2017-2018 NHL Discussion

[Kendrick 4,741]

35 minutes ago, Tyler said:

 

same way with marner. The Habs/Leafs game he must have dove 2 or 3 times but due to hsi size it's hard to call it a dive more just being over powered so easily

Yeah they just need to hit the gym instead of being little boys.

[Kendrick 4,741]

21 minutes ago, tfong said:

 

Except..then Demko sits and does nothing. But I guess its ok if Utica isn't playing lol. Its just cuz i thought they were.

He would be sitting doing nothing in Utica though so might as well have him up with the team practicing.

[boubabi 4,725]

@tfong you wanted analytics to prove that drouin is better or at least equal as a center than a winger ?

 

 

 

 

 

Don't talk shit if you don't know what you are talking about 

 

source : http://sportlogiq.com/

 

basically everything is better except for the turnovers in the D zone, which is understandable for a C 

[Kesler 1,514]

@Devise ez

[Kendrick 4,741]

@tfong So much for having an opinion. Apparently an opinion is now considered "talking shit" haha. Fragile

[boubabi 4,725]

Yes, your opinion has no value if your arguments aren't true

 

Sure you can have an opinion, but you can have a false one as well. Next time instead of blocking me on chat during an argument, he should face the truth that his opinion was unfounded and he should validate his saying before having those sort of statements and talking shit.

 

The only thing that is fragile is your confidence Kendrick. 

 

[Kendrick 4,741]

Actually an opinion is an opinion, it isn't weight by facts. Someone can have an opinion on something if they want. You don't have to agree with their opinion, but everyone is entitled to their own.

 

What's fragile is your discussion skills. It seems like someone if someone has a difference of opinion with you, you find it common practice to just knock the person and not the opinion. Technically no opinion is false actually haha

 

He blocked you on chat because you didn't want to discuss, you wanted to go at him. I think anyone would do the same. Discussions are great but if one person is just looking to go at the other person, I think he's at the age where tuning out the young mind is pretty best.

[Baozi 1,658]

27 minutes ago, boubabi said:

Yes, your opinion has no value if your arguments aren't true

 

Sure you can have an opinion, but you can have a false one as well. Next time instead of blocking me on chat during an argument, he should face the truth that his opinion was unfounded and he should validate his saying before having those sort of statements and talking shit.

 

The only thing that is fragile is your confidence Kendrick. 

 

 

I blocked you because you didn't give me any of this info which I would've gladly considered. I blocked you because as I said you were being belligerent and Kendrick can vouch for me. There is literally no point in debating with someone if their only return comment is "I refute your arguement" and bring nothing to the table. I even asked you to show me stats so I can look at them. So good, you bring me something to look at which is great. Maybe you should've OPENED YOUR POINTS with these instead of calling my arguments stupid.

 

I'll take a look at the comparisons in a little bit but they seem like solid arguements.

Edited October 27, 2017 by tfong

[Kendrick 4,741]

Technically if I say "I think CCM makes the best equipment". That is my opinion. That doesn't mean I'm talking shit to anyone who thinks CCM is not the best equipment haha. It just means its my opinion.

[boubabi 4,725]

5 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

Technically if I say "I think CCM makes the best equipment". That is my opinion. That doesn't mean I'm talking shit to anyone who thinks CCM is not the best equipment haha. It just means its my opinion.

That must be the dumbest logic i've ever read.

 

Your opinion on ccm is based on your personal preferences. And even told that why, you add whatsoever no weight credibility/weight to your argument by just saying "I think ccm is better" without a "why".

 

In this case, fong was saying that Drouin is meh and he tried to imply that he had better analytic last season as a winger in TB. Even though multiple other things could be considered (timing, number of games played etc), I've singularly proce that his "analytic" shit was bullshit (which was pretty much is lone argument that couldnt be proven or countered at the time). When I simply showed that drouin had the same PPG in tb and mtl, the dude just blocked me and you guys jerked off each others dick for a while

 

He said whenever I had a counter argument I could show him, there you go. It adds to whatever logical argument that I had earlier and showed that Drouin was far from "meh" so far (if he thought that Drouin wasnt "meh" as a winger in Tampa."

