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

Is there such thing as 'expert' hockey analysis? How would this affect peoples perceptions of the Canucks?


hockeydude474

Recommended Posts

Guest Dasein

I would rather absorb what Aaron Ward has to say than what the OP has to say. Aaron Ward actually played the game and has three Stanley Cup rings.

Ah yes the classic Stanley Cup ring argument...

"And lastly I'll say, there's one other guy, I believe, in hockey today that's still working in the game that has won more Stanley Cups than me. So I think I know a little bit about winning" - Kevin Lowe, President of Edmonton Oilers since 2008

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you started a thread annoyed by what people like Craig Button and Aaron Ward have to say. How is that any better?

First post: "Why do we care what hockey experts have to say?"

Later post: "I really care what CDC'ers have to say!"

Ah yes the classic Stanley Cup ring argument...

"And lastly I'll say, there's one other guy, I believe, in hockey today that's still working in the game that has won more Stanley Cups than me. So I think I know a little bit about winning" - Kevin Lowe, President of Edmonton Oilers since 2008

It's a fair point though. The OP's quick to discount any and every hockey expert's analysis but has done nothing really to prove he's more right than any of them. It's a prediction, I'll put more weight on what someone with multiple Stanley Cup rings has to say (until they show me otherwise) every time over some random poster on the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dasein

It's a fair point though. The OP's quick to discount any and every hockey expert's analysis but has done nothing really to prove he's more right than any of them. It's a prediction, I'll put more weight on what someone with multiple Stanley Cup rings has to say (until they show me otherwise) every time over some random poster on the internet.

Not really - yours is a fair point as you give reasons why you would discount the OP

The other guy merely relied on Ward's rings as his "reason"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your point is ridiculous and if you can't see it then there's no help for you. Of course Aaron Ward or any other analyst has not played for EVERY team in the NHL. However, there are good analysts out there who watch and study the game ... and some (like Aaron Ward) have actually played the game and been successful at it. Of course, there are analysts that are terrible at their job ... but there are some that are very good. Just becuase they haven't played on a particular team does not make their comments/opinions lack credibility. For example, I have a lot of time for good analysts like Bob McKenzie. He hasn't played on any NHL team, yet his insight into the game and teams is very credible.

Your OP is full of generalizations. Get real. 'Nuf said.

I'm not really sure how it's ridiculous but okay. I'd appreciate some further elaboration on that but I actually am quite happy that you disagree, after all, the point of a discussion is to have some dissenting opinions!

Also if you could comment on the particular generalization which you don't think are fair then that would be appreciated as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First post: "Why do we care what hockey experts have to say?"

Later post: "I really care what CDC'ers have to say!"

It's a fair point though. The OP's quick to discount any and every hockey expert's analysis but has done nothing really to prove he's more right than any of them. It's a prediction, I'll put more weight on what someone with multiple Stanley Cup rings has to say (until they show me otherwise) every time over some random poster on the internet.

Sorry, I should of made it more clear - i'm not proposing that I know more than the 'expert' analysts. I'm proposing that no one has any higher basis of knowledge than anyone else. There is no such thing as an objective 'expert' and that everyone with an opinion on the topic has an equal weight.

I just think its absurd that people actually get paid to voice opinions that are no more informed than anyone else. Obviously, these people are only employed because there's a demand for their service, but I think my main point is that I want to call into question the service they're providing in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol ... nope. Not angry at all. Just replying back to a question that was asked of me. Not sure how you can see anger in a message post.

No answer was given to my question. And I was being completely serious, I really am curious to know what you gained out of your original post. But fair enough, you don't want to talk to me. I hope you have a pleasant day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one's up for grabs. The pundits are paid to predict. it's going to be a good series, for sure. Can't wait.

Sure it's up for grabs...that's the bottom line. And if some idiot wanted to cut me a cheque to hear my prediction, I'd make one. Wouldn't make one bit of difference whether it was right or wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't mean to sound hostile.

Well anyway, as bad as Torts has been last season, he isn't entirely to be blamed. He's not a bad coach but some of his antics prevent him from being a better one. It's probably going to be quite a while before he gets another job.

If one doesn't adapt, a good coach from years past may very well be superceded by younger, more flexible coaches.

Torts has won a cup, so there's no denying that he was a good coach.

Ted Nolan has won a cup too (if I recall) - and so has Paul Maurice. Both of those coaches have been questioned about their "coaching ability", especially Maurice's.

Then there are unproven coaches that have turned out pretty solid (i.e. Desjardins). Even then, Desjardins hasn't been without scrutiny.

I think it's too simple of an approach to say someone is a 'good coach' or a 'bad coach', at least on the NHL level. There's just too many factors.

Is Todd McLellan a bad coach? Absolutely not. Is his job in jeopardy? Yes.

Heck, even that Pittsburgh coach got fired too - and he won a cup pretty recently. The position is pretty tenuous, in most cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course there are experts. They are professionals that follow the game and analyze it for a living. Like any profession, though, some are better than others. And of course, it's sports so once the game is played, there are all kinds of variables. I'm really not sure what it offends people if the majority of the press picks Calgary. So be it. What matters is what happens on the ice. Injuries, people picking up their play, hot goalies, etc. are not something you can predict through analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd say 1/3 opinions on cdc are well informed and reasonably deduced. i strongly disagree with your statement.

There's actually a lot of really insightful comments and analysis on CDC. Of course, they are mixed in with the "troll", "real fan", "have you ever played?" comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most "experts" I've heard say it will be close but that it's likely Van's to lose. Though it's very win-able for either team.

Ferraro was the only TSN guy to favour the nucks... If only by a narrow margin. I kinda agree with him. This Calgary team won't roll over and die without a fight.

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...