Player Discussion Derek Dorsett: Best of luck in life.

[biturbo19]

Yeah. The offensive results aren't going to continue, but i'm just startled by how much better he's looked than he did early in the preseason. He looked like a guy who might be legitimately headed for early retirement after that injury. Now he's back to looking like more or less exactly the sort of bottom-6 grinder he was brought in to be. I hope it's sustainable. There is still an uncomfortable amount of term left on that deal. But i'm glad to see him back to actually playing his role fairly effectively.

 

[WTG]

he's been quite consistent during his time here.

Consistently bad.

Guy's an anchor possession wise and drags everyone around him down. Throughout his time in Vancouver he's been playing at levels that would get a prospect sent down, but since he fights people seem to endure him. Dorsett isn't good at defense, his possession stats show that he gets absolutely pumped with shots against when he's on the ice. I don't think Dorsett gets too much shit, I think he doesn't get enough shit. If we where to hold any other player to his standard they would be out of the league rather immediately. Look at Virtanen, guy is much better defensively then Dorsett yet doesn't get the same opportunity that Dorsett does, despite Dorsett being frankly a AHL player.

Dorsett shouldn't be in the NHL. If he where to get waived tomorrow it would make the team better.

 

[Nomobo]

Consistently bad.

Guy's an anchor possession wise and drags everyone around him down. Throughout his time in Vancouver he's been playing at levels that would get a prospect sent down, but since he fights people seem to endure him. Dorsett isn't good at defense, his possession stats show that he gets absolutely pumped with shots against when he's on the ice. I don't think Dorsett gets too much ****, I think he doesn't get enough ****. If we where to hold any other player to his standard they would be out of the league rather immediately. Look at Virtanen, guy is much better defensively then Dorsett yet doesn't get the same opportunity that Dorsett does, despite Dorsett being frankly a AHL player.

Dorsett shouldn't be in the NHL. If he where to get waived tomorrow it would make the team better.

Were you drunk or something when you wrote this?

 

[Jyrki21]

you've heard of nuclear fusion, well he's powered by spinal fusion. even better.

It's like that "Rookie of the Year" movie.

The moral is that dangerous injuries make us all superhuman, folks.

 

[m9]

Playing back to how he was during his first season here when he was the only guy that showed up many nights.

Obviously not sustainable, but we have a few younger guys who can take notes on how things happen when you go to the net.

 

[Peen]

Were you drunk or something when you wrote this?

Great contribution

You're so cool dude

 

[vancityluongo]

you've heard of nuclear fusion, well he's powered by spinal fusion. even better.

All this time we thought Jake needed to rub shoulders with Dorsett... but really Dorsett just needed to fuse his neck with Dorsett!!

 

[WTG]

Were you drunk or something when you wrote this?

What are the chances he will score at a 40 % pace for the rest of the season? Or even for the rest of the month?

You got all you can from dorsett put him on waivers cross your fingers someone takes him off our hands.

 

[DL44]

Player who best exemplifies the qualities of perseverance, sportsmanship, and dedication to ice hockey



Really don't like the negative sarcastic tone set by the OP...
A thread designed to incite negativity on a player that's been a great story so far.

 

[CanaFan]

Player who best exemplifies the qualities of perseverance, sportsmanship, and dedication to ice hockey



Really don't like the negative sarcastic tone set by the OP...
A thread designed to incite negativity on a player that's been a great story so far.

A tad cheeky I’ll give you but only negative if you think Dorsett’s play in the past 8 games is somehow sustainable.

He’ll come back to earth but for now it’s an amusing side story.

 

[DL44]

A tad cheeky I’ll give you but only negative if you think Dorsett’s play in the past 8 games is somehow sustainable.

He’ll come back to earth but for now it’s an amusing side story.

No.. It's clearly negative using the same sarcastic tone of responses to his play in the GDT from the usual suspects.
I did not find it amusing because i don't think the OP's intent was humor.

Sustaining his goal scoring rate has nothing to do with it...
(and on further thought.. how or why would it?)

 

[Nomobo]

What are the chances he will score at a 40 % pace for the rest of the season? Or even for the rest of the month?

You got all you can from dorsett put him on waivers cross your fingers someone takes him off our hands.

Of course he won't score at that rate
but he can pot 15 to 20 goals and continue his good defensive play.
Not a chance he gets out on waivers and you know it.

 

[MS]

Player who best exemplifies the qualities of perseverance, sportsmanship, and dedication to ice hockey



Really don't like the negative sarcastic tone set by the OP...
A thread designed to incite negativity on a player that's been a great story so far.

Yeah, I tend to agree with this.

He's far from my favourite player and I think playing him this much will bite us long-term, but right now this is a tremendously hard-working player who is playing well and getting success after a career-threatening injury, and I'm not going to make fun of him for it or turn it into a 'sucky player has nice run!' sort of big joke.

