GDT: Hawks vs Sharks - 7:30PM CT on NBCSCH and ESPN+ -- Home Opener on 10-10

[BobbyJet]

if the hawks give up on Nylander after his preseason and those two games you might as well just light a match to the organization and blow it up, the guy oozes talent and he will succeed, he needs time and the correct opportunity, if he does not get it in buffalo or here it will be somewhere else.

have some patience Hawks

I still expect Nylander will have a long leash here - a few games watching from above is a message to him that he has things to learn, a part of the process.

 

[Pez68]

oh god this again. it isn't a problem of effort. even if it is (which i don't think it is for reasons i will outline) you have literally no way of knowing that short of having an inside perspective on the motivations and mindset of each player on the ice from moment to moment. this isn't an "eye test" thing, this is you claiming to have the supernatural power to access the inner psychology of people you are viewing through a television screen. and that's not to say that it's impossible to gauge a general feeling for how much a guy is trying on this or that play, but it's to say that any argument that has "effort" or "compete" as it's central thesis is wholly inadequate to explain what is actually happening on the ice.

to illustrate why i don't think it's a problem of effort, i could give numerous examples. the best i can think of is seabrook, who you can tell is trying so hard that he's absolutley exhausted after every shift, and yet he looks like he's just standing around out there on numerous goals. but your point is about the "talented forwards" so look at kane. the guy was so clearly frustrated all throughout the game, and yet outside of stromes goal he was practically invisible. or take nylander. the whole game he had chances on the puck. he was clearly puyting himself in the position to do something with it, and yet every time he tried to get a shot away his stick would get tied up, or he'd get a bad bounce from a rolling puck that he couldn't corral.

to me what this shows isn't that they simply aren't trying. it shows a problem of execution. the "skill" guys put themselves into excellent positions (just look at how many breakaways they had through the first two periods) but simply can't convert. it's an inability to translate effort into goals that is plaguing this team's offense more than anything, which is a really odd realization considering this was a game in which they scored 4 goals.

Except forwards have other responsibilities aside from scoring, which is where you see the lack of effort. Most of the time the guy that wins a puck battle is the guy that wants it more. This is a huge issue with the forwards on this team. At the end of the game they were chipping the puck in and THEIR D were the first ones in on the forecheck. If that isn't an effort issue I'm not sure what is.

 

[deytookerjaabs]

Just watched the game.

First off, 2 or 3 of the goals against were serious WTF type goals. Tough break there.

Secondly, this team cannot ****ing transition to a shut-down mentality. Some of the lamest rosters in the league year to year are capable of it so it's not a roster issue.

Third, I dunno, here's my mess of drunken ramblin's: Strome, please commit to D at your blue line and in general. Seabs, perhaps steroids. Gus, know what you're doing before you get the puck and don't over-handle it. Kubalik, Gus, & others, if you see a killer chance don't defer to Kane when he has no shot. Shaw, you were the real Lexus "Player of the game." Nylander, you got mad skill now dip down with your hips and box guys out and eat the ****ing puck when needed. Cags, you look good, be patient. Saad, looks good too. Smith, wheaties, steroids, adrenochrome, just get your compete back. Carpenter, sha na na na.


Colliton, get ejected from a game for ****'s sake so we know you're there.

 

[Styles]

October 4th - October 10th

 

[Hawsse]

Except forwards have other responsibilities aside from scoring

okay? it's certainly their primary purpose if nothing else.

which is where you see the lack of effort.

no, i don't see a "lack of effort". you can't see something like that. you infer it from the way someone does something. that's the issue here. if there is a problem, describe it. don't appeal to abstractions that you don't have the capacity to demonstrate.

Most of the time the guy that wins a puck battle is the guy that wants it more.

bullshit. you cannot by force of will alone win a puck. a quadruple amputee could never, no matter how hard he tried, win a puck battle against an nhl player. the guy that wins the puck battle is the guy that outplays the other guy. it's as simple as that. this obsession with accusing the players of "not trying" is so mystifying to me.

At the end of the game they were chipping the puck in and THEIR D were the first ones in on the forecheck.

that's hyperbole to the extreme if you mean to suggest this was the case all throughout the third. but regardless, yeah, i would agree the team sucked in the third. i don't see why it is necessary, or even preferable, to chalk that up to a lack of effort as opposed to an effort that failed.

