these decisions is another story.

There is no method of prevention for actual illnesses like depression or cancer. No matter what roadmap in life you follow if it's in your cards it's going to happen. I find it offensive to compare the two.

That's not true. For cancer - food choices/cigarettes/etc can significantly increase chances.

 

[Habs Icing]

From my uneducated point of view a disease such a substance abuse should never be lumped into the same category as depression, cancer etc for the simple reason that there is a 100% effective method of prevention - don't drink or do drugs. Substance abuse is brought on by a series of decisions, why people make these decisions is another story.

There is no method of prevention for actual illnesses like depression or cancer. No matter what roadmap in life you follow if it's in your cards it's going to happen. I find it offensive to compare the two.

You know you're lumping in physical with mental illnesses: cancer with depression and then forgetting about addiction.

Don't drink or do drugs? Can't you make the same argument about depression? As Bobby McFerin put it, "Don't worry, be happy". The advice of telling an addict don't drink or do drugs is on par to telling a depressive don't have sad or suicidal thoughts.

 

[hersky77]

You're being offended at your own fertile imagination. Did you actually read my post ? In no way am I attacking Galchenyuk's character for seeking help. Good for him if he actually did.

And yes, the fact I am assessing Galchenyuk's long history of being a headcase does indeed show the kind of person I am: Someone who actually knows what he is talking about, instead of following weird narratives that hold responsible absolutely everybody around Galchenyuk for his problems, except him.

He is attempting to get rid of his problem by suposedly going to rehab. But you have the gall and audacity to attack his character and praise mr dui Mario tremblay.

You are the definition of a hypocrite.

 

[groovejuice]

Delete

 

[BlackStar]

Where haven't I taken Cancer seriously? I'm not in here saying someone with lung cancer should take some personal accountability for smoking cigarettes, or being near people who did, or living in areas with poor air quality, or doing jobs that had them breathing in particles that could have contributed to it.

If I said something like that, then yes, ****ing infract me.

Whatever, man. You couldn't be anymore irrelevant to me.

Mods, I doubt you would take his whining about me needing an infraction seriously, but just in case, just know that all this came from me making a simple comment where I say that if the rumour is true, I am disappointed in Gally, AND I hope he is getting all the help he needs.

 

[Frank Drebin]

That's not true. For cancer - food choices/cigarettes/etc can significantly increase chances.

It can in some cases. Good point. I was thinking more of childhood cancer or cancer where there is no direct cause, or depression.

I've said my piece and it's time to leave this discussion.

 

[Andrei79]

Where haven't I taken Cancer seriously? I'm not in here saying someone with lung cancer should take some personal accountability for smoking cigarettes, or being near people who did, or living in areas with poor air quality, or doing jobs that had them breathing in particles that could have contributed to it.

If I said something like that, then yes, ****ing infract me.

Honestly, it's no use.

When he brought up Marc Davis ( David Lewis?), that's all I needed to know.

The way his arguments are set up, no amount of facts, research or science will do anything to budge his beliefs, because when all else fails, it's the institutions who make money of of it that are creating this false disease and the biology behind it. How convenient for him.

 

[Frank Drebin]

The advice of telling an addict don't drink or do drugs is on par to telling a depressive don't have sad or suicidal thoughts.

So basically you're saying addicts are born, or created, and their fate is sealed that they will grow up to be addicts? They have no choice in the matter?

Depressed people have no choice about their thoughts, addicts have no choice in seeking out substances and becoming addicted to them? Not sure I buy that.

 

[WeThreeKings]

So basically you're saying addicts are born, or created, and their fate is sealed that they will grow up to be addicts? They have no choice in the matter?

Depressed people have no choice about their thoughts, addicts have no choice in seeking out substances and becoming addicted to them? Not sure I buy that.

Some don't. It literally consumes their thoughts. All they can think of is getting that next drink into them. No matter the cost. That's why you see homeless people on the streets begging for change and instead of getting a bite to eat, they go to the nearest liquor store and get the cheapest liquor they can to get drunk again.

Okay, let me try to boil this down. You know how depressed people have no choice about their thoughts? How they can't seem to get out of that spiral of dark thoughts that cripple them? Well, that's what an alcoholic is like. They can't control that impulse, that part of their brain that says, no don't take a drink, you're addicted and it's leading you down a dark path - it either isn't there or it gets overruled by the part of their brain that is so overwhelmed with the need for alcohol.

Some depressed people are able to seek interventions through therapy and counselling. Others seek anti-depressants and other drugs to regulate their moods and thoughts. AA meetings, counselling, rehabilitation centres, these interventions can work because they can get someone clean and teach them how to cope in other ways and how to find a way to fight those impulses. But for some people, it doesn't work, they can be clean for a long time and relapse. It can be a life long battle.

I would be very surprised if someone on this forum wasn't directly impacted by alcoholism in some way, shape or form. So, I think any discussion where we are actively criticizing someone who actually had the wherewithal to seek treatment for something like this, is a dangerous thing to do.

Some of it is ignorance and not knowing any better. Some of it is being willfully ignorant and disrespectful. In this case, Frank, I understand where you are coming from and I don't think you are being malicious at all, and I think you are trying to learn a bit more about it. Whereas Vlad and Blackstar are continuing their character assassination and doubling down on ignorance, being very combative about the subject.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

It speaks to the character of a man when he goes TMZ and shares privileged and incredibly sensitive information about another man whose struggled/struggling with something that can ruin lives.

