I wrote a big long response to this while angry and it came across as less respectful than how I generally want to come across.. I need to log off and cool off, I might respond to the rest later.
Re: 1. Nothing confirms the Rangers wanted Pettersson..
Canucks GM mic'd up at draft: 5 things we learned - Sportsnet.ca
2017 NHL Draft Grades: New York Rangers
A few things about this tweet:
1. That tweet and the response seem to contradict one another. The first has NYR trading up aggressively to get Makar, the next one has Pettersson atop NYR's list. Which is it? (
Same source)
2. I just want to be clear: This tweet from Adam Herman _confirms_, in your mind, that NYR would have taken Pettersson correct?
3. If this tweet does confirm this information for you, does JD Burke's insight confirm Miller/9th for you? It's an aside, but I want to know how much weight you put into tweets by bloggers.
4. Did you know that Adam Herman is an HF poster?
You know what, in the interest of serving the grander discussion, let's say Pettersson was NYR's #1 choice. Next: VAN finishes in NJ's slot (2 points more, and still below BUF). Aside from winning the lottery, which NJ did do, let's bad-luck the Canucks again and have them pick 6th or 7th (the majority percentage for the 5th last team (61.7%)).
- With ARZ now picking 5th instead of 7th, and with Glass still on the board, are we absolutely certain they trade this pick?
- Next, where is Pettersson likely to go in this scenario given no trades in the top10? (the control)
- Can VAN trade up from 6th/7th in this scenario?
This alternative universe theory is among the weirdest things I've seen on this board in quite some time. Apart from lacking common sense, it also has some serious flaws in regards to it's internal logic.
So Benning takes Nylander, then Tkachuk according to scouting consensus. Then in 2015 - again going purely by consensus the team selects Kylington instead of Boeser, who was the consensus ranked 23rd pick (Boeser was 24th). Oops, no Boeser and we have a bust. Then when 2018 rolls around, even if Petterson is still somehow on the board, the team somehow weirdly changes gears to stop drafting according to consensus and goes off board? How does that make sense?
In a weird way, you are actually proving my point here by employing reductio ad absurdum, even if you don't realize it (you don't). There are simply too many variables to conclude things either way, that's the point. The initial take here has been that Nylander + Tkachuk =/= Pettersson. It's an unsupported premise. There's no way to conclude this without choosing to hold variables constant. The _choosing_ is the problem.
I think I am the only one to truly challenge it by attempting to ground those variables. Others have chosen to outright mock the original premise by saying things like "had we not lost to Boston, then no Pettersson". What do you think they think of your argument?
Last, it's been awhile since you were last in full retreat from this sub-forum (main boards are interesting though, I'll grant you), but what you find the "weirdest" statement on here I find a cute reminder that some will stretch to hyperbole to emphasize a porous arguments. Do continue on though, it's entertaining. (I'm working on something for you as we speak)