 

[BK]

okay? it's certainly their primary purpose if nothing else.

no, i don't see a "lack of effort". you can't see something like that. you infer it from the way someone does something. that's the issue here. if there is a problem, describe it. don't appeal to abstractions that you don't have the capacity to demonstrate.

bull****. you cannot by force of will alone win a puck. a quadruple amputee could never, no matter how hard he tried, win a puck battle against an nhl player. the guy that wins the puck battle is the guy that outplays the other guy. it's as simple as that. this obsession with accusing the players of "not trying" is so mystifying to me.

that's hyperbole to the extreme if you mean to suggest this was the case all throughout the third. but regardless, yeah, i would agree the team sucked in the third. i don't see why it is necessary, or even preferable, to chalk that up to a lack of effort as opposed to an effort that failed.

You can 100% see a lack of effort but you cannot quantify it.

 

[Hawsse]

You can 100% see a lack of effort but you cannot quantify it.

no. like i said before, this isn't an "eye test" thing. it's an attribution of an inner psychological state onto someone based on their actions. you don't "see" that someone is trying or vice versa. you infer it from what you do see.

quit trying to stick me in the math nerd box. i don't privilege quantification over qualification, and i've already explained this to you in detail. i privilege substance over ethereal navel-gazing.

 

[BK]

no. like i said before, this isn't an "eye test" thing. it's an attribution of an inner psychological state onto someone based on their actions. you don't "see" that someone is trying or vice versa. you infer it from what you do see.

quit trying to stick me in the math nerd box. i don't privilege quantification over qualification, and i've already explained this to you in detail. i privilege substance over ethereal navel-gazing.

Never stuck you in the math nerds box so you can stop being so sensitive. It was a general comment. I can argue that I did the opposite when I asked about your background.

You can see effort in hockey in little actions/inactions along with understanding the players ability. It is 100% an eye test thing.

Just because you personally can see effort doesn’t mean other can’t. If you are around the game long enough you can see these things.

 

[Hawsse]

Never stuck you in the math nerds box so you can stop being so sensitive.

so is it just a coincidence that you chalk basically every disagreement you have with me up to "heh, you are too focused on NUMBERS. try WATCHING with your EYES" even when i've made no reference to stats or quantification at all?

You can see effort in hockey in little actions/inactions along with understanding the players ability. It is 100% an eye test thing.

Just because you personally can see effort doesn’t mean other can’t.

again, this is completely false. you do not see "effort". what you see are the actions. you then interpret what you see in terms of the effort being made. this is a matter of interpretation and rationalization, not of seeing.

If you are around the game long enough you can see these things.

"heh, try watching hockey some time kiddo."
i've watched the game for quite a long time. i've also talked about the game for quite a long time with a great many people, and what i've learned is that the way people usually talk about it lacks any real substance and doesn't tell you anything useful about what is happening in reality.

 

[BK]

so is it just a coincidence that you chalk basically every disagreement you have with me up to "heh, you are too focused on NUMBERS. try WATCHING with your EYES" even when i've made no reference to stats or quantification at all?

Yeah this has not really happened. I actually went as far as asking about you let background to give me better insight to how you view things. Again you are just reading into something that is not there.

 

[AmericanDream]

okay? it's certainly their primary purpose if nothing else.

no, i don't see a "lack of effort". you can't see something like that. you infer it from the way someone does something. that's the issue here. if there is a problem, describe it. don't appeal to abstractions that you don't have the capacity to demonstrate.

bull****. you cannot by force of will alone win a puck. a quadruple amputee could never, no matter how hard he tried, win a puck battle against an nhl player. the guy that wins the puck battle is the guy that outplays the other guy. it's as simple as that. this obsession with accusing the players of "not trying" is so mystifying to me.

that's hyperbole to the extreme if you mean to suggest this was the case all throughout the third. but regardless, yeah, i would agree the team sucked in the third. i don't see why it is necessary, or even preferable, to chalk that up to a lack of effort as opposed to an effort that failed.

just stop on that note man..

 

[Hawsse]

Yeah this has not really happened. I actually went as far as asking about you let background to give me better insight to how you view things. Again you are just reading into something that is not there.

then why mention effort being unquantifiable at all?

just stop on that note man..

no, it's true. show me a picture of "effort". you can't, because it's not a thing. it's a concept. sometimes it can be a useful concept. it isn't useful as the central plank of an argument about why a hockey team lost a game.

