Speculation: What happens to Tatar now?

Lord Stan 2020

Elite fan
Jun 29, 2013
12,262
886
New Port Richey Fl
www.facebook.com
well it seems most of you take offence to my opinion and honestly, I already answered some of your most concerns as well throughout my posts. So I will try not to say anything on this subject and save me a hassle of replaying to everyone of you.

Let's see how it plays out shall we?

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs:) So what if others disagree. Remains to be seen. I took things that you said wrong probably and doubted you have seen and put a lot of effort into the prospects we have etc.. I did not view you as a non fan or anything or wrong in your own views its how you see things.

90 something percent of the fans on this board realize we have too many old guys who are not worthwhile adding cleary just makes zero sense. We dont want him taking up 16 minutes a game when are others who can play like 3 years ago cleary deserving to get his spot and at least a look to see if they can do better than the last two year cleary. Again is 90 % of the people on here who know that abby is useless on top two lines and should have been shipped out of those positions after a 2-3 month trial. That was enough to know he is not the right guy.

So now we lost brunner and fippula for alfie and weiss. Kept the same team that Mike put abby and cleary on top 2 lines and took up 16 minutes a game.

A team that GOT LUCKY very very lucky to even sniff playoffs when we have talent being under used which obviously makes us more competitive and gives us a better chance to win and not squeak into a playoff spot.

Agree or disagree you owe no one an explanation or apology.
 
Jul 30, 2005
17,660
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
It's flawed because it's an appeal to authority instead of looking at the argument itself. And a rather bad authority at that. It's not like he's a doctor or something that requires specialized knowledge. It's not like being a pro-athlete. Pretty much anyone with decent writing ability and a passion for the sport can do it. Sports interviews are a joke. "So, do you think it really helps to have >key player< back from injury?" "What do you have to do better in the next period?" "How do you like >new guy<?"

And the idea that if you're not doing something professionally, you must automatically be worse at it than someone who does, is flawed. It's not a conclusion that makes sense. Again, especially in a field like sports journalism. People take different jobs for different reasons. If someone takes another job because it pays better, or because they like it more, it doesn't mean they then suck at everything else. People can be talented in more than 1 thing. I personally make no judgment on RWN's "sports writing" ability because I haven't seen any.

For starters, and RWN mentioned it, I cringed as Malik described Tatar as "speedy" who burned by Cleary. I mean... yeah... Cleary is slow. I mean, is that supposed to be insightful? His content is filled with fluff and extremely subjective opinions that aren't really informative or useful.

Just as a completely unrelated question. Have you ever question a professional's ability in their field of work of which you are not also a professional?
I don't think it's a fallacious appeal to authority. Typically, the point of the fallacy of appealing to authority is that their authority is the premise. Here, I think you'll find that I have my own.

The logic is simple: if Malik sucked nearly as badly as RWN claims, he would be fired. If it's as obvious as RWN makes it seem, surely Paul Kukla would notice. The problem with RWN's continued arguments is that everybody who disagrees with him is incompetent is a systematic manner. So in order for his claim about Malik to go through, we have to believe that Kukla is incompetent enough to keep an awful blogger on for extended periods of time. And then we find ourselves asking questions like: how does Kukla's Korner survive, then? Surely a bad blog site run by a bad owner would fold. and we probably conclude that it's because the readers are incompetent as well. The bad blog site with its bad owner stays open because the readers are bad too.

When somebody argues that everybody else is wrong, it's natural to ask why they aren't the one who's wrong. Or, more properly, why they're the one who's right.

I think your criticism of Malik is almost as bad as his. What, he used the wrong word? Is that all? Granted, you haven't made any proclamations on as grand a scale as RWN has, but mind you that RWN's condemnations largely come as a consequence of Malik being an average writer with a lean toward the flowery. From that, he tries to argue that Malik is not to be trusted. That is, Malik is a poor blogger and factually unreliable because... he makes bad stylistic choices? That doesn't make a lot of sense.

