Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Sabres/Cody Hodgson Talk


Merci

Recommended Posts

If that was 'really surprising' to you, then perhaps you should stop commenting about Kesler. Stick to Coho.

Yeah, I see the 'conversation' has shifted from trying to claim that Hodgson's defensive numbers were as good as Kesler's (based on simplistic +/- alone) to uh, they are different types of players, but Hodgson didn't get the time to develop his offensive game that Kesler did his defensive - conveniently ignoring the already posted fact that...

Sigh. :picard:

In the first place, my comments about Kesler are consistent and the hard numbers referenced are as accurate as the source(s). Look up the word 'elaborate' sometime and you might clue into what I've done in my most recent post ;)

Secondly, to the extent that Hodgson's +/- is one of the most referenced stats by those who feel the need to bash the guy senselessly, it's beyond silly to pretend that the stat is somehow meaningless just because one doesn't like it being flagged that Kesler's own +/- wasn't exactly much better at the same stage of his career.

Here's an idea - if you're going go fruity over the notion that Kesler might be judged on the basis of only his basic numbers and without context to the variety of other factors in play, how 'bout taking off the anti-Hodgson blinders long enough to give the same ever-so understanding analysis?

Oh, and FYI - Rather than try to get in a lame dig because *someone* (aka: me) doesn't walk around with blinders on sticking only to preconceived opinions but instead actually reads/considers what others have added to a discussion, you could just try another approach and take your own blinders off and engage in a genuine discussion. It is, after all, a discussion board not at "let's bash everyone whose opinion differs" board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good job! My only comment would be that Kesler has more size and speed. CoHo broke in with a squad that had far superior skill than did Kesler. That had to impact his stats.

For sure on the speed difference, I'd hazard a guess there'd be no disagreement on that one? Like Henrik/Daniel who were also once known for being "slow", I'd bet Hodgson continues to work on that element of his play.

I'm not so sure about your second point though? To the extent that Kesler began his career behind the WCE and Sedins, while Hodgson was behind the Sedins and Kesler, I'd probably lean toward arguing the alternative. But perhaps that's just because I see the WCE+younger Sedins being a stronger mix than the older Sedins+Kesler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh.

In the first place, my comments about Kesler are consistent and the hard numbers referenced are as accurate as the source(s). Look up the word 'elaborate' sometime and you might clue into what I've done in my most recent post

Secondly, to the extent that Hodgson's +/- is one of the most referenced stats by those who feel the need to bash the guy senselessly, it's beyond silly to pretend that the stat is somehow meaningless just because one doesn't like it being flagged that Kesler's own +/- wasn't exactly much better at the same stage of his career.

Here's an idea - if you're going go fruity over the notion that Kesler might be judged on the basis of only his basic numbers and without context to the variety of other factors in play, how 'bout taking off the anti-Hodgson blinders long enough to give the same ever-so understanding analysis?

Oh, and FYI - Rather than try to get in a lame dig because *someone* (aka: me) doesn't walk around with blinders on sticking only to preconceived opinions but instead actually reads/considers what others have added to a discussion, you could just try another approach and take your own blinders off and engage in a genuine discussion. It is, after all, a discussion board not at "let's bash everyone whose opinion differs" board.

No, in the first place, it doesn't appear that you know much about Ryan Kesler at all. Because of this, I am merely suggesting that you refrain from posting about Ryan Kesler. Esp. in the Coho thread, where Kesler (and Sedin) is irrelevant. In effect, your arguments, analysis and comparisons regarding these players have been flawed, weak, incorrect and/or skewed, so can you please stop? Feel free to 'genuinely discuss' Coho though, as that seems to be your modus operandi.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, in the first place, it doesn't appear that you know much about Ryan Kesler at all. Because of this, I am merely suggesting that you refrain from posting about Ryan Kesler. Esp. in the Coho thread, where Kesler (and Sedin) is irrelevant. In effect, your arguments, analysis and comparisons regarding these players have been flawed, weak, incorrect and/or skewed, so can you please stop? Feel free to 'genuinely discuss' Coho though, as that seems to be your modus operandi.

Riiggghhtt! Cuz no one ever compares players and results on this board, gottcha ;)

Thanks for your permission to discuss Hodgson, much appreciated, lol. But here's a tidbit that might help you to reduce your stress level - if my posts bug you, don't worry yourself silly monitoring them. Seriously, no worries, my feelings just won't be hurt if you move it along. Heck, isn't there a feature that allows you to "ignore" my posts altogether? Go for it!

Of course, you could also just get back to discussing the assortment of topics raised rather than going on and on about me, but that's your call...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riiggghhtt! Cuz no one ever compares players and results on this board, gottcha

Thanks for your permission to discuss Hodgson, much appreciated, lol. But here's a tidbit that might help you to reduce your stress level - if my posts bug you, don't worry yourself silly monitoring them. Seriously, no worries, my feelings just won't be hurt if you move it along. Heck, isn't there a feature that allows you to "ignore" my posts altogether? Go for it!

Of course, you could also just get back to discussing the assortment of topics raised rather than going on and on about me, but that's your call...

It's not the comparison, it's the flaws. But i don't pretend that i can sway you to stop, i am just suggesting that you do, on account of all the flaws that many people have pointed out. It simply discredits your posts about one topic when you post so many that are flawed about another topic. How can anyone take it seriously?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the comparison, it's the flaws. But i don't pretend that i can sway you to stop, i am just suggesting that you do, on account of all the flaws that many people have pointed out. It simply discredits your posts about one topic when you post so many that are flawed about another topic. How can anyone take it seriously?

lol. Well, you know, if I had any confidence that your analysis of my analysis wasn't merely based on dismissing all that which doesn't fit with your preconceived illusions, I'd actually be interested enough in your opinion to take it seriously. As it is though, you just keep yakking about "flaws" without rhyme or reason, more keen to attack the person than to tackle the topic.

Here's another idea for you - if you ever want to "sway" someone to your argument, try addressing the actual points raised, even add some of your own info bits... Basically put something more substantive on the table than old rhetoric and lame disses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

your arguments, analysis and comparisons regarding these players have been flawed, weak, incorrect and/or skewed,

That's about it in a nutshell and when that becomes exceedingly clear, one can always resort to the "sigh" and avoid any matters of actual substance.... blah, blah, blinders, blah, blah anti-Hodgson, blah blah bash, blah blah blinders...

Snore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol. Well, you know, if I had any confidence that your analysis of my analysis wasn't merely based on dismissing all that which doesn't fit with your preconceived illusions, I'd actually be interested enough in your opinion to take it seriously. As it is though, you just keep yakking about "flaws" without rhyme or reason, more keen to attack the person than to tackle the topic.

Here's another idea for you - if you ever want to "sway" someone to your argument, try addressing the actual points raised, even add some of your own info bits... Basically put something more substantive on the table than old rhetoric and lame disses.

In this case, I am addressing the actual point raised. I made the point that your posts indicate that you don't know much about Ryan Kesler, as pointed out by multiple responses by multiple users to your 'analysis' about him, so you should probably stop posting about him. At all, imho, but Esp. in a Coho-related thread.

So far you've responded with 'ignore my posts then' and other deflections.

I'm putting forward the notion that if these opinions on Kesler, a player we should all be very familiar with on cdc, are remarkably flawed, then why would any opinion about Coho (his past, his future, and in particular his dealings with this team) from the same source be of any value? (I may be beating a dead horse here, but this may be the thread for that.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's about it in a nutshell and when that becomes exceedingly clear, one can always resort to the "sigh" and avoid any matters of actual substance.... blah, blah, blinders, blah, blah anti-Hodgson, blah blah bash, blah blah blinders...

Snore.

Its like OCD with you seriously.

Does the snore indicate that you are now tired and will no longer incessantly .. multipost day after day after day in thread after thread for weeks and months on end in these hodgson threads that you "don't" (haha) care about? Do you just feel compelled to point out that others are obsessed.. over and over . I hope you can get on with your life, i'm worried about you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is it ok for me to say I'm confused? i have no clue who's arguing what anymore... anybody have the cliff notes?

It's no wonder - prana repeatedly loses track of who he's arguing with - but still manages to come up with gems like this...

Its like OCD with you seriously.

Does the snore indicate that you are now tired and will no longer incessantly .. multipost day after day after day in thread after thread for weeks and months on end in these hodgson threads that you "don't" (haha) care about? Do you just feel compelled to point out that others are obsessed.. over and over . I hope you can get on with your life, i'm worried about you.

That's very 'interesting' prana.

Do you have any hockey discussion to add?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's time to move past it people, it's pretty clear they're ignoring anything that contradicts their love for Hodgson. He's a better offensive player now than Kesler was coming into the league, but Kesler was better in other ways and is a better all around player currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...