Post-Game Talk: #78 | FLYERS 2 at Avalanche 1 | Wed., Mar. 28, 2018, 10:00 pm ET

[Beef Invictus]

I agree. Giroux is better than Lehtera.

That's who is being compared right? Did I get that right? What year is it?

 

[Striiker]

Sometimes there is a middle ground with things. And people want to label me a "Hakstol lover" simply because I take a middle ground with him and don't bash him across the board. It's because of the human psychological element of wanting to paint anything that doesn't 100% correlate with your own opinions as, essentially, evil.

Not here. That's why I had chosen to leave the forum, but have regretfully returned.

I know a couple people who almost never post anymore for the same reason.

Oh please.

You guys like to accuse people of being intolerant of any differing opinions, but that's an obvious lie.

The problem is almost always one of two things. Either:

a) they're different "opinions" that can't be backed up with any logic, any proof, or are just blatantly false, which is obviously not something people will be patient with
and/or
b) they're being argued by people who aren't socially competent, which gets in the way of any real discussion

I had a different opinion from the majority of the board... did I go running away or have a meltdown because it wasn't tolerated?
Nope. I laid out why I believed what I did, others disagreed, we had a discussion, and then it was tabled until more evidence was available to be discussed. Zero problems.
I didn't throw a tantrum because people disagreed with me and I didn't make ridiculous claims that I couldn't back up.

It's really just that simple. If I can do it, when I've been accused of so many different negative personality traits, then why can't someone else? Shouldn't it be easy to be better than me? Shouldn't it be easy to do if I managed it?

Anyone who refuses to post here anymore because "you're not allowed to have different opinions" is just an excuse making contrarian who can't back up their "opinions".



Also, nobody should complain about being called a "Hakstol lover" when they regularly label people "Hakstol haters" or some variation of that.

 

[FlyersMania2]

That's who is being compared right? Did I get that right? What year is it?

cue Chevy Chase Christmas Vacation "Where's the tylenol?"

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Are you in high school? Or early 20s? I am not trying to insult you but I am trying to understand where you are coming from.

If you know all of the people currently not posting on this board, you should start your own forum so they can all post. Make some advertising money + you already have a prime audience of passionate people who are displaced by all of us Jori and Hakstol haters.

Instead of being condescending, please read what I actually have written. I said I know "a couple" people who almost never post anymore because any disagreement of opinion with the popular crowd turns into insults, condescension, and an unwillingness to even consider alternate viewpoints. And I know them in person. I never said anything like I "know all of the people currently not posting on this board." Yeesh.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

That's who is being compared right? Did I get that right? What year is it?

Huh? I don't know where you got that. Nothing even close to that was suggested.

 

[FlyersMania2]

Instead of being condescending, please read what I actually have written. I said I know "a couple" people who almost never post anymore because any disagreement of opinion with the popular crowd turns into insults, condescension, and an unwillingness to even consider alternate viewpoints. And I know them in person. I never said anything like I "know all of the people currently not posting on this board." Yeesh.

Fine. I don't care to split hairs about these people lurking in the shadows whoever they are. No one is that harsh here - in fact the people whose feelings get hurt aren't posting with kittens and rainbows. Let's not pretend those who oppose you and these other non-posters are more harsh in their responses bc that just isn't true.

 

[Striiker]

Instead of being condescending, please read what I actually have written. I said I know "a couple" people who almost never post anymore because any disagreement of opinion with the popular crowd turns into insults, condescension, and an unwillingness to even consider alternate viewpoints. And I know them in person. I never said anything like I "know all of the people currently not posting on this board." Yeesh.

I proved that wrong.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Oh please.

You guys like to accuse people of being intolerant of any differing opinions, but that's an obvious lie.

The problem is almost always one of two things. Either:

a) they're different "opinions" that can't be backed up with any logic, any proof, or are just blatantly false, which is obviously not something people will be patient with
and/or
b) they're being argued by people who aren't socially competent, which gets in the way of any real discussion

I had a different opinion from the majority of the board... did I go running away or have a meltdown because it wasn't tolerated?
Nope. I laid out why I believed what I did, others disagreed, we had a discussion, and then it was tabled until more evidence was available to be discussed. Zero problems.
I didn't throw a tantrum because people disagreed with me and I didn't make ridiculous claims that I couldn't back up.

It's really just that simple. If I can do it, when I've been accused of so many different negative personality traits, then why can't someone else? Shouldn't it be easy to be better than me? Shouldn't it be easy to do if I managed it?

Anyone who refuses to post here anymore because "you're not allowed to have different opinions" is just an excuse making contrarian who can't back up their "opinions".



Also, nobody should complain about being called a "Hakstol lover" when they regularly label people "Hakstol haters" or some variation of that.

