GDT: #22: Rangers 0 at FLYERS 4, Friday, Nov. 23, 2018, 1:00 p.m. ET

[Ghosts Beer]

so anytime somebody disagrees with you/striker that means the person is lying.

ok, makes sense

You'll find that those posters who frequently accuse other posters of "lying" habitually misrepresent others' opinions in an amusing example of hypocrisy.

For instance, you'll often find smug sarcastic references to +/- "proving" whether a player is good or bad defensively. This, of course, is a thinly veiled shot at me, implying that I've argued and believe that +/- is a definitive measure of a player's defensive play. Of course, that isn't a correct representation of what I've said regarding +/- at all.

I've merely said that +/- isn't "meaningless," as Striiker *has* explicitly argued, and I've given examples as to why I think it isn't "meaningless" (such as Couturier consistently being at the top relative to his teammates over the years, and Simmonds near the bottom). However, I have also called it a "flawed" statistic that requires context and is *not* a definitive measure by itself of an individual's defensive play. When I have cited +/-, I have cited it as one of many factors in support of an opinion, and have never cited it in isolation as black and white irrefutable proof of a player's defensive performance. Nevertheless, you won't see that aspect of my position acknowledged. No, you'll just see Striiker make a straw man misrepresentation of my position that is easier to attack. That's lazy, disingenuous debate, especially from someone who likes to call others liars.

Similarly, you'll find posters twist my assertions that Hagg gets more hate than deserved into things like me believing he's a top 4 defenseman (I've always said I think he's a third pairing defenseman), and my willingness to defend some of Hakstol's decisions into defending Hakstol at all costs (even though I've said for over a year I won't care if he's fired, and in the last month have said I actively support a coaching change). And of course you have the misrepresentation of my support for a Nylander trade, seen above. When it boils down to it, if you take an opinion that differs from the majority on this board (particularly if it is critical of a fan favorite player, even if just for a single play), expect to have all nuance and context stripped from your position and have it misrepresented into something easier to shoot down.

 

[Danko]

You know times are hard when I actually agree with everything milbury said.

 

[magnumpi]

You'll find that those posters who frequently accuse other posters of "lying" habitually misrepresent others' opinions in an amusing example of hypocrisy.

For instance, you'll often find smug sarcastic references to +/- "proving" whether a player is good or bad defensively. This, of course, is a thinly veiled shot at me, implying that I've argued and believe that +/- is a definitive measure of a player's defensive play. Of course, that isn't a correct representation of what I've said regarding +/- at all.

I've merely said that +/- isn't "meaningless," as Striiker *has* explicitly argued, and I've given examples as to why I think it isn't "meaningless" (such as Couturier consistently being at the top relative to his teammates over the years, and Simmonds near the bottom). However, I have also called it a "flawed" statistic that requires context and is *not* a definitive measure by itself of an individual's defensive play. When I have cited +/-, I have cited it as one of many factors in support of an opinion, and have never cited it in isolation as black and white irrefutable proof of a player's defensive performance. Nevertheless, you won't see that aspect of my position acknowledged. No, you'll just see Striiker make a straw man misrepresentation of my position that is easier to attack. That's lazy, disingenuous debate, especially from someone who likes to call others liars.

Similarly, you'll find posters twist my assertions that Hagg gets more hate than deserved into things like me believing he's a top 4 defenseman (I've always said I think he's a third pairing defenseman), and my willingness to defend some of Hakstol's decisions into defending Hakstol at all costs (even though I've said for over a year I won't care if he's fired, and in the last month have said I actively support a coaching change). And of course you have the misrepresentation of my support for a Nylander trade, seen above. When it boils down to it, if you take an opinion that differs from the majority on this board (particularly if it is critical of a fan favorite player, even if just for a single play), expect to have all nuance and context stripped from your position and have it misrepresented into something easier to shoot down.

I agree.

And I observed this for a while
They do the same thing to Deadhead.

And again, I agree with about 95% of Ignored Member's commentary but anytime suggests something outside of the official narrative then do resort to straw man tactics, weird accusations of lying, and distorting of the message.

3 weeks ago, I stated that TK appeared a little shaky on a couple shifts. It was simply an observation, more of an off-hand comment.
But the person took it as me slamming TK and defending Hakstol and all the other nonsense. The poster literally cursed at me.
And then TK scored a goal and it was the typicall BS of "oh look at the TK bashers now." I wasn;t bashing TK. He fumbled the puck and I wondered if Hakstol was in his head a little bit. It was never meant to be a big deal.

This mentality is no different than message boards I frequented 20 years. nothing new under the sun

 

[Tripod]

ok, anytime you don't agree with someone's message then they're lying.
very bizarre

if I'm to such a bad start then do me a favor and ignore me.

PErsonally, I'm not here to win a popularity contest. Good luck on your quest to the top here.

See...more lies.

