ATD2011 Jim Robson Semi: (1) Kimberly Dynamiters vs. (5) San Jose Sharks

[Derick*]

Nor should you be.

I know. That's what I said.

Just because you win an argument does not mean you'll win a series.

I know. But the fact is aggravating because it makes losing seem arbitrary and leaves open the possibility that it was.

Bugg built a strong team. Your first unit was awesome, but your lower units left much to be desired and featured too many reaches for lesser modern players. It was your first draft and you probably learned a ton about older players throughout the process. You acquitted yourself quite well, but you lost to a guy who slipped a couple of semi-abusive trades under the radar and built himself a very top-heavy team. Come back next year and I'm sure you'll do better.

I'm not denying that there were legitimate reasons to vote against my team. I'm saying that it's discouraging that people vote by them without bringing them up in the thread for my to at least have a chance to argue, one reason being that it leaves open the possibility that the reasons were illegitimate.

I don't think I'll come back next year. It was interesting to try once to see what it's like, but now that I have I won't be able to invest the time when I know that at the end it could be for naught because of any unknown person's arbitrary whim.

I don't mean this to try to delegitimatize my loss somehow or say that my loss was unfair. I just mean that, to me, the way the game works makes losing unsatisfying in a way it wouldn't be if the reasons one won or loss felt more objective.

 

[Sturminator]

Yeah, it does come down to people's opinions in the end, though I honestly believe that the core of dedicated GMs (who are also most of the regular voters) in this thing are quite objective, overall. I voted for your team to win in seven, though I can understand why someone might have voted for Kimberly. Don't be discouraged by losing. You'll find that things tend to go much better the second time around. No rookie GM has ever advanced far in this thing on his own.

 

[Leafs Forever]

I too encourage you to give it another shot. It is unfortunate, but much like hockey, the reasons one team defeats another are chaotic and unknown until the series is over.

Besides, winning isn't really the grand objective of the ATD; can you not say you have learned a great deal about hockey history from this experience?

 

[hfboardsuser]

While this was indeed a team that provides a solid foil to my Dynamiters, I think a big part of the problem is that your style of "arguing" is just that- it's arguing, and it often comes across as disrespectful. Brave Canadian, for example, was debating you by pointing out what he thought was a contradiction. You took it as some kind of personal slight and made a melodramatic comment. Probably not coincidentally, BC never came back to the thread.

Show a bit more restraint next time and perhaps you'll have a better result.

 

[Derick*]

While this was indeed a team that provides a solid foil to my Dynamiters, I think a big part of the problem is that your style of "arguing" is just that- it's arguing, and it often comes across as disrespectful. Brave Canadian, for example, was debating you by pointing out what he thought was a contradiction. You took it as some kind of personal slight and made a melodramatic comment. Probably not coincidentally, BC never came back to the thread.

Show a bit more restraint next time and perhaps you'll have a better result.

In no way were my comments disrespectful. In no way did I take anything as a personal slight. In no way were my comments melodramatic.

This sort of thing is exactly why I won't be participating again. Who knows what kind of arbitrary, petty reason someone is going to vote against you? Comments like this just completely ruin it for me.

 

[hfboardsuser]

In no way were my comments disrespectful. In no way did I take anything as a personal slight. In no way were my comments melodramatic.

I am sorry this has become so personal to you you're evading the obvious.

Really? That's not melodramatic?

Bugg is frankly losing this debate handidly and I think he's pretty much given up in frustration. I don't see how Kimberly can win this match-up at this point.

Or this?

It is discouraging to "lose" and not be told why, and it forces me to assume the reasons were invalid (seed, glance at the rosters not considering the arguments, etc.)

Or this?

This sort of thing is exactly why I won't be participating again. Who knows what kind of arbitrary, petty reason someone is going to vote against you? Comments like this just completely ruin it for me.

No, the reason you won't be participating again is because you lost. Instead of saying "Well, you know, the voters didn't like something about my team. I guess I need to learn from this experience and move forward," you chose to blame it on "arbitrary" and "invalid" voting.

I've never won this thing. Never reached the Finals, I don't think. As was said, you don't play to win- you play to learn, and being stubborn to the point that you arguments consist of juvenile hyperbole like how my team will be "shelled" by a "cataclysmic" matching problem and a "dominant" powerplay doesn't do anything for you. Any time someone tried to challenge a point with you, the response was something like this:

-On Bylsma:

"No offense, but I think statements like this make it clear you're speaking out of frustration for the cocah of your own team that was just eliminated."

-On the top-six forwards versus one another:

"Mr. Bugg's forward to forward comparision post borders on ludicrous."

-On Drillon vs. Hextall:

"I am sorry this has become so personal to you you're evading the obvious."


But no, it's because the voters were all wrong or misinformed and your team was better. By all means, try again next year with that attitude. And the next. Unless your team is vastly superior to the naked eye, it's just not going to work.

 

[seventieslord]

For a balanced and realistic take on what just happened here, see posts 75 and 79.

Cognition, you are a promising young GM... you better be back, I mean it.

 

[Derick*]

Post 79, and the rest of Mr Bugg's slander, are the furthest thing from a "balanced and realistic take."

I am flattered that you want me back seventies but I won't be.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

It's not as though your team was ridiculously superior to his team and people just voted by the seedings without looking at arguments and the actual rosters. I'm pretty sure I had you winning. Both teams had holes in them, and people thought that yours might have been a little bigger. I wouldn't be upset if I was you. For a first timer, you performed quite well and knocked out a guy that had been in an ATD before. My first ATD team was pretty bad, and after an MLD, AAA Draft, and B-League Draft, I feel like I know a thousand times more than I did before. Give it a shot, trust me.

 

[seventieslord]

Post 79, and the rest of Mr Bugg's slander, are the furthest thing from a "balanced and realistic take."

I am flattered that you want me back seventies but I won't be.

LOL... sorry I meant 77. Not 79.

 

[Derick*]

LOL... sorry I meant 77. Not 79.

Oh. Okay that makes me feel a bit better

 

[seventieslord]

Oh. Okay that makes me feel a bit better

oh yeah, and I won't believe you until ATD2012 is underway without you. You think you're the first one to say you won't be back?

 

[Derick*]

I appreciate everyone who, post my complaining, came in and amiably explained what they thought the weaknesses in my team were and defended the system in place. Made the process of losing more interesting and rewarding than it might have been. I'm glad you guys accomodated my complaints instead of complaining about my complaining.