 

[BK]

again, this is completely false. you do not see "effort". what you see are the actions. you then interpret what you see in terms of the effort being made. this is a matter of interpretation and rationalization, not of seeing.

"heh, try watching hockey some time kiddo."
i've watched the game for quite a long time. i've also talked about the game for quite a long time with a great many people, and what i've learned is that the way people usually talk about it lacks any real substance and doesn't tell you anything useful about what is happening in reality.

These “actions” you speak of are plays attributed to effort. If a player consistently does these little actions you easily come to the logical conclusion and see that a player is or isn’t putting in the effort. Example: Compare Hossa to Kane in the defensive end and backcheck. This is not a talent issue.

Again you are being too sensitive as I never said or implied “try watching the game kiddo”, believe me I would just say that if that is what I am trying to say. Example: When I said it was very clear you have not watched Boqvist much or at all. There is no point in being cryptic or passive aggressive on here, it is much easier to be blunt.

I will say watch and talking with people is much different than playing (not talking house league obviously) but it is not the be all end all.

 

[BK]

then why mention effort being unquantifiable at all?

no, it's true. show me a picture of "effort". you can't, because it's not a thing. it's a concept. sometimes it can be a useful concept. it isn't useful as the central plank of an argument about why a hockey team lost a game.

Because it is a general comment in the context of the whole conversation.

 

[Hawsse]

These “actions” you speak of are plays attributed to effort.

attributed being the operative word.

If a player consistently does these little actions you easily come to the logical conclusion and see that a player is or isn’t putting in the effort.

again, this is precisely the point i am making. it's a matter of exercising logic to make inferences, not of simply watching.

This is not a talent issue.

go back and read my original response. i never said it was a talent issue.

Again you are being too sensitive as I never said or implied “try watching the game kiddo”

you said that even if i can't see it, others can. then you said that it's people who have been "around the game long enough" who can see it. the implication was clearly that i simply can't "see" the abstract concept because i'm not familiar enough with the game.

 

[AmericanDream]

then why mention effort being unquantifiable at all?

no, it's true. show me a picture of "effort". you can't, because it's not a thing. it's a concept. sometimes it can be a useful concept. it isn't useful as the central plank of an argument about why a hockey team lost a game.

I enjoy some of your posts, you bring a different take to the conversation at times...but other times you come off as a complete douche that has a "mightier than thou" posting approach..we get it, you like to use big words and are a deep thinker...but this is a f***ing hockey chat board and honestly most of the stuff you post comes off as simply someone that hasn't played this game at any competitive level. now that doesn't mean shit overall, but in your case you should show more humility and an opening to understanding things you simply haven't experienced.. I appreciate the time and effort you put in, and you obviously have a different take, but you need to stop coming off as smarter than the rest of us, and it really does come off as that. the simple fact that you posted you can't see a lack of effort is absolutely horrific and something nobody that has played this or any sport would say.. you 100% can tell when someone isn't giving their all, you 100% can tell when someone isn't giving full effort..it is why coaches call out those players and demand it from their players..it is obvious to a TRAINED eye and obvious to a fellow teammate. I think you can be a real damn good poster here, but you need to back off some on your takes, they are simply flat out bad.

 

[BK]

attributed being the operative word.

again, this is precisely the point i am making. it's a matter of exercising logic to make inferences, not of simply watching.

go back and read my original response. i never said it was a talent issue.

you said that even if i can't see it, others can. then you said that it's people who have been "around the game long enough" who can see it. the implication was clearly that i simply can't "see" the abstract concept because i'm not familiar enough with the game.

I will respond later but we are not far apart on what we think. I will say you are reading to deep into my comments.

 

[Hawsse]

we get it, you like to use big words and are a deep thinker

...the biggest word i used in that post was "unquantifiable" and it's a whopping one syllable larger than "quantifiable" which is the word bk used.

but you need to stop coming off as smarter than the rest of us

i post what i have to say. i never claim that i'm smarter than someone else. in fact, i very seldom even mention the character of who i'm talking with. i give an argument that i think is true. if you disagree, provide a counter-argument, and we can go from there.

the simple fact that you posted you can't see a lack of effort is absolutely horrific

you act like it's equivalent to commiting a quadruple homicide or something. like "ohhhh someone said something that goes against my basic intuitions, how horrific."

you 100% can tell when someone isn't giving their all, you 100% can tell when someone isn't giving full effort

yeah, i never disagreed with this point in the slightest, except for the "100%" bit. it's not like my claim was that effort is some unreal thing that you can't even properly describe. i said you can't see it. you have to see something, and then apply your conception of effort onto it.