I think I've tried to be pretty calm, reasonable, and logical. I wouldn't label it a "tantrum" simply because I'm debating the side you disagree with.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I proved that wrong.

OK. I agree sometimes there are exceptions to the general rule. But you've taken part in your share of insults yourself.

 

[Striiker]

I think I've tried to be pretty calm, reasonable, and logical. I wouldn't label it a "tantrum" simply because I'm debating the side you disagree with.

This isn't specifically and exclusively about you... I'm talking about all the people who have ever made this same accusation.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

 

[Beef Invictus]

Huh? I don't know where you got that. Nothing even close to that was suggested.

I gotta lay off the cleaners, geez. What a whiff.

 

[FlyersMania2]

View attachment 108669

Perfect meme.

 

[Striiker]

OK. I agree sometimes there are exceptions to the general rule. But you've taken part in your share of insults yourself.

But that proves my point, doesn't it?

The only insults I've ever taken were directed at the way I argued, not at the content of what I was arguing. And most were probably deserved.

 

[CSKA1974]

Oh please.

You guys like to accuse people of being intolerant of any differing opinions, but that's an obvious lie.

The problem is almost always one of two things. Either:

a) they're different "opinions" that can't be backed up with any logic, any proof, or are just blatantly false, which is obviously not something people will be patient with
and/or
b) they're being argued by people who aren't socially competent, which gets in the way of any real discussion

I had a different opinion from the majority of the board... did I go running away or have a meltdown because it wasn't tolerated?
Nope. I laid out why I believed what I did, others disagreed, we had a discussion, and then it was tabled until more evidence was available to be discussed. Zero problems.
I didn't throw a tantrum because people disagreed with me and I didn't make ridiculous claims that I couldn't back up.

It's really just that simple. If I can do it, when I've been accused of so many different negative personality traits, then why can't someone else? Shouldn't it be easy to be better than me? Shouldn't it be easy to do if I managed it?

Anyone who refuses to post here anymore because "you're not allowed to have different opinions" is just an excuse making contrarian who can't back up their "opinions".



Also, nobody should complain about being called a "Hakstol lover" when they regularly label people "Hakstol haters" or some variation of that.

Oy vey. I will respond in kindness to your generalizations. The reason I stopped posting (or had a meltdown in your language) is that I stopped enjoying the conversations. And since participation on this board is my leisure time, I decided to dedicate it to something else.

 

[deadhead]

Meh, I've learned not to micro-analyze what coaches do, you often don't know the details of what's going on.

Fans jump to conclusions, Pederson was an idiot when he was hired, the worst of all the potential candidates, so-so two years ago, a genius after he won the SB with a backup QB. Belichick was an idiot in Cleveland, brilliant in New England after Bledsoe broke his ankle and he had to play the 6th rd backup QB.

I try to look at circumstances, the Flyers overall have average talent, five very good players, a handful of talented but very inexperienced prospects, and half of a roster composed of scrub veterans and marginal prospects [Filppula, Lehtera, Weise, Read, Leier, Laughton, MacDonald, Manning, Gudas, Hagg]
Overall, the goalies have been in the bottom third of the league.

So given that as a baseline, I'd say 85-90 points was a reasonable expectation.
I thought if this team had average goalie play they could reach 95 points this season.
So from that perspective, I can't conclude Hakstol is a below average coach, because his team is overachieving.
The goalies are as bad as last year, yet the team is going to finish around 10 points better, that's substantial improvement, and after trading their 3rd best scorer from last season.

"Just Win Baby."

 

[FlyersMania2]

Meh, I've learned not to micro-analyze what coaches do, you often don't know the details of what's going on.

Fans jump to conclusions, Pederson was an idiot when he was hired, the worst of all the potential candidates, so-so two years ago, a genius after he won the SB with a backup QB. Belichick was an idiot in Cleveland, brilliant in New England after Bledsoe broke his ankle and he had to play the 6th rd backup QB.

I try to look at circumstances, the Flyers overall have average talent, five very good players, a handful of talented but very inexperienced prospects, and half of a roster composed of scrub veterans and marginal prospects [Filppula, Lehtera, Weise, Read, Leier, Laughton, MacDonald, Manning, Gudas, Hagg]
Overall, the goalies have been in the bottom third of the league.

So given that as a baseline, I'd say 85-90 points was a reasonable expectation.
I thought if this team had average goalie play they could reach 95 points this season.
So from that perspective, I can't conclude Hakstol is a below average coach, because his team is overachieving.
The goalies are as bad as last year, yet the team is going to finish around 10 points better, that's substantial improvement, and after trading their 3rd best scorer from last season.

"Just Win Baby."

As you try to minimize Hakstol opposers' criticism of him by using terms like "micro-analyze" - a chess player indeed.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Meh, I've learned not to micro-analyze what coaches do, you often don't know the details of what's going on.