I disagree with others peoples message, and they with mine at times. But when one can be proven untrue, then it's a lie...not AN OPINION.

Bad start? See...a lie. I said you were off to a good start. Try and keep up. And I have no one on ignore, and you won't be the 1st.

Well that's good on the contest. You wouldn't win. Me neither. Likely go to LOD or Appleyard....or Cap for his craziness.

And thank you for your contributions to the thread. Would not be the same without you.

 

[kudymen]

Every PGT becomes a whining meltdown fest, I guess the only question which poster is up next?

Btw the guy who talked about mirrors and studying human history 25 hours a day is still winning, sorry not sorry

 

[pit]

You can read me like a book

Is it a YA fiction book?

 

[magnumpi]

See...more lies.

I disagree with others peoples message, and they with mine at times. But when one can be proven untrue, then it's a lie...not AN OPINION.

Bad start? See...a lie. I said you were off to a good start. Try and keep up. And I have no one on ignore, and you won't be the 1st.

Well that's good on the contest. You wouldn't win. Me neither. Likely go to LOD or Appleyard....or Cap for his craziness.

And thank you for your contributions to the thread. Would not be the same without you.

you've gone on and on about lies and I still have no idea what you're talking about. Is that your favorite accusation or something?

Is it possible someone just misread something? or misinterpretation? or is viewing things in a different context?
for whatever reason, i thought the comment said "bad start" and or implied "bad start"

 

[pit]

Good god. Can't these threads confine themselves to hockey and stupid gifs instead of assaulting each other's character?


PS - Not only did I not get to watch today because it's not a day off in Canada, but I've also been told my co-worker who doesn't care about hockey at all was given four tickets to the Leafs/Flyers game tomorrow night for her whole family. Unfair!

At least I get to see the Phantoms/Marlies next weekend.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Should be asking that question of Myers now.

Myers has a couple things going for him.

1) Hak in all likelihood won’t pair him with Sanheim which means he’ll probably play in the top 4.

2) He has some of the gritty, hardworking, hard to play against qualities Hak eats up.

He just needs to win over Hextall first.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

This thread is about lit as a Christmas party at Nakatomi Plaza circa 1988.

 

[pit]

1) Hak in all likelihood won’t pair him with Sanheim which means he’ll probably play in the top 4.

Or he will devise a super-secret way to have a bottom 4 just to keep Meyers off the top 4. It will be like double secret probation.

 

[Tripod]

you've gone on and on about lies and I still have no idea what you're talking about. Is that your favorite accusation or something?

Is it possible someone just misread something? or misinterpretation? or is viewing things in a different context?
for whatever reason, i thought the comment said "bad start" and or implied "bad start"

I go on about lies, because that is what "bothers" me. I could care less if people have different opinions than me, they should. But when certain people lie, in an attempt to make and opinion, a true fact, theen that is different.

I am sorry you thought the comment said "bad start", when it said good start.

 

[Striiker]

I go on about lies, because that is what "bothers" me. I could care less if people have different opinions than me, they should. But when certain people lie, in an attempt to make and opinion, a true fact, then that is different.

I am sorry you thought the comment said "bad start", when it said good start.

 

[JXC]

need another branch

"i'm right and you're wrong... you're stupid, I'm smart"

Good point

It probably ought to be at the top

 

[Adam Warlock]

This was the first time I have ever actually been disappointed in a win.

Sure we have had the tank years where I knew losing was the best route but I still felt joy when the scored and anger when they were scored on.

Today though...i felt myself legitemetely hoping the ranger would win. Its really a sad feeling.

 

[Striiker]

I enjoyed the win even though logically I know it's probably not for the best.

I still enjoy it and especially when the top line dominates like they did.

Honestly, we could have been up 10-0 if it wasn't for Hank and his 5-leaf-clover.

 

[mja]

 

[FLYguy3911]

Or he will devise a super-secret way to have a bottom 4 just to keep Meyers off the top 4. It will be like double secret probation.

Or he’ll settle into a nice bottom 6 role like Robert Hagg.

 

[Striiker]

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

You guys think this whole thing is stupid, wait 'til you get a load of this.

* It suffers from gigantism and elephantitis, so will take a while to load

 

[JXC]

if you take an opinion that differs from the majority on this board (particularly if it is critical of a fan favorite player, even if just for a single play), expect to have all nuance and context stripped from your position and have it misrepresented into something easier to shoot down.

Yes.

 

[mja]

I totally didn't see that. In my defense, the last ten pages or whatever are just f***ing awful.

 

[Tripod]

You guys think this whole thing is stupid, wait 'til you get a load of this.

* It suffers from gigantism and elephantitis, so will take a while to load

Wait...you are talking about the Leafs GDT aren't you?

 

[Angry Hockey Dad]

I'm late but here we gooooo

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Wait...you are talking about the Leafs GDT aren't you?

Yessir.