 

The whole argument that he is less good because the team loses is simply ridicule and shows a totale misunderstanding of the game and the player.

[Kendrick 4,741]

4 minutes ago, boubabi said:

That must be the dumbest logic i've ever read.

 

Your opinion on ccm is based on your personal preferences. And even told that why, you add whatsoever no weight credibility/weight to your argument by just saying "I think ccm is better" without a "why".

 

In this case, fong was saying that Drouin is meh and he tried to imply that he had better analytic last season as a winger in TB. Even though multiple other things could be considered (timing, number of games played etc), I've singularly proce that his "analytic" shit was bullshit (which was pretty much is lone argument that couldnt be proven or countered at the time). When I simply showed that drouin had the same PPG in tb and mtl, the dude just blocked me and you guys jerked off each others dick for a while

 

He said whenever I had a counter argument I could show him, there you go. It adds to whatever logical argument that I had earlier and showed that Drouin was far from "meh" so far (if he thought that Drouin wasnt "meh" as a winger in Tampa."

 

The whole argument that he is less good because the team loses is simply ridicule and shows a totale misunderstanding of the game and the player.

That's all great and everything, but when you disagreed with him all you said was that you "refute his claims"; without giving any counter argument to it. You just said you disagree and then called him out for being stupid, when you never gave any reason why you think his opinion wasn't "correct". No one will discuss anything if the person they are discussing it with just says they are dumb.

 

We didn't jerk off each other by the way, it's called discussing with respect for the other person. If you don't want to show that, you'll find less people will want to discuss sports or anything for that matter.

 

By the way the CCM example was to prove you don't know the difference between talking shit and opinions. It is my opinion CCM is better looking so I think they are better in my mind. If someone disagrees with that that is fine and that is their opinion, that doesn't mean my opinion was "talking shit" haha.

[Baozi 1,658]

31 minutes ago, boubabi said:

That must be the dumbest logic i've ever read.

 

Your opinion on ccm is based on your personal preferences. And even told that why, you add whatsoever no weight credibility/weight to your argument by just saying "I think ccm is better" without a "why".

 

In this case, fong was saying that Drouin is meh and he tried to imply that he had better analytic last season as a winger in TB. Even though multiple other things could be considered (timing, number of games played etc), I've singularly proce that his "analytic" shit was bullshit (which was pretty much is lone argument that couldnt be proven or countered at the time). When I simply showed that drouin had the same PPG in tb and mtl, the dude just blocked me and you guys jerked off each others dick for a while

 

He said whenever I had a counter argument I could show him, there you go. It adds to whatever logical argument that I had earlier and showed that Drouin was far from "meh" so far (if he thought that Drouin wasnt "meh" as a winger in Tampa."

 

The whole argument that he is less good because the team loses is simply ridicule and shows a totale misunderstanding of the game and the player.

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/d/drouijo01.html

The points i was using in my arguement was that

1. Dro's shooting % dropped from 11.5 to 7.1 along with his line onICEsh% which went from 7.9 to 6.0. 

Now for this arguement one can say that maybe Drouin has just been unlucky for the past 9 games. Which is fine. But since we only have a 9 game sample anyways thats basically all we have anyways and i did mention repeatedly that Dro could be a better player as a center in the future and that I thought he was a better player as a winger currently than center. So back to this, you can surmise that maybe his quality of line mates dropped as well, but then you look at his most frequent linemates and they were Brian Boyle and Val Flipp. Vs Max Pac and Brendan Gallagher/Ales Hemsky. So I kinda think its a wash or maybe slight advantage to Tampa. What is important to note that his shooting and ice % is lower so my theory is that perhaps he has better shot chances or played better as a winger.

 

2. Goals created per score. He was 0.27 in TB and 0.28 currently in MON. So pretty even here that his line scores similiar amount of goals due to his presence. However when you look at point share totals, he drops 5.5 to 0.6. What does this mean? Point share is n estimate of the number of points contributed by a player and can be separated through defence/offense. 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/about/point_shares.html for an explanation of point shares but TLDR is the points he is involved in generating for the team is far less when looking at underlying numbers.