As for your question, I certainly have. It's commonplace in my field for us to go around mopping up all sorts of errors made by professionals in other fields, and they're usually ones of the intellectual variety. But having said that, the proper conduct in doing so is to find the logical flaw (or something similar, like a category mistake), and not something so petty as a stylistic one. and even in correcting somebody, it's usually considered to be an ******* move to denounce somebody entirely, especially to denounce somebody's entire body of work. You just say they made a mistake and move on.
 

tfong

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2008
10,402
972
www.instagram.com
I think it's a really bad way of saying that Tatar has a number of different types of shots.

So wrist, slap, backhand, etc. are all "species" according to which his shot is "multi-species."

Yeah. I said it was bad.

So if I like wrist shots more than slapshots, does it make me feel a racist?
 

RedWingsNow*

Guest
What makes you think your analysis of Malik has merit? Where's your credibility? Malik gets paid to write and talk hockey. Hell, he even gets to show up to press events and interview the big names.

What is it that you do again in the hockey world? Why should we believe you over him? From my standpoint, you've proven nothing. You've been spouting off about how bad he is for a while now, but he's still paid and you're still an anonymous message board poster...

I think Malik won that one.

:laugh:

Ouch. I am an anonymous message board poster!
 

Flowah

Registered User
Nov 30, 2009
10,249
547
I think your criticism of Malik is almost as bad as his. What, he used the wrong word? Is that all? Granted, you haven't made any proclamations on as grand a scale as RWN has, but mind you that RWN's condemnations largely come as a consequence of Malik being an average writer with a lean toward the flowery. From that, he tries to argue that Malik is not to be trusted. That is, Malik is a poor blogger and factually unreliable because... he makes bad stylistic choices? That doesn't make a lot of sense..

Er no, you completely missed my point. I said "fluff." What does a teacher mean when they say "don't fluff up your papers." They mean they want content and information, not meaningless words. That's what journalism should be too. Sure, have style, that's great. But make sure there's some actual content too. There's barely any there. It's like 90% fluff. I think that makes poor journalism. I've read a bunch of his reports and... they're just not insightful. It's like I'm watching an intermission interview written by the biggest homer.

As for your question, I certainly have. It's commonplace in my field for us to go around mopping up all sorts of errors made by professionals in other fields, and they're usually ones of the intellectual variety.
But... how can you do that? They're paid to do that and you're not? What's your credibility?
 

RedWingsNow*

Guest
What's the flaw? It's simple. If you're going to challenge someone's credibility, we need to know why we should believe you. That is, you need to have some credibility of your own in order to do it.

Malik's own words undermine his credibility.
His implication that Tatar made cleary look slow --- implies Cleary looks fast.
Cleary is not fast.
His statement about Tatar being a "blazingly fast forward" is just ****ing stupid. Anyone who knows anything about Tatar knows that's a ****ing exaggeration.

These are examples about 1 guy. I read his prospect report for about 90 seconds and had to close it down because it's 100 percent ********.

Malik cares more about using ridiculous adjectives and describing players as if he understands their emotional state ... And what it tells you, in the end, is that Malik's hockey impressions are terrible.

What makes it a tougher case is that Malik has some level of instant credibility in that he is a professional, and has been for years.

You better define the word professional and then explain how you think it applies to Malik.


If RWN is superior to Malik in such an obvious way, why hasn't KK or another such site picked up his blog? What's he going to say to that? Is he going to grace us with the time-honored "I have better things to do" retort?

Dude ---
1) Malik, if he's paid at all, is paid peanuts
2) Writing a hockey blog and assessing hockey players' talents are two different things.
3) I actually started the Mlive blog Red Wings blog back in 2005 or whatever, when I left the news business and had a 9 to 5 type job that allowed me the time to blog. I had fun with the blog, because of my reporting background, I tried to use it to be the first North American source on Datsyuk's contract situation coming out of the lockout. Once the season started, all there was to do was link out to people's game stories. Not my thing. So I left. And I got back into the news business. Mlive didn't pay me anything. Nor did I ask for anything. It was a hobby. If I spent 50 hours a week doing it, I;d live in my mom's basement, too.


Mind you, it's also one thing to say "I think X is wrong about this" and quite another to say "I think X is wrong about basically everything ever." The second is a very strong claim, and you need to show why you're qualified to completely judge somebody like that.

