Words NHL fans need to remove from their vocabulary

[Realgud]

Here’s one that’s unrelated to hockey, but I see it here and on twitter a lot: “Cringe” being used as an adjective. “Cringeworthy” or even “cringey” are fine, but “cringe” is a verb. (Can’t tell how you’re using it, so this isn’t directed towards you.)

The worst is definitely "literally" losing its meaning and being used as yet another dumb superlative.

 

[soothsayer]

Initialism is a special form of acronyms. All initalisms are acronyms but not vice versa.

Some contention around this. Bryan Garner (basically the world's preeminent grammarian) says that acronyms are distinct from initialisms, and both are types of abbreviation. Also, why am I doing this.

 

[tenken00]

"Defence core"

It's defense corps

For some teams, it's defense corpse.

 

[Realgud]

Some contention around this. Bryan Garner (basically the world's preeminent grammarian) says that acronyms are distinct from initialisms, and both are types of abbreviations. Also, why am I doing this.

Starting the offseason threads early

 

[barbu]

Criminally underrated
Bloodbath (when referring to a competitive division)

 

[covfefe]

"BPA" when talking about drafting. Literally means nothing since none of us know the organizations lists.

My nominee as well. It's even more rich when you consider that we don't actually know who the 'BPA' is until 3, 4, or 5 years down the road.

 

[SML2]

I watched a national broadcast on NBC the other day and was amazed at how many times they referenced "confidence". NHL teams apparently don't need coaches as much as they need motivational speakers.

 

[Trade]

dangle, snipe, celebrate just doesn’t pack the same punch

 

[Canadiens Ghost]

"Advanced stats"

 

[BruinDust]

I hate that one, too. We are talking about humans here. Unless A team owns a stadium or the plane, then you can talk about assets.

I like to add "compete level". That one just sounds horrifically constructed in a not very clever way. There is a perfectly good word for it and it's competitiveness.

Exactly, and not every deal or transaction is done with "maximizing assets" is the goal. Sometimes GMs are simply trying to find one of their guys a place to play that the GM themselves can't offer. Truth is, I think a lot of GMs are happy when they see their players they moved succeed. As long as it's not against their team.

You see this "asset management" crap all the time. Like if a 4th line UFA isn't moved at the deadline for a 5th or 6th rounder, fans whine that the GM isn't good at "asset management".

 

[Realgud]

My nominee as well. It's even more rich when you consider that we don't actually know who the 'BPA' is until 3, 4, or 5 years down the road.

The term isn't as explicative as it could be I guess, it's more along the lines of "pick the player that your scouts believe to be the best player available, regardless of position". Scouts that your organization pay for, and where those scouts work the whole season trying to figure out who are the best prospects.

But yeah, if we take it as literal as it is, then yes, we won't know for many years who was the actual best player, this I agree with.

Anyway, this explains it well too:

You are taking it too literally.

It's still a term that has use because it's echoing a drafting methodology. If your team is stacked at a position, BPA means still drafting at that position if the team thinks that's the best player available. As opposed to picking what the team deems is the best player available at a position of organizational need, even if they think it's a lesser player. For example, the Isles are pretty well stocked at RD, but are weak at LW. If they had a top 5 pick and a stud RD was there, they should still take him and if needed, make deals for a LW later rather than pick the best LW in the draft who overall is not as valuable an asset.

It's an important distinction and so there's a phrase to refer to it by. What's so wrong about that? The salary cap requires maximizing valuable assets. In today's NHL, people preach BPA because it's better to take what the team deems is the best player and then make deals later from a position of strength.

 

[Kairi Zaide]

Hockey
Goal
Puck
Stick
Player
Defenseman
Forward
Goaltender
Crowd
Line
Net
Shot
Dangle
Hand
Leafs
Cup
Playoffs
Game
Score
Zone
Transition
Pass

 

[Lt Dan]

carom

 

[OKR]

Initialism is a special form of acronyms. All initalisms are acronyms but not vice versa.

Initialisms cannot be spoken as words: they are spoken letter by letter, acronym is a pronounceable word. Eg. ASAP=acronym, FBI=Initialism

 

[Soundgarden]

Tank has got to be one of the most misinterpreted words on this site. Teams don't lose on purpose, some teams just suck.

Buffalo didn't tank this year, they were just laughably bad. Pittsburgh playing a 4th string goalie over a healthy starter to lose a game on purpose in order to draft Mario over New Jersey is tanking.

 

[DickSmehlik]

As far as I know, "best of 7" is still the proper term but I'm ready to be proven wrong. I just don't see how it implies that all the games will be played.

Best of 7 implies that the first to 4 wins

Ask someone who is a sports novice how many games a "best of 7" series is and you will have your answer.

I came to this realization when I started dating my now wife when she asked me how many games a playoff series was (this was when the Sabres last made the playoffs, so it was about a decade ago).

 

[generalshepherd141]

you're an announcer with a long stick from time to time

 

[stranger]

When at a game I don't need to hear the dumb fan incessantly yelling SHOOT non stop.

 

[DonM]

My nominee as well. It's even more rich when you consider that we don't actually know who the 'BPA' is until 3, 4, or 5 years down the road.

BPA is not about who will be best years down the road, it is in distinction to drafting specifically to fill organizational need. A player can be both BPA and a bust, there is no conflict there.

 

[DonM]

Some contention around this. Bryan Garner (basically the world's preeminent grammarian) says that acronyms are distinct from initialisms, and both are types of abbreviation. Also, why am I doing this.

It is in the name of scholarship. There is no higher cause.

 

[MartinS82]

"Grace Period"

I know where (and from whom) it came from, I get why people brought it up afterwards. But I still see people trying to use it 3 years later for what they believe are some sick burns. Lame.

 

[PepperKeenan]

Using ”filthy”, ”dirty”and worst of all ”disgusting” to describe the complete opposite.

 

[Bostonzamboni]

Sucks, blows, AF, WTF, freaking, frickin', What the F, etc.

Maybe I'm just too old st 61, but all of these words are gross and sound low class....even uneducated, at least to me. "Suck" was not a word yet uttered when I grew up or in college, except regarding sucking through a straw.

I realize some or even most here and elsewhere who use these words are educated and have compelling posts and usually write well, so it's even more annoying that they resort to these words.

The two Boston sports radio stations are a non-stop party of these words, from the hosts and callers. Even regular radio talk shows have hosts and callers, males and sometimes females, employing such "words."

And yes, I do realize I'm in a small minority feeling this way.

Would Doc Emrick ever downgrade himself on tv with such garbage? No, and that's one reason he has class.

 

[Khelandros]

"Appetite" for anything
"Stomach the cost"
"Gauging the temperature"
"We are a hockey team"

Pretty much anything that comes out of Dregers mouth describing anything to do with hockey.

and "litigate". It is used wrong in any and every context that it is used by anyone associated with hockey.

 

[Shocker]

idk about fans, but I think NHL players need to remove "you know" from their vocabulary.