 

So those were the key pieces I was looking at the time and they still stand right now for my reasoning. I read the numbers you've given and they make sense so I can concede that you are more likely to be right, in that Dro is better or at least equal to being a center vs winger. However I'll wait and see how they all play out as with those 2 factors, they still make me think that he could be a better winger still. Also importantly is that he sucks at draws. 43.5% is pretty bad for a center.

 

Now as far as the Habs situation? Probably he is a better center than Pleks or Danault. Though personally i feel (without much research) that Danault is actually a pretty decent 2nd line center anyways.

 

 

Now back to why I blocked you. Simply put you were being rude and you didn't show me any of your info? Why do I have to spend effort trying to explain these points of reference for you if all you're going to fire at me is rhetoric? Think about it, if you had just been civil and just came at the debate with this info, wouldn't it have been more reasonable?

 

TLDR: If one is douche, even if correct, I will block you. I don't feel a need to waste energy and time on those kinds of arguements. But I believe in your statements and observations far more now than I did the other day.

 

Edited October 27, 2017 by tfong

[boubabi 4,725]

The difference is esthetic is mainly personal taste and can hardly be argued with numbers and straight facts. We could even argue that esthetic has little to none weight in a debate if the debate is which stick is better on the ice.

 

However, saying that Drouin is "meh" at center in MTL and implying that he had "better" analytics in TB is simply false. Even the PPG argument is false as both are comparable. Plus, fong said that the Habs would be better with drouin at wing (because he was supposedly better at wing in TB) which I said was false because Drouin is more useful for the Habs, with his current production, at center the Drouin's production at wing. And that you can easily prove that logic just by looking at the depth chart of the CH.

 

Therefore, saying that Drouin was "meh", plus would be more useful at wing for the Habs is completely false and considered as a ignorant opinion from a dude that didnt had enough infos/data to to prove his point

 

From my position, I couldnt prove (at the time) his only argument that had a little bit of weight that was better analytic. My post above just shows that firstly, that is also not true, and the fong uses argument that arent true/verified to (try) to prove his points, which is a low blow.

 

He can blame himself that he was ignorant and he misjudged the information maybe, but other than that, he just looked like a guy that didnt know what he was talking about, which profoundly pisses me off in my every day life as well.

[boubabi 4,725]

The GM in Arizona built his team from those numbers and take a look where they are now. Yes thosr are numbers but they need to be evaluated carefully and with context

Context is where fong was WAY off

[boubabi 4,725]

7 minutes ago, tfong said:

Now for this arguement one can say that maybe Drouin has just been unlucky for the past 9 games.

Now you are just quoting my argument at the time where its not fair to judge a player during a 6 games losing streak and 7 total game

 

Maybe my arguments were good and you were just too stubborn to look at time euh?

[Baozi 1,658]

2 minutes ago, boubabi said:

The difference is esthetic is mainly personal taste and can hardly be argued with numbers and straight facts. We could even argue that esthetic has little to none weight in a debate if the debate is which stick is better on the ice.

 

However, saying that Drouin is "meh" at center in MTL and implying that he had "better" analytics in TB is simply false. Even the PPG argument is false as both are comparable. Plus, fong said that the Habs would be better with drouin at wing (because he was supposedly better at wing in TB) which I said was false because Drouin is more useful for the Habs, with his current production, at center the Drouin's production at wing. And that you can easily prove that logic just by looking at the depth chart of the CH.

 

Therefore, saying that Drouin was "meh", plus would be more useful at wing for the Habs is completely false and considered as a ignorant opinion from a dude that didnt had enough infos/data to to prove his point

 

From my position, I couldnt prove (at the time) his only argument that had little weight that was better analytic. My post above just shows that firstly, that is also not true, and the fong uses argument that arent true/verified to (try) to prove his points, which is a low blow.

 

He can blame himself that he was ignorant and he misjudged the information maybe, but other than that, he just looked like a guy that didnt know what he was talking about, which profoundly pisses me off in my every day life as well.

 

As pointed out above, I had specific points I was looking at because all other things were significantly different.

 

Just now, boubabi said:

The GM in Arizona built his team from those numbers and take a look where they are now. Yes thosr are numbers but they need to be evaluated carefully and with context

Context is where fong was WAY off

 

Context in this case is off sure. But because of your attitude is where the rest of the stuff happened. So if you're mad at that, its not on me for you to control your own anger.