I don't say Malik is wrong about everything ever.
I said he lacks credibility.
You can't read his stuff and feel as if it's believable.
http://kuklaskorner.com/tmr/comments/impressions-from-day-3-of-the-red-wings-training-camp
Scroll down to the player reports
Almost every single report is filled with bogus BS.
Let's look at the first one.
Johan Franzen: Watching Franzen practice reminds me that for all the offensive **** we give him, he is in fact a pretty good defensive forward, and when he's engaged, and again, when he is willing to GIVE the puck and then GO somewhere, he's tremendously effective. He's starting to understand that Weiss and Alfredsson need to carry the puck and carry the mail here. Even just starting to figure that out is huge.

1) Franzen hasn't been a good defensive forward in a few years. But whatever. That's an opinion.
2) The cardinal sin comes right here;
He's starting to understand that Weiss and Alfredsson need to carry the puck and carry the mail here. Even just starting to figure that out is huge.
How in the **** does George Malik have ANY idea what FRANZEN is "STARTING TO UNDERSTAND"
Somehow, Malik UNDERSTANDS something that FRANZEN is just starting to understand? And the fact that FRanzen is JUST STARTING TO FIGURE OUT what Malik ALREADY KNOWS -- well that's huge.

This is ****ing ********. 100 percent ********. Any reader with any level of critical thinking sees this instantly.

He goes on to do the same **** with Weiss
Stephen Weiss: He just works hard, REALLY hard. The difference between Valtteri Filppula and Stephen Weiss involves work ethic. Filppula may be more skilled, but Weiss works like he's Drew Frickin' Miller, not like he's the already-baptized second-line center. He's been soaking in the detail work during his training camp experience and he uses his short stick to his advantage in terms of both knocking down pucks and sweeping pucks into offensive positions.

He starts off by dismissing Filppula as sort of lazy and then drawing a bizarre parallel to "Drew Frickin' Miller." In all my years, I never imagined that Drew Miller worked so much harder than Filppula. Did you? I mean, Flip lacked combativeness and intensity at times. But is that somewhere where Drew Miller really has him beat? Miller's pretty soft and noncombative, himself. So, Malik starts this like a good little propagandist, by reinforcing the idea that Weiss is better than Flip. That annoys me... but whatever
Here's the line that's dishonest:
He's been soaking in the detail work during his training camp experience
How in the hell does Malik know that?
Once again, it's just Malik going on and on, making up things that he probably thinks sounds reasonably realistic.

Drew Miller:
Drew Miller: The hockey gods gave Drew Miller battle drills today and drills in which he could out-hustle his opponent, and by dammit, he out-battled, out-willed, out-hustled, out-worked and out-executed. He knows these systems like the back of his hand, but it doesn't mean he's going to do anything less than work his ass off to re-learn them. There is no half-assing it in Drew Miller's vocabulary.

Let's just ignore all the BS about the hockey Gods, and ignore Malik's BS about he outwilled and out-battled everyone (which is absurd, when you consider that so many the guys in his report get credit for outworking everyone else.

But here's the purse BS line.
He knows these systems like the back of his hand,
How does Malik know this?

And here's Malik's tendency to create myths about people -- which is really just BS.
There is no half-assing it in Drew Miller's vocabulary.

Eaves
Patrick Eaves: Fast, diligent, and perhaps for the first time in his career, hesitant, because he seems to know that he's an endangered species.

Again - more total BS.
Eaves has never been hesitant before? I'm pretty sure the broken jaw and concussions made him hesistant- but Malik ignorantlychalks it up to Eaves "seeming to know" he's an endangered species.


We all have disagreements about what we see when we watch games.
But most of us don't resort to making up BS about what's going through a player's head.
 
Jul 30, 2005
17,660
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
We all have disagreements about what we see when we watch games.
But most of us don't resort to making up BS about what's going through a player's head.
I still remember when you tried to say that Malik couldn't properly judge McNulty's speed. Which would had to have meant that he couldn't judge the forward motion of about... anything. He'd have to be practically blind. That is how hard you push the "Malik is incompetent!" line—to absurdity.

That was like two weeks ago.
 

RedWingsNow*

Guest
I still remember when you tried to say that Malik couldn't properly judge McNulty's speed. Which would had to have meant that he couldn't judge the forward motion of about... anything. He'd have to be practically blind. That is how hard you push the "Malik is incompetent!" line—to absurdity.

