You called my post "ironic" and said I don't see the "hypocrisy" in my statement. I pointed out that nothing I said in that post was ironic or hypocritical since I didn't make a "point" about something previously that I then contradicted in that post you quoted.
For instance, this would be an example of hypocrisy:
Post #1: "Crosby had more points, so who cares who had more goals?"
Post #2: "Crosby scored more goals, even if he had less points. Doesn't mean anything"
My post was a statement of how you move goal posts depending on whether it favors Crosby. It did not make a statement that contradicted something I said earlier. See the difference now?
I haven’t moved any goal posts though. That’s where your entire argument falls onto itself. I only pointed out the hypocrisy of citing how Crosby was better BECAUSE of goals, and yet the the same logic doesn’t get to be applied to Ovechkin? That’s interesting....
I’ve seen and been told now that Harts and Lindsays don’t matter in certain seasons with Crosby and only smythes and cups. I’ve been told now that Crosby was better because goals in 2017 and 2010 but was better other seasons due to higher assists totals. Don’t talk to be about “hypocrisy.” When Crosby has the most points, he’s the best no matter what, when he has the most goals, doesn’t matter who has more points, when he isn’t the best offensive player, then his defense makes up for it, when he isn’t being voted the best or most valuable, the voters suddenly are incompetent. Your one of the known posters who walks that fine line every Crosby thread.
FYI: I think Crosby is the best of this generation, that won’t change. But what makes him the best was his consistency, he hasn’t been the undisputed best player year in and year out, but that’s when posters like you hold value to certain things that favor Crosby, while belittling other things while ignoring all logic and context. Hope this clears things up for you.