[Baozi 1,658]

1 minute ago, boubabi said:

Now you are just quoting my argument at the time where its not fair to judge a player during a 6 games losing streak and 7 total game

 

Maybe my arguments were good and you were just too stubborn to look at time euh?

 

Your arguements are better supported with 3rd party data and less of being a douchebag. As i said before, you probably could've easily convinced me otherwise if you came at me with that info and discussion rather than what you DID do.

[boubabi 4,725]

My attitude doesnt matter. I brought those same arguments on the table. You were just too affected by your emotion of feeling wrong that you turned defensive and became blind. Those are 100% the same arguments I was bringing. 

[boubabi 4,725]

No, that info just confirms (and destroy) your only valid argument at the time that had weight in an argument.

 

That said, even if drouin had lower production here as a center, its not fair to judge him after 6 games and also that you saw little to none from him in MTL. What you had to work with is, 5 points in 7 games. If you think that was meh, well drouin was Meh in TB as well

[Baozi 1,658]

Just now, boubabi said:

My attitude doesnt matter. I brought those same arguments on the table. You were just too affected by your emotion of feeling wrong that you turned defensive and became blind. Those are 100% the same arguments I was bringing. 

 

If i was defensive and blind I'm fairly certain I wouldn't be responding to you now and saying that your arguement has more weight than my own.

 

Yes your attitude does matter. Life will show that it does in almost every case. You were too affected by emotion to just simply give me the proper answer so thats not really on me. I didn't have any emotion in it other than thinking you were just being beligerent (which you were) and I even said that i was hoping you will just calm down and bring some info back at a later time.

[Baozi 1,658]

Just now, boubabi said:

No, that info just confirms (and destroy) your only valid argument at the time that had weight in an argument.

 

That said, even if drouin had lower production here as a center, its not fair to judge him after 6 games and also that you saw little to none from him in MTL. What you had to work with is, 5 points in 7 games. If you think that was meh, well drouin was Meh in TB as well

 

No because as I said there are specific points I'm looking at which i pointed to those two above in the post which are still valid.

 

I also changed from 7 days to 9 because the analytics have now changed to 9 games versus 7 so I can't exactly say its 7 games still.

[boubabi 4,725]

No it doesn't. You are responding because 1st, you calmed down and became rational.

 

2nd, its because I simply showed a great source that proves your point wrong. You had nothing more on the table. If you, at the moment, still think that drouin is meh at center, I can easily say that you have an ignorant opinion and prove it

[boubabi 4,725]

I wasnt affected by my emotions because thats just the way I am 24/7. Im told you, someone talking shit about things he doesnt understand pisses me off and find it important to prove him that he cant do that shit.You just felt in a corner and or you had nothing more to say other then "it is my opinion and I dont care about facts" and you blocked me.

 

I might not be the best guy to say that, but I've never backed away or censore someone just because "my feelings were hurt". Thats what you did

[Baozi 1,658]

2 minutes ago, boubabi said:

No it doesn't. You are responding because 1st, you calmed down and became rational.

 

2nd, its because I simply showed a great source that proves your point wrong. You had nothing more on the table. If you, at the moment, still think that drouin is meh at center, I can easily say that you have an ignorant opinion and prove it

 

I personally think that you calmed down and came back with good info for me to compare with but thats fine. Difference in opinion.

 

I did mention that you're more right than myself. But i still have a few doubts.

[Baozi 1,658]

Just now, boubabi said:

I was affected by my emotions because I was still able to have a talk and prove my point. You just felt in a corner and or you had nothing more to say other then "it is my opinion and I dont care about facts" and you blocked me.

 

I might not be the best guy to say that, but I've never backed away or censore someone just because "my feelings were hurt". Thats what you did

 

Sorry that sounds more like what you were doing, I was reading my stats at the time of the arguement. But thats also my opinion and I think that of Kendrick.

 

I backed away because I didn't want deal with a person being mad and not giving me any info except "I refute your arguement". I said as much after the fact that I hope you would come back with the info to prove me wrong. I'm also perfectly fine with your data and i did concede that fact.