 

[CanaFan]

No.. It's clearly negative using the same sarcastic tone of responses to his play in the GDT from the usual suspects.
I did not find it amusing because i don't think the OP's intent was humor.

Sustaining his goal scoring rate has nothing to do with it...
(and on further thought.. how or why would it?)

I think that says more about your dour take on the people in this board than it does about the title.

It’s a positive, if exaggeratedly so thread title.

What would you like it to say? His name and jersey #?

 

[DL44]

I think that says more about your dour take on the people in this board than it does about the title.

It’s a positive, if exaggeratedly so thread title.

What would you like it to say? His name and jersey #?

That's your take on sarcasm?
Can you give an example of sarcasm used in a descriptively positive manner?
Sorry... but in this case.. the intent was clear.. and established in the GDT the last couple of games. As well as the OP authoring the Virtanen title as well... coincidence? But No need to derail this thread any longer. I'm sure Op doesn't need you speaking for him.We clearly see this differently.

 

[CanaFan]

That's your take on sarcasm?
Can you give an example of sarcasm used in a descriptively positive manner?
Sorry... but in this case.. the intent was clear.. and established in the GDT the last couple of games. As well as the OP authoring the Virtanen title as well... coincidence? But No need to derail this thread any longer. I'm sure Op doesn't need you speaking for him.We clearly see this differently.

Take a glance at the other thread titles on this board and tell me why this one stands out so much. Feel free to PM if you don’t want to clutter this thread.

 

[MS]

Take a glance at the other thread titles on this board and tell me why this one stands out so much. Feel free to PM if you don’t want to clutter this thread.

It's less the thread title than the over-the-top sarcastic comments about his play in the GDT and this thread, which I feel might be an attempt at deflection from people who had a strongly negative opinion of this player and have been caught off-guard by his play. Easier to go LOL GREATEST PLAYER EVER! than 'Oh, maybe I was wrong. Let's discuss what this player is doing well.'

I'm certainly no fan of Dorsett and thought he was brutal in 15-16 but through 8 games this year he's been one of our best forwards and has been one of the best players on the ice in probably 3 of those games (regardless of whether he scored or not) and that's terrific for a player of his role. And it's fair to question whether the poor play from 2015-17 that created those negative opinions was mostly a result of his medical issue rather than a pure lack of ability - which I what I'm sure most of us assumed.

Obviously he'll regress offensively. But so far this season he's been an asset for the club, he's working his tail off, and given everything he's been through I'm really happy for him. And I like him a lot more than I did a few months ago.

 

[CanaFan]

It's less the thread title than the over-the-top sarcastic comments about his play in the GDT and this thread, which I feel might be an attempt at deflection from people who had a strongly negative opinion of this player and have been caught off-guard by his play. Easier to go LOL GREATEST PLAYER EVER! than 'Oh, maybe I was wrong. Let's discuss what this player is doing well.'

I'm certainly no fan of Dorsett and thought he was brutal in 15-16 but through 8 games this year he's been one of our best forwards and has been one of the best players on the ice in probably 3 of those games (regardless of whether he scored or not) and that's terrific for a player of his role. And it's fair to question whether the poor play from 2015-17 that created those negative opinions was mostly a result of his medical issue rather than a pure lack of ability - which I what I'm sure most of us assumed.

Obviously he'll regress offensively. But so far this season he's been an asset for the club, he's working his tail off, and given everything he's been through I'm really happy for him. And I like him a lot more than I did a few months ago.

Probably fair and I’ll admit I’m one of those who was not at all a fan of this player in his time here. I feel the negativity is more skepticism at the sustainability of his play combined with some obvious luck in his production. As with all things it is usually the exaggerated opinion of one side that fuels an exaggerated counter response from the other and on it goes.

I just found the whining about the thread title disingenuous when we’ve got similar titles for Virtanen, Pouliot, and Granlund up right now.

 

[DL44]

It's less the thread title than the over-the-top sarcastic comments about his play in the GDT and this thread, which I feel might be an attempt at deflection from people who had a strongly negative opinion of this player and have been caught off-guard by his play. Easier to go LOL GREATEST PLAYER EVER! than 'Oh, maybe I was wrong. Let's discuss what this player is doing well.'

I'm certainly no fan of Dorsett and thought he was brutal in 15-16 but through 8 games this year he's been one of our best forwards and has been one of the best players on the ice in probably 3 of those games (regardless of whether he scored or not) and that's terrific for a player of his role. And it's fair to question whether the poor play from 2015-17 that created those negative opinions was mostly a result of his medical issue rather than a pure lack of ability - which I what I'm sure most of us assumed.

Obviously he'll regress offensively. But so far this season he's been an asset for the club, he's working his tail off, and given everything he's been through I'm really happy for him. And I like him a lot more than I did a few months ago.

Dead on.


One day I'll get my like button back from the mods.. for now take this thumbs up.. .