I think you can be a real damn good poster here, but you need to back off some on your takes, they are simply flat out bad.

i won't back off from a damn thing until someone demonstrates it to be false.

 

[AmericanDream]

...the biggest word i used in that post was "unquantifiable" and it's a whopping one syllable larger than "quantifiable" which is the word bk used.

i post what i have to say. i never claim that i'm smarter than someone else. in fact, i very seldom even mention the character of who i'm talking with. i give an argument that i think is true. if you disagree, provide a counter-argument, and we can go from there.

you act like it's equivalent to commiting a quadruple homicide or something. like "ohhhh someone said something that goes against my basic intuitions, how horrific."

yeah, i never disagreed with this point in the slightest, except for the "100%" bit. it's not like my claim was that effort is some unreal thing that you can't even properly describe. i said you can't see it. you have to see something, and then apply your conception of effort onto it.

i won't back off from a damn thing until someone demonstrates it to be false.

lol

 

[Hawsse]

lol

so, do you just not have an argument? or are you conceding that you completely misrepresented me as saying something as trivially false as "you can't tell when someone makes an effort"?

 

[Naster Okan]

so, do you just not have an argument? or are you conceding that you completely misrepresented me as saying something as trivially false as "you can't tell when someone makes an effort"?

Dude...

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

okay? it's certainly their primary purpose if nothing else.

no, i don't see a "lack of effort". you can't see something like that. you infer it from the way someone does something. that's the issue here. if there is a problem, describe it. don't appeal to abstractions that you don't have the capacity to demonstrate.

bull****. you cannot by force of will alone win a puck. a quadruple amputee could never, no matter how hard he tried, win a puck battle against an nhl player. the guy that wins the puck battle is the guy that outplays the other guy. it's as simple as that. this obsession with accusing the players of "not trying" is so mystifying to me.

that's hyperbole to the extreme if you mean to suggest this was the case all throughout the third. but regardless, yeah, i would agree the team sucked in the third. i don't see why it is necessary, or even preferable, to chalk that up to a lack of effort as opposed to an effort that failed.

You said it best. I don’t know if you intend it but you come off extremely aggressively.

 

[Hawsse]

You said it best. I don’t know if you intend it but you come off extremely aggressively.

that's not hyperbole. it's an example that demonstrates the point i was making. aggression isn't my intention, but intentions don't mean much. i just try to get my point across.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

that's not hyperbole. it's an example that demonstrates the point i was making. aggression isn't my intention, but intentions don't mean much. i just try to get my point across.

It’s a goofy ridiculous example because of course somebody with no limbs could win a board battle against a professional hockey player. When somebody says it comes down to effort they’re obviously comparing it to two people that are in the .1% of their field where every sliver of percentile matters.

And of course intention means something. If you come off as needlessly aggressive it feels like you’re just trying to win an argument instead of having a constructive and educational back and forth.

 

[Hawsse]

It’s a goofy ridiculous example because of course somebody with no limbs could win a board battle against a professional hockey player. When somebody says it comes down to effort they’re obviously comparing it to two people that are in the .1% of their field where every sliver of percentile matters.

i was responding to someone who said that effort is what wins puck battles, and i provided an example where that's clearly false, and i don't think the example has to be that extreme. more times than not, a smaller guy will lose to a larger guy in a puck battle. one guy will generally lose to three or four along the boards. a less skilled player will lose to a more skilled player more times than not. a guy that makes a mistake will lose to the guy that happens to be at the right place to capitalize. there are many, many reasons for why a puck battle could be lost, and all of them are better explanations than "lack of effort".

And of course intention means something. If you come off as needlessly aggressive it feels like you’re just trying to win an argument instead of having a constructive and educational back and forth.

well, seeing as how i already explained what my intention is (to state my opinion and defend it against arguments i find lacking), then there should be no problemo here.