That was like two weeks ago.

Got a link? I'm nearly 100 percent sure you're ****ing up the context.

By the way, way to IGNORE the chief criticism of Malik. --- He tries to convey information he can't possibly have.
He has these fanciful ideas about players and conveys them as if they were true.
 
Jul 30, 2005
17,660
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
By the way, way to IGNORE the chief criticism of Malik. --- He tries to convey information he can't possibly have.
He has these fanciful ideas about players and conveys them as if they were true.
I think you take what he says (and about all of those quotes) as though he's speaking literally, when he's plainly not. Some of them come across as giving him a hard time for no apparent reason.

Example: he knew the drills like the back of his hand.

When anybody uses that, of course they cannot literally know the contents of the other person's mind. But we make that same judgment in our daily lives on a regular basis, and it's perfectly rational to make.

or

"He's been soaking in the detail work during his training camp experience"

Again, this is a thing that we can easily say about another person. When can we say that? Usually when somebody appears to be watching very closely and asking lots of questions. We can say "Oh, that guy is paying close attention to the details." It's perfectly reasonable to do so.

My question then is: why skewer the guy over that stuff? It's awkward language, but it doesn't convey any sort of falsehood like you make it seem.
 
Jul 30, 2005
17,660
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
Found it for you, Guru
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=69251995&postcount=125

I took issue with the assertion that McNulty looked like 'freakin' athanasiou' out there.
And I stand by that.

Implying that McNulty skates as fast as Athanasiou is misleading -- at best.

Once again, you're proving my point for me.
#74 Marc McNulty: Baby-faced defenseman, overpowered easily, bumped around, holds his own, has a good shot and passes well, and then you find out that this 6’6†kid who may way 175 pounds has wheels like frickin’ Athanasiou at times. It’s just remarkable, because it doesn’t happen too often
But, here we are again. This one is a bit sloppy on Malik's part, so I'll cut you some slack, but it's the difference in the uses of "like." You can use it to mean "the same as," but you can also use it to mean "roughly similar to." And we should note that Malik goes on to say that it doesn't happen very often.

Should we take it to mean that McNulty is literally just as fast as Athanasiou? No, probably not. Is it sloppy on Malik's part? Yeah, a bit. Did we all read that and understand exactly what Malik meant? Yeah, I think we did. The message was that McNulty is fast, and can sometimes be very fast.

Maybe the problem here is that you're looking for precision in Malik's writing, and that's just not his style. But I think the disconnect is that he doesn't try to make it his style, and yet you continually hammer him for it. In confronting that fact, I think the proper thing to do is to recognize that Malik is not a precise writer, and at no point will you be getting a particularly clear account of how things are. But the man is also not mentally Pejorative Slured, either, and he generally gets the basic point across. Just like he did with the McNulty thing.
 

RedWingsNow*

Guest
I think you take what he says (and about all of those quotes) as though he's speaking literally, when he's plainly not. Some of them come across as giving him a hard time for no apparent reason.

Example: he knew the drills like the back of his hand.

When anybody uses that, of course they cannot literally know the contents of the other person's mind. But we make that same judgment in our daily lives on a regular basis, and it's perfectly rational to make.

or

"He's been soaking in the detail work during his training camp experience"

Again, this is a thing that we can easily say about another person. When can we say that? Usually when somebody appears to be watching very closely and asking lots of questions. We can say "Oh, that guy is paying close attention to the details." It's perfectly reasonable to do so.

My question then is: why skewer the guy over that stuff? It's awkward language, but it doesn't convey any sort of falsehood like you make it seem.

Skewer the guy? You posted three comments he made about Tatar. I like Tatar. I would love to believe those comments about Tatar.
But I explained why Malik has given me no reason to believe those comments.

And then you skewered me.

When you're sharing your observations, you share what you observe. If you don't see something -- you don't insert details to fill in the gaps.
You don't make **** up. You don't pretend to know more than you do.

As a reader, how am I supposed to know when he's giving me the straight black-and-white vs when he's giving me Malik technicolor?

There is honesty in precision. The kind of fluff he's producing isn't precise. It's fluff. It's made up. Malik's fluff tells us more about what he thinks about a player than what is actually taking place on the ice.
 