I have to deal with a lot of privileged information myself (including from people suffering from addiction) and take it very seriously. But Mario Tremblay is NOT a professional in charge of Galchenyuk's therapy. He is a member of the media. As I said earlier, it's not like he broke into some office and stole confidential info. Even casual outsiders have known for years that Galchenyuk parties hard. So Tremblay didn't, in all likelihood, betray anyone's secret. This wasn't his privileged information. Journalists around the world release confidential information all the time. It's nothing new.

The only issue is whether this news was *of public interest or not*. That's what usually differentiates serious journalism from TMZ. I understand why some people might not think it is. But I am in the camp who thinks that, if an issue sufficiently affects his on-ice performance for such a long time, it's legitimate to cover it.

Should it have been a brief remark on the radio ? Obviously, no. This deserved a serious piece of journalism IMO. A proper in-depth article by a serious journalist. And maybe we will get that eventually.

 

[Habs Icing]

So basically you're saying addicts are born, or created, and their fate is sealed that they will grow up to be addicts? They have no choice in the matter?

Depressed people have no choice about their thoughts, addicts have no choice in seeking out substances and becoming addicted to them? Not sure I buy that.

I never said that. You inferred it.

The same way cancer can at times be treated so can mental illnesses. So fate is not as sealed as you make it out to be.

Nowadays I rarely drink but in my youth I drank like most teenagers. Most of us have drank like teenagers. In other words most of us sought out various substances in our youth and we did not become addicts but some of us did. I don't want to get into personal history but I've had friends who were regular teenagers like me, tried it a couple of times and were hooked. I can honestly tell you I didn't and don't have more self-control than they did. They had something that was triggered. I saw it in many friends and some family.

 

[Edgy]

www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-canadiens-alex-galchenyuk-first-line-centre-depth-line-winger/

Bringing back the discussion to actual hockey....

A very interesting read that affirms (through stats) what the majority of us already think and have stated. Galchenyuk is most productive at center and the decline in his offensive output started when he was placed on the wing.

Seems like the majority of fans and analysts are perplexed by Bergevin's actions and constant refusal to do what's best for Galchenyuk and the team.

 

[Tighthead]

that's a simplistic way of looking at it...

like AG or the Habs would comment on this stuff anyway (true or false).


I mean, it'S true cause he said it, that's it ? ? ?




or maybe Nilan woulodnt believe Tremblay ? and why would he anyway ? cause Tremblay is saying the truth ? based on what ? hos own words ?

It may be simplistic but if it was wrong I would expect swift denials from the player, his agent and the team. It’s either true or it’s slander. If it’s not true why wouldn’t someone speak up?

I wouldn’t be surprised if other people have known and just not reported it. It’s a small world.

 

[Andrei79]

I have to deal with a lot of privileged information myself (including from people suffering from addiction) and take it very seriously. But Mario Tremblay is NOT a professional in charge of Galchenyuk's therapy. He is a member of the media. As I said earlier, it's not like he broke into some office and stole confidential info. Even casual outsiders have known for years that Galchenyuk parties hard. So Tremblay didn't, in all likelihood, betray anyone's secret. This wasn't his privileged information. Journalists around the world release confidential information all the time. It's nothing new.

The only issue is whether this news was *of public interest or not*. That's what usually differentiates serious journalism from TMZ. I understand why some people might not think it is. But I am in the camp who thinks that, if an issue sufficiently affects his on-ice performance for such a long time, it's legitimate to cover it.

Should it have been a brief remark on the radio ? Obviously, no. This deserved a serious piece of journalism IMO. A proper in-depth article by a serious journalist. And maybe we will get that eventually.

Honestly, I respect you for taking the time and posting this, despite it being an unpopular opinion. It's a well nuanced post and makes me understand your previous posts on the subject, even if I disagree with the end conclusion on Galchenyuk.

 

[Saxon]

Tremblay was lambasted today by the 'english' media. Haven't heard anything on the other 'solitude's side.

Me being the paranoid ex-journalist that I am wouldn't be surprised that Tremblay got the cue from within the organisation. Bergevin could have played the Gainey-defending-Brisebois card and be appalled by the story. But he looked anything but the part today.

It is peculiar that Tremblay went on a rant BEFORE leaving for some vacation time. Timing is everything, eh?

But that's just me being paranoid. Don't mind me.

Bergy trying to leak character issues to justify an incoming trade of a popular player????.........

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Honestly, I respect you for taking the time and posting this, despite it being an unpopular opinion. It's a well nuanced post and makes me understand your previous posts on the subject, even if I disagree with the end conclusion on Galchenyuk.

Thanks, I appreciate this !

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Can someone give me the coles notes on this discussion.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Yeah, sure. Many of us recall your foul and repugnant post where you pseudo-psychoanalyzed a player at length. Under the pretext of "expertise" you wrote one of the vilest attack posts ever seen here.

You're suggesting you know Galchenyuk intimately, because you'd have to in order to make any kind of specific assessment of him, as you just did here. No one wants to see more of that garbage here, I'm sure.

Edit: I have a copy of that very post. It's the very worst thing I've ever read on HF.

I have absolutely no idea what vile post you are talking about and am very curious ! Don't even know which player you are refering to.

As for Galchenyuk. What is that assessment I have made of him ? That he has off-ice issue ? That's hardly a shocker to anyone with a brain. What else ?