Fans jump to conclusions, Pederson was an idiot when he was hired, the worst of all the potential candidates, so-so two years ago, a genius after he won the SB with a backup QB. Belichick was an idiot in Cleveland, brilliant in New England after Bledsoe broke his ankle and he had to play the 6th rd backup QB.

I try to look at circumstances, the Flyers overall have average talent, five very good players, a handful of talented but very inexperienced prospects, and half of a roster composed of scrub veterans and marginal prospects [Filppula, Lehtera, Weise, Read, Leier, Laughton, MacDonald, Manning, Gudas, Hagg]
Overall, the goalies have been in the bottom third of the league.

So given that as a baseline, I'd say 85-90 points was a reasonable expectation.
I thought if this team had average goalie play they could reach 95 points this season.
So from that perspective, I can't conclude Hakstol is a below average coach, because his team is overachieving.
The goalies are as bad as last year, yet the team is going to finish around 10 points better, that's substantial improvement, and after trading their 3rd best scorer from last season.

"Just Win Baby."

That pretty much sums me up to a tee.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

lolz

We are waist deep in it now.

wait till we miss the POs by 1 point..

oh the IRONY !!!

 

[Striiker]

Oy vey. I will respond in kindness to your generalizations. The reason I stopped posting (or had a meltdown in your language) is that I stopped enjoying the conversations. And since participation on this board is my leisure time, I decided to dedicate it to something else.

OK, I'll amend that.

Anyone who refuses to post here anymore because "you're not allowed to have different opinions" is just an excuse making contrarian who can't back up their "opinions" or someone who doesn't like watching contrarians who can't back their opinions get - deservedly - shot down.

The fact remains, different opinions are perfectly acceptable on here. Saying they aren't is a factual lie and a mere excuse.

 

[Beef Invictus]

View attachment 108669

On the subject of this meme, this one had me dying last night:

It's a "you get it or you don't" kind of deal where if you don't get it, the consolation is that you aren't a huge nerd and probably have friends and lovers.

 

[gertbfrobe16]

at least the post in here are thought out and for the most part not insulting with comedy thrown in for entertainment. if you wanna see bad post and real rude posters go to the main and look at any gdt on a night that the bruins are playing or the thread about morrissey hitting some bruin gryz guy three days ago and 48 pages and still growing .

 

[Striiker]

Meh, I've learned not to micro-analyze what coaches do, you often don't know the details of what's going on.

Fans jump to conclusions, Pederson was an idiot when he was hired, the worst of all the potential candidates, so-so two years ago, a genius after he won the SB with a backup QB. Belichick was an idiot in Cleveland, brilliant in New England after Bledsoe broke his ankle and he had to play the 6th rd backup QB.

I try to look at circumstances, the Flyers overall have average talent, five very good players, a handful of talented but very inexperienced prospects, and half of a roster composed of scrub veterans and marginal prospects [Filppula, Lehtera, Weise, Read, Leier, Laughton, MacDonald, Manning, Gudas, Hagg]
Overall, the goalies have been in the bottom third of the league.

So given that as a baseline, I'd say 85-90 points was a reasonable expectation.
I thought if this team had average goalie play they could reach 95 points this season.
So from that perspective, I can't conclude Hakstol is a below average coach, because his team is overachieving.
The goalies are as bad as last year, yet the team is going to finish around 10 points better, that's substantial improvement, and after trading their 3rd best scorer from last season.

"Just Win Baby."

So there's something going on we don't know about that excuses using MacDonald 2nd most of all defensemen?
Or that makes it OK to use Lehtera more than Patrick?
Or any of the other obviously incorrect coaching moves that can't even be debated?

 

[FlyersMania2]

wait till we miss the POs by 1 point..

oh the IRONY !!!

Imagine this vanilla coach playing this boring system while relying on mediocre (or bad) players ending up with a middle of the round draft pick.

Would be the perfect ending to this

 

[CSKA1974]

OK, I'll amend that.

Anyone who refuses to post here anymore because "you're not allowed to have different opinions" is just an excuse making contrarian who can't back up their "opinions" or someone who doesn't like watching contrarians who can't back their opinions get - deservedly - shot down.

The fact remains, different opinions are perfectly acceptable on here. Saying they aren't is a factual lie and a mere excuse.

You know it's not true. The comments on infestation, leprosy and being knee deep in it just in this thread prove you wrong.

 

[Striiker]

You know it's not true. The comments on infestation, leprosy and being knee deep just in this thread prove you wrong.

I can personally vouch for that statements truth. I've experienced it.

Like I said, I had an opinion that went against the vast majority and I had zero problem. So explain that. Am I just that likable that I'm the only person to get away with fighting the hivemind?