 

[DL44]

I just found the whining about the thread title disingenuous when we’ve got similar titles for Virtanen, Pouliot, and Granlund up right now.

You perceived my post as whining and disingenuous?
Nice.
To answer your question.. it's context.
The Bad Granlund title actually has context to a long debate and it's ironically funny...
Pouliot for reasons.. simple reference to people not getting the acquisition.. nothing wrong with that.
I have issue with the Virtanen title for the same reason... it's a sarcastic hyperbollic cop out... but not nearly as as over the top as what's been thrown Dorsett's way in GDTs and the Op. But I think you know all this and are being intentionally obtuse. Or am I giving you too much credit?

 

[MS]

Probably fair and I’ll admit I’m one of those who was not at all a fan of this player in his time here. I feel the negativity is more skepticism at the sustainability of his play combined with some obvious luck in his production. As with all things it is usually the exaggerated opinion of one side that fuels an exaggerated counter response from the other and on it goes.

I just found the whining about the thread title disingenuous when we’ve got similar titles for Virtanen, Pouliot, and Granlund up right now.

The difference is that in those threads people are actually discussing the player from both sides.

On Dorsett, the people who were slagging him for the last 2 years (and I'm definitely one of those people) have defaulted near-unanimously to a LOL SCORING STAR! BUT HE'LL REGRESS position rather than discussing the player and the fact that - regardless of how much he's scoring - he's actually looked very effective so far this season.

It's basically the anti-Benning equivalent to the LOL GAUNCE 1 GOAL! posts - taking a dumb, lowbrow position to a player doing well that you were invested in the other way because you don't want to have an actual discussion and admit that what's happening is different from what you expected.

 

[stampedingviking]

Consistently bad.

Guy's an anchor possession wise and drags everyone around him down. Throughout his time in Vancouver he's been playing at levels that would get a prospect sent down, but since he fights people seem to endure him. Dorsett isn't good at defense, his possession stats show that he gets absolutely pumped with shots against when he's on the ice. I don't think Dorsett gets too much ****, I think he doesn't get enough ****. If we where to hold any other player to his standard they would be out of the league rather immediately. Look at Virtanen, guy is much better defensively then Dorsett yet doesn't get the same opportunity that Dorsett does, despite Dorsett being frankly a AHL player.

Dorsett shouldn't be in the NHL. If he where to get waived tomorrow it would make the team better.

Just stop.

 

[CanaFan]

You perceived my post as whining and disingenuous?
Nice.
To answer your question.. it's context.
The Bad Granlund title actually has context to a long debate and it's ironically funny...
Pouliot for reasons.. simple reference to people not getting the acquisition.. nothing wrong with that.
I have issue with the Virtanen title for the same reason... it's a sarcastic hyperbollic cop out... but not nearly as as over the top as what's been thrown Dorsett's way in GDTs and the Op. But I think you know all this and are being intentionally obtuse. Or am I giving you too much credit?

So you don’t mind “sarcastic” thread titles if there is a historic “reason” for it? So maybe Dorsett’s “reason” is that he’s been an overplayed, marginally effective energy player for the past 3 seasons who is suddenly our top goal scorer which has some people suggesting that he has reached a new (lasting?) level of play?

Is that any less of a “reason” than the others?

What exactly am I missing here? What would you consider an appropriate thread title? “Derek Dorsett; he’s pretty ok but not so much that it seems we are making fun of him”?

 

[DL44]

So you don’t mind “sarcastic” thread titles if there is a historic “reason” for it? So maybe Dorsett’s “reason” is that he’s been an overplayed, marginally effective energy player for the past 3 seasons who is suddenly our top goal scorer which has some people suggesting that he has reached a new (lasting?) level of play?

Is that any less of a “reason” than the others?

What exactly am I missing here?

Apparently the whole point.
And I PM'd you about how it wasn't about the thread title. Missed that as well.

 

[CanaFan]

The difference is that in those threads people are actually discussing the player from both sides.

On Dorsett, the people who were slagging him for the last 2 years (and I'm definitely one of those people) have defaulted near-unanimously to a LOL SCORING STAR! BUT HE'LL REGRESS position rather than discussing the player and the fact that - regardless of how much he's scoring - he's actually looked very effective so far this season.

It's basically the anti-Benning equivalent to the LOL GAUNCE 1 GOAL! posts - taking a dumb, lowbrow position to a player doing well that you were invested in the other way because you don't want to have an actual discussion and admit that what's happening is different from what you expected.

I guess. Except Dorsett is 31 and I doubt we are going to see a version of the player that hasn’t existed by and large for the past decade of his NHL career. Personally I don’t care that he’s doing well except that it runs the risk of increasing his ice time at the expense of other more “important” players. If I had a choice I’d rather see him back to playing 10-11 mins a night and distributing those minutes to Virtanen, Boeser, Baertschi. Sucks for Dorsett but he’s not a significant piece of this team’s future and so I don’t really care how he performs. If that makes me a dick then so be it.