Lord Stan 2020

Elite fan
Jun 29, 2013
12,262
886
New Port Richey Fl
www.facebook.com
All I can say is I am on RWN side in this. He called out Helen and after watching her for last couple weeks can say he has reason to cause of a lot of her stuff is terrible to be kind. She is writer for free press. Just sad to me. This guy malik think you all are arguing over is just a blogger. I dont take much stock in bloggers will listen to certain people after watching them a couple months on prospects who are over seas etc.. and listen to some true scouts. Others am not so high on will not name names but some people are just WOW.

Is more bad than good lets put it this way. We have the bloggers round table in tampa now and is 5 guys 2 of which drive me INSANE with nonsense and have four or five girls on twitter for Tampa news reports same thing have a couple for detroit.

The same two guys I hate on the blogger thing tear into others who are getting started constantly for any type of misstep. People who do sports rant etc... Have a passion for hockey but maybe dont have the education yet on all the workings of new cba or salary or structure of something.

I have seen them cut someone to pieces for not understanding everything on the new cba and unless your a rocket scientist and a lawyer is a confusing damm thing to me who has spent plenty of time studying myself and still find ask for help here and there to decipher things.

I have seen this same person ask for help regarding how to research something etc..

Do these professional expert bloggers help them? Hell to the no they will not help them cause they are scared of their territory and power they have now even though they are idiots themselves.

I havent pointed out to them the nonsense they have put out. I just shake my head and try not to run across their garbage.

When I want an evaluation on something I want someone who watches and says well such and such was good at this this and that but I saw he needs work with this etc..

I sure as hell dont want malik saying this guy is pissed off has a fire lit under him nonsense.

Some idiot reporter/blogger asked a bad question in a bad way to Tatar. They got the sensational garbage response they hoped for. They ran it probably out of context and with limited facts etc..

Now you got a board of people thinking Tatar is super unhappy a discontent going to be moving to KHL etc..

All cause of lousy two bit reporting.

Too much of this goes on in the sports world but this is what grabs the attention.

I have spoke my piece I am just disgusted with a lot of this nonsense and is same type of thing that gave grabovski bad publicity and is sad.

Nothing since that initial response that I would bet was cause of a garbage question by a garbage reporter asked in a garbage way tells me that Tatar is a miscontent is pissed off has a fire lit under him blah blah blah.

Did I say garbage?
 

jaster

Unregistered User
Jun 8, 2007
13,095
8,225
I read Malik's stuff one time. Which also happened to be the last time.
 

kuick

Tatar Sauce
Aug 15, 2009
2,724
0
Grand Rapids
Malik is pretty insufferable, imo. I think most here that read him know to take him with a grain of salt.

But don't take my opinion on this, I'm just an anonymous internet poster.
 

Lord Stan 2020

Elite fan
Jun 29, 2013
12,262
886
New Port Richey Fl
www.facebook.com
Just want to add this tidbit. Might not be an article might have been twitter. But is a professional.

I will name two guys tootoo and tatar as one example of the things I see out there.

That they used in the following twitter tweets.

They announced the line ups.

First day of practice well the lines are such and such.

First tweet was sort of like

Can tell by this how the execs or franchise views them.

Second tweet was pretty much

The lines at camp show what two guys are being targeted.

Third tweet was basically

Can tell they are not long for detroit in future or are out the door.



Now I promise this is not exact recital of the words. But when you see someone saying this stuff. Is more than just a shake of the head. Is like ok so camp is set up to create some sort of competition but because two guys are together the franchise has given up on them and they are out the door?

I am gonna use caps SOURCE I mean once I saw that I blew my top.

I was like really so know you know hollands mind based on who babcock puts on what line in camp.

I doubt if any writer has ever pissed me off more.
 

DRWCountryClub

Registered User
Jun 28, 2010
3,970
0
Apparently Guru's argument comes down to people getting paid = professionals and therefor credible, more credible than someone who doesn't get paid.

In that case I'll send Bob $5 for his posts on here about the Wings, because he sure as hell seems more reliable and knowledgeable about hockey, and the Wings, than Malik.

That do anything for you? The best part is that you're able to judge the credibility of other professionals(intellectuals too) who are in fields that you are not educated in, only because you get paid to do it.

Seriously?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->