MartyOwns
thank you shero
- Apr 1, 2007
- 24,217
- 18,033
I hate having an argument about an argument. I don't like it. But both he and you are wrong. Please square these statements:
Me: "Blackwood was terrible this year, Senn was mediocre and is already 22, and Appleby is whatever. Absolutely none of these people should be thought of as players who can one day play in the NHL at a competent level."
devilsblood: "I'm not overly confident he'll be a starter in the NHL, but I can pretty easily look past a bad season behind a bad team."
How do these people agree about this player? devilsblood says 'Well, maybe he won't be a starter, but I can pretend like this bad season never happened'. I am saying 'Based on this bad season, I do not think this player will ever play competently in the NHL'. How is this agreement? He's basically saying it's just a little airborne, it's still good, it's still good, and I'm saying it's [almost certainly] gone. These are two irreconcilible positions.
no offense, but i've read your posts on this topic and you're being reaaaally pretentiously defensive over a rather harmless point.
you both agree that he had a piss poor season. he thinks (correctly IMO) that 1 bad season shouldn't define a 21 year old's career. you think (based on somewhat flawed data) that he won't ever amount to anything. so, for the billionth time, you both agree that he sucked this year, and you disagree over his future. it's as plain and simple as that