Neither you or I wanted Lucic back at that term and cap hit. And we weren't nearly alone. Yes, were there some people vehemently for bringing him back no matter what? Yup. And there still are.
You've got to understand that when you write out three page long thread discussions, you are inevitably going to attract posters who think the opposite of you that want an equally long conversation. You then set yourself up to think that there is a gang ready to burn you at the stake.
This is like me with firing Claude Julien. While I think that was a more even split than the Lucic thing, I could not stand the unconditional Claude/"there's no one else available" supporters. Truthufully, however, I think a healthy portion of this board was ready to move on. I certainly wasn't nearly alone.
I appreciate what you are saying. and I know hf has rules about necroing threads. or getting into this... you were wrong in 2014 thing...
I wish they didn't have a policy against it because I love when I have debates with my friends from 5-10-20 years ago. that's who I am on a personal level. I don't really care when im wrong... not much
I actually have said that no one gets it right more than 50% of the time. that's a philosophy I have. ive invited people to share with me their ideas and if they get it right more than 50% of the time I will eat humble crow and call them a genius.
since I don't think anyone gets it right more than 50% of the time... im prepared to live with my score being less than 50% too.
theres certain things I spend a hell of a lot of time on... things that aren't a matter of opinion. things that are actually facts. when im arguing a fact I will be a bit more vigorous in my argument. specially when its an area I spend a lot of time developing my understanding.
contracts... I get pretty vigorous on those.
the teams success record... hell, I love to celebrate positive achievements so I will definitely argue in favor that this team has a pretty damn good record over the years of success
terry oreillys legacy... hes my all time favorite hero for a reason
there are some things I will argue and they mean enough to me that I will throw some elbows when I argue. so, apologize to the innocent who get tagged. my elbows are probably meant for a few others here who like to personally attack me. I cant name them because to me its never personal. its about my passion for my team and the game it plays
other things like... drafting and developing kids... I have no particular passion about it. I only have 45 years experience as a bruin fan. not all kids end up making it. and theres a limit how many kids can make it at one time. im not passionate about it... I just think the odds are in favor im right about it because history tells me im right
when I said lucic was a bad option to sign... hell im a lucic fan. I certainly wasn't passionate about saying he should be dealt. I said history tells us he should be dealt. im not a genius for looking at history, im just someone with a lot of experience who takes the time to study my history
as I said... I did a history look at marchand and so far hes defying history. my passion is in favor of marchand. ive made over a dozen posts since I said we shouldn't resign him and in every one I happily eat crow. im very passionately happy I was wrong about him so far
I said history is ok about signing david backes. I compared him to big bodies like mike Knuble and Brenden shanahan and mike fisher and ron francais and others who didn't necessarily need to run people over to be effective... who had talent in the slot and could defend and could use their big bodies even as they slowed down to get their position. of course backes hasn't been able to stay healthy, but I continue to believe if he gets healthy he will justify his contract. will I be wrong? maybe...
but its not really me... its history
history wasn't kind for louie Eriksson. I compared him to esa tikkanen, jere lehtenen, pj axlesson, jan Eriksson from the rangers... and some others who were smallish shifty euros known for their 2 way positional play. again you see overwhelming evidence that when these guys lose a step near 30... they fall off the face of the earth overnight
its a rare type of guy that stays effective much beyond 30-31 years of age so general idea is to bet against these guys. but truly elite talent can stay effect to 40 and some other certain type players have a better track record of continuing success too
not all players are finished at 30. dmen who are 'smart' tend to continue to play well after 30. guys with size who don't get hurt... tend to continue past 30
its the smaller/skaters who slow down that fall off quick... and the guys that are constantly making body contact... and the guys who had to work harder then everyone else just to earn a living on the 4th line.
anyhow... I do wish that people stopped trying to say I am always trying to claim im perfect. theres a few people here who hate me on a personal level that tried to spread this crap about me over the past several years. maybe they didn't like when I said we are all less than 50% because I include them in that too. but I sure as hell include myself
