[GDT] Vancouver Canucks vs. Vegas Golden Knights | August 29th, 2020 | 6:45pm PT, SNP | R2G3

[You Mad Bro?]

6 minutes ago, Roberts said:

I vote game-related conversations should begin tomorrow, and other subjects should be brought to a different thread. Thoughts? It would just be nice to get back on track.

Maybe keep this one going just change the title? Start a new one with a disclaimer of something. I’m not sure. Would be nice to have a proper Hockey gdt without the politics 

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, GhostsOf1994 said:

Im with you oldnews, why did my grandmother flee germany as a 7 y.o. to "vacation" in canada for the summer?

 

Because according to her countrymen, her skin tone and features made her sub human.

 

Why did my great grandparents flee norway?

 

Because they weren't blonde haired and blue eye and feared for their lifes.

 

Norway was occupied by the Roman empire - and the Roman Catholic church.

 

So here is one (of many) instances, where it becomes worth questioning - what is "white" identity?  What is white nationalsim?  White supremacy?

 

Because here is the point.

 

Not only Norway, but what is now called England,  what is now called Germany, what are now called various European nations - were occupied by Romans.

 

What, "racially" - were the Romans?

Were they "white"?  Were they "black"?  Were they mixed blood?

Were "white" nations occupied by other white nations?

Which "white nation" am I supposed to belong to?  Join?

 

Ironically - the 'British' - became junior Romans themselves - or rather, their pretentious ruling people did.

 

But the point runs far broader and deeper than simply Europe.

 

For example - what are the origins of 'white supremacy' in Europe.

Where did the 'aryan' concepts originate?  where did the symbols most identified as racist - the swastika - for example, originate.

"Racism" mutated over centuries - was imported into the "Germanic" world (all of Europe essentially ran through the Germanic tribes at points of history).

There are origins of "racism" that stem from sanskrit, from Hinduism - and perhaps ironically, were transplanted back and forth into what is now known as India, Germany.

How much of the modern ideologies of racism in Europe - originate, ironically, from 'brown' faced thinkers?

Remembering that caste in India - is based largely on the depth of darkness of the skin - it becomes a mere relative abstraction - the basis of "race".

 

Don't mistake these points for an attempt to pinpoint racisms origins as Indian.  That is not the point, whatsoever - and undoubtedly reducing 'racism' to a 'racial' origin would prove both reductive and historically inaccurate - or at least only a partial truth.

 

The point is more along these lines:

Europeans have done countless, horrible things to one another - historically there is no such thing as the 'white nation' = it's a delusion and fabrication.

Further - Indians (I mean actual "East Indians", not "Native Americans" = likewise.  And this runs far beyond "race" to intersections of religion - ie "Indians" fight not only over "race" but over Hinduism/Muslim lines, etc.

Africans have and continue to do horrible things to one another - not simply a matter of 'race'.  At what point is a person the same race?  Are Tutsis and Hutus the same "race"?  Are "Africans" a single "race"?  It all falls to pieces when you scratch the surface.  What is the difference between "race" and "nation"/nationalism... or religion.  "Jews" are allegedly a "race" - but they're actually a religion - Judaism.

Asians likewise - do horrible things to one another -  have plenty of "internal" racism to what is considered "Asian".   (Some) Japanese consider "Korean" people, for example, to be subhuman - one step away from "Africans" - perhaps even 'lower' depending on who you speak to.  And of course. millions of Japanese people are not 'racist' in that sense - and would not/don't/can't be bothered to buy into it.  This is just an example - that applies specifically, but in a broader sense, across the spectrum.

 

So, let's pause for a second and ask the question "scientifically".

There has been countless attempts to substantiate "race" scientifically - and some of it as absurd as measuring skulls to see if implications where intellect is concerned can be found/correlated. 

But biologically/scientifically:

 

Kingdom

Phylum

Class

Order

Family

Genus

Species.

 

Where does "race" fall in taxonomic rank?

It falls below species.  It even falls below subspecies. It's informal in the end - not "scientific" and more a cultural abstraction than an actual, identifiable taxonic category.

 

"White" can be Causasian, 'European', can even be 'Middle Eastern', or 'North African'.

Again - what were Romans?   When you think about it - the lines blur and appropriately, start to lack real meaning.

 

So - for me - the bottom line becomes twofold.

 

1) don't try to sell me some kind of 'white identity', nationalism, supremacy - it's a weak abstaction, borderline meaningless 'inclusion', particularly when it's not situated in my 'homeland', but in a settler state.  I understand and respect defensive nationalism - what I don't respect is offensive 'nationalism' - which really, should be called by the other appropriate names.  You're not "my people" by simple virtue of - relatively similar skin tone.   And in the end - white people are and can be highly intelligent, "good people", are and can be utter idiots.  Indians - are and can be highly intelligent, are and can be utter idiots.  Asian people - are and can be intelligent, are and can be utter idiots. And so on, and so on.  And ironically, the more we know about each other, