StanleyCupOneDay
-
Posts
2,507 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by StanleyCupOneDay
-
-
14 minutes ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:
Well I guess getting absolutely nothing makes sense? It doesn't sorry.
Doesn’t matter how many times you repeat yourself in the thread, it doesn’t make what you say true. I guess in your mind we should trade Hughes, Petey, Miller, Horvat, Demko, Mikheyev and Kuzmenko for a 3rd rounder each? After all if we don’t get something for them now we might end up with nothing. That type of thinking is the real recipe for eternal mediocrity. No GM in the league is willing to do what you’re suggesting, none. It shows weakness, ties your hands for any future trades and doesn’t improve the team now or in the future. Like I said it’s lose, lose, lose.-
1
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:
We have been down this road. If we risk trying to sign him after the deadline and he walks and we get nothing. A lot will say in here we should have traded him at the deadline. This management is awful. I am sorry but this franchise can't afford the risk. Something is better than nothing. Can't really argue that.
Absolutely not. You don’t trade a guy like Kuzmenko for anything less then a 1st or blue chip prospect, otherwise you keep him. Trading him for a 2nd or a couple of bottom pairing D-men just to “at least get something”is ridiculous reasoning. I don’t care how many times it bites us on the ass by waiting, once you trade a guy for a pittance then every other team will only look to trade with you if they get the same deal on a player. They know when blood’s in the water and will circle like sharks. Getting a bunch of middling prospects or picks is just as bad as staying put because then we continue to be a middle team and lose our best trade chips. It’s a lose lose lose with that type of thinking. -
3 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:
He's the new darling of the Right in his fight against 'wokeness' whatever that is. What he's failed to account for is most of his customer base is granola munching eco leftists. Who have many options when it comes to EV's.
One of the biggest opponents of “woke”, the Governor of Florida, who actually passed something called the Stop Woke Act is in a trial right now after firing a duly elected attorney who refused to prosecute those who provided or sought an abortion. DeSantis lawyers actually had to define what woke meant in the lawsuit. It’s only the latest iteration in the culture wars like crt theory, caravans, Hunter biden and more that they like to use to rile their base. This is what the right wing, Musk and his supporters are so angry about.During the trial, Warren’s attorney, Jean-Jacques Cabou, asked those within DeSantis’ administration for their personal definition of ‘woke,” a term that DeSantis has used to disparage Warren in the past.
DeSantis’ general counsel, Ryan Newman, responded that the term means “the belief there are systemic injustices in society and the need to address them.”
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Darius said:
Hogs and Garland looked great. I hope they dont give up on Hoggy, hes young and not afraid to go to the dirty areas. Could be our next Hansen.
That hit Höglander made was *chef’s kiss*-
1
-
-
Honestly if someone offers a 2nd for him I’d take it. Not only from all the insane adversity he’s had to work through at only mid-20’s in his life that he deserves a fresh start somewhere. Also because he was picked 23rd overall, so getting basically a pretty similar pick back and shedding $6.65m cap is about as good of asset management as you can hope, for a draft picked player. Especially so given his current struggles.
Wherever he goes though I’ll be cheering hard for him and will never forget that act of kindness he gave that wonderful young girl taking her to the prom. He’s a really good guy who has deserved so much more, hopefully he can put himself back together elsewhere.
-
1
-
-
If Bo goes then management has definitely decided to tank this season and next. I wanted them to sign Miller, but if I knew we would only keep one of them it’s no contest at all, I’d choose Bo every single time and have traded Miller for the highest offer even if it wasn’t as much as they wanted. Offering him 7 is an insult. He’s playing better then Miller and they signed him to $8m per. That should be the bare minimum he’d accept. 50-60 goal scorers are rare and very pricy.
This new group is really starting to lose me. So many mistakes and assumptions that bit them in the ass. Maybe it’ll all work out fine in the end, but it’s a mess so far. -
7 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:
The candidate he voted for in June, a MAGA Republican Myra Flores, lost reelection by over 10,000 votes. Musk tweeted that he had voted QOP in June:
“First time I ever voted Republican,” Musk declared at the time. “Massive red wave in 2022.”
Musk Didn’t Even Vote in Midterms He Cared So Much About
The gullible don’t care, as long as you say what they want to hear and piss off those against discrimination and the far right insanity that’s infected politics all over the world then that’s all that matters. Actions to you know actually follow through or prove they mean what they say instead of taking those gullible for a ride means nothing to them.-
2
-
-
So when do the Musq fans decide to start criticizing him over the hate they say (yet never seem to show in actions or words, weird huh) that they don’t approve of? 1 month? 1 year? Never? You’d think if it was a bunch of trolls trying to test their limits (the argument used by supporters) after he took over that they would have stopped by now. Or maybe, just maybe those behind him just refuse to admit the reality: Musq doesn’t give a flying f about hate and discrimination on the platform, which helps lead to the murders of minorities like in the Club Q mass shooting.
And to be frank it’s fairly easy to be against hate and discrimination and those who spread it, that’s just the bare minimum someone can do, but it means nothing if you stay silent, nothing. They seem to hate the wokeist libs more then racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia so none of his clan will ever criticize him for letting it spread like wildfire (especially not those here on CDC). At some point saying you’re against something, but never actually being against people who do that something is empty words. I hope some of you (you know who you are) prove me wrong in my lack of faith of those who constantly defend him and will wake up to the dangers and consequences of letting this stuff slide.
It ain’t words to crazy people, it’s permission to murder.
-
Only last year I started watching MLB, so I might be unaware or out of the loop on something, but can anyone tell me what was the reason the Jays didn’t re-sign Ross Stripling? He was lights out last year and his cost didn’t seem to be that much given what the Giants signed him for. He basically single-handedly dragged the team into the post season. I don’t know why they wouldn’t want to keep him.
-
35 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:
Oh of course. It just seems to be few & far between because power corrupts. Its kind of why I'm less interested in centralized power than perhaps a more socialist minded person might be, despite being in agreement on most of these things - in a basic sense at the very least (I don't know for sure, but I assume so).
edit: and I was just joking around too. I really enjoy being able to have respectful conversation and/or finding common ground with people I may seemingly 'disagree' with.
I really don’t believe that. In corporate positions of power? Definitely with you there. In political positions of power? The evidence just tells me otherwise. Of course not everything a person in power at any level does is good or the right thing to do, but when I look at the policies or laws changed or made there’s a whole lot of good things for society and for the average person that improves life. I truly believe government does more good then bad and it’s not because of party or partisanship, it’s actually looking at the bills and policies enacted, so I guess that’s where our agreement ends on the elected official level. Basically I view government as the only real counterweight to the wealthy and corporations.Of course, I knew that, hence my joking reply. I do too, like when me and Master Mind agreed on the Kyle Beach disgusting act or the appalling conduct of hockey Canada and the players who perpetrated those vile assaults. There’s always going to be at least one thing you agree with someone else on, be it small like loving hockey or liking the same movie or something larger like when it comes to a societal issue. The only things that are deal breakers for me is white supremacists (they exist, I’ve met them unfortunately), discrimination (this is more of a Grey area) and hurting other people intentionally. Everything else is just a disagreement on “insert issue here”. I’ll argue my side, but I don’t hate the other person for their opposing opinion.
-
15 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:
Well its like we talked about with Corporations - and I'm sure some probably do care but - it serves their interest as far as social status, right? The same thing can happen with people.
There's often a basic human social need to be liked, and in a hyper politicized society there can be a social incentive to taking a certain position whether a person has even actually ever independently thought about the issue at all or not. And whatever said 'position' is can be different in different places, both physical (where you live/social group) or now online aswell, so I don't mean that to be a 'partisan' thing. And sometimes its even to the point of narratives regurgitated verbatim.
Do some people believe the things they do due to social pressure of and from whoever they talk with or where they grow up or something like that before thinking about it themselves? Yeah, definitely. Do I think that’s how a majority of people form how they think about an issue? Not really. Those who care about tolerance as one example mostly do so because they want to be a good person to others. Most people have the ability to look into something and form their own opinion, does that sometimes get influenced by other factors surrounding them? Yes, but it’s not absolute. Or am I misunderstanding your point? -
10 minutes ago, KristoffWixenschon said:
Maybe I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but I maintain not everyone can become incredibly muscular. Genetics are too variable. Some men and women are not designed to put on mass.
But anyways, you are making an argument that men have variability in strength and speed amongst themselves, within their sex.
As do women, have variability within the sex.
And this is true!
But the variability between elite men and elite women is MUCH higher than the variability between small elite men and large elite men.
It just doesnt matter how hard Brittney Griner works. She can never be Lebron.
Serena Williams could never be Nadal.
Hayley Wickenhiser couldnt exercise enough to crack an NHL roster. Despite being the same size, Amanda Nunes would lose to Max Holloway every time.
So the question of fairness is due to the degree of variability between sexes. A more interesting question is where individuals draw the line for the amount of variability they are willing to accept as fair. You are postulating that considering sizes within sexes should be considered to make sports extra fair. Most people consider separation of sexes in sport to be fair. And some people consider separation of gender to be fair. It's an interesting question, with a complicated non answer.
But that’s my point. Unfairness comes in many different forms: genes, upbringing, opportunities, size, wealth, time available and more can all be advantages that are unfair to someone who doesn’t have the same. Why should we specify that only transgendered people advantages over their competition (of which not all have, only some) are what matter and are where we should draw the line? Like I said either we play all men and all women regardless of the gender they’re born or else we’re discriminating for a reason that doesn’t make any sense to specify given how many other advantages and unfairness already exists in sports today.The variability between someone who can afford 24/7 365 days a year of training and someone who uses things around the house to exercise with is big too. So is a man who is 5’8 and a man who is 6’8. So is a woman who has a family lineage in the sport and a woman who is the first to compete in their family. So is someone who devotes all their time to training and someone else who works 3 jobs just to afford rent. That’s what I’m saying: there’s so many unfair advantages between athletes competing in the same sport already, why is this one potential advantage the one that is too big and shouldn’t be accepted when all the others are deemed fine?
-
6 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:
@StanleyCupOneDay And the other important thing is - whether its corporations or just usual people - using these causes for social status doesn't help the cause itself either. Some things are complex, or there just aren't easy answers, but rather than approaching it that way it often just devolves into some BS culture war thing instead.
Social status? Not sure what you mean? Can you elaborate? There’s definitely issues that are complex, but there’s also definitely issues that are black and white, good or bad, right or wrong too. -
1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:
See I'm not always that bad
. No but seriously, it's totally true. If corporations like Nike, the NYT, or Nestle present themselves as though they care about progressive causes they'll never have to answer for things like sweat shops, apologizing for Stalin, or their environmental impact/stealing water (or any other company/example you can think).
When it comes to some of this stuff I find keeping in mind that 'people in positions of power are often driven by self interest' to be useful. I think this is definitely an area where I'm there with the more left "socialist" type thinking.
No, just mostly
I kid, I kid. I don’t hate or take personally anyone who disagrees with me, they have their right to their own opinion. I will however argue against it if I do disagree and I guess that makes it seem like I do. It’s definitely the wealthiest and corporations to blame for the inequality that’s screwed over most working people. I can agree with that second part only if you can agree there’s times and people or parties that have a self interest in staying in power that can also align with helping out the average person. I don’t subscribe to the “all people in positions of power are crooks and only care about themselves” train of thought. There’s good and bad, just like with basically anything in life.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, KristoffWixenschon said:
None of this is true, unfortunately.
Not any person can become a "muscular behemoth".
The acknowledged problem is that most transgender women have a different body chemistry and structure than biological females.
Asking biological women to "work harder" is a little hurtful and kind of insensitive, which is out of character for you. I'm talking about women at the pinnacle of their sport. We need to tell them to just work harder than the limits of their biology?
Actually it’s all true. There’s muscular behemoth men and women. It can be possible for anyone. If you want to get into the debates of certain genes being more likely to produce certain body types we can do that too, but my statements stands that anyone can achieve this. No one starts out muscular. It gets built from training. My point is that if transgender men or women playing amongst biological men or women causes concern due to fairness then so should the size of a person and not just what gender someone was born as. Otherwise it’s just exclusion for being different.It’s not meant to be hurtful and insensitive, it’s what every single smaller man or woman or less fit man or woman is told if their competition is better then they are in whatever sport they compete. They aren’t told that it’s unfair she or he is better then you are. They’re told to work harder to improve their abilities. We should either care about the unfairness of size differences amongst men or women which is a far greater advantage to someone bigger or we should let all men play together and all women play together.
-
It’s a mixed bag with Bettman, depends on your perspective. Yes he’s made the league overall bigger and more profitable. Yes he’s expanded the NHL in the US. Would this have happened with anyone in that position? Up for debate. Has he also screwed over Canadian teams in the NHL? Absolutely. Has he made mistakes and refused to address the refereeing inconsistencies? For sure. Could someone else have been worse then him? Yup.
So it depends on if you look at it through a lens of the NHL reach overall, which is arguably good or a lens of the NHL in Canada, which is arguably bad or a lens of the NHL consistency, which is arguably bad or a lens of the NHL quality, which is arguably mixed. -
12 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:
Idk Twitter is a pretty big/important/revolutionary company. In any important institution where there's some questions about how stuff is being run at the highest level (whether its a gov't, social media network, or even a hockey team) when the new regime takes over & has info available to potentially explain some stuff there will be some demand for it (atleast amongst those who cared to question).
The thing he's got wrong is the evil in this world doesn't care about the woke **** either, for them its just a tool to gain power/favour.
Corporations love the woke causes because it gets them social support without having to face criticism for their lies or unethical production of their products. The 'mind virus' is really more a symptom or barrier than the source.
It’s rare where we seem to be on the same page for an issue, but you’re absolutely right here in regards to most corporations public actions vs actual practices. Not all of course, but most use social issues support publicly as an easy deflection from changing the labour/wage/benefits/paid leave/quality of product issues that are pervasive among the biggest companies in Canada and the world.-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Master Mind said:
If your friend told you to call them sir/sire, would you consider yourself disrespectful if you didn't honour them? Or would you simply honour them?
I know I'm giving an extreme example, but we already see ones like zim/zer, so at what point does it become acceptable to not honour someone's preference?
Is there any straws left with how much you’re grasping them? Sir/sire in reference to someone of higher status is not the same as using a pronoun to make someone feel more comfortable and respected in their body. Why do you insist on believing all pronouns are the same? Because they aren’t. Also thank you for pointing out these new pronouns I wasn’t aware of, I learned something new today and now can be even more respectful and comforting to my lgbtqia2s+ friends and community that I care enough for to use their preferred pronoun/s.-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Alflives said:
I’m pretty sure the whole “kitty litter” thing is a joke. And if that was a punch line in a comedy club it would be funny as hell. As for these people wanting to be called by particular pronouns I really don’t see any problem with that. I think I’m kind of right wing on a lot of things (Am I?) but don’t see this as a political issue. It’s more an issue on the personal level. And if it helps folks to be okay with themselves (even a little bit more) for me to address them respectfully in the manner they so choose, I’m 110% okay with that. I remember a time when some women wanted to be addressed as Ms. Instead of Mrs. No big deal. Just like this. But that Kitty Litter in the washrooms. That is funny.
The only issue I think you’re rightwing on in my experience on CDC Alf is abortion, but even then I think you support the right of women to choose for themselves even though you disagree vehemently with it, which is perfectly ok, lots of people are personally pro-life, but want the option for others if they choose to do so. Everything else is pretty much considered centrist/center left where 60-70% of the population in Canada is.-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, 4petesake said:
To be a fly on the wall as he points at the whiteboard explaining his plan to the marketing team.
And that is exactly how you kill a company, get support from those who will never buy your products and lose support from those who would always (or at least used to) buy your products. The free market at work. Watching this all unfold is like a plane crashed into a train wreck that rolled into a dumpster fire.-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Master Mind said:
You can make the entitlement argument on both sides.
Entitled to be respectful or entitled to be disrespectful. Yeah you can, but it’s not a great argument on one of the sides.-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Master Mind said:
Wish I could.
So you don’t have actual proof of this email, just your word? -
Just now, Master Mind said:
Funny that people think they know what I've seen.
Well why don’t you post it for all of us to see then? -
2 minutes ago, Playoff Beered said:
It's real.
Well that ought to get Elon really mad with all those pronouns he has to use.
. No but seriously, it's totally true. If corporations like Nike, the NYT, or Nestle present themselves as though they care about progressive causes they'll never have to answer for things like sweat shops, apologizing for Stalin, or their environmental impact/stealing water (or any other company/example you can think).
I kid, I kid. I don’t hate or take personally anyone who disagrees with me, they have their right to their own opinion. I will however argue against it if I do disagree and I guess that makes it seem like I do. It’s definitely the wealthiest and corporations to blame for the inequality that’s screwed over most working people. I can agree with that second part only if you can agree there’s times and people or parties that have a self interest in staying in power that can also align with helping out the average person. I don’t subscribe to the “all people in positions of power are crooks and only care about themselves” train of thought. There’s good and bad, just like with basically anything in life.
[Official] Toronto Blue Jays Major League Baseball thread
in Off-Topic General
Posted
If he wanted to play elsewhere, then there’s not much they could have done, but I don’t know if that’s actually the case or not. He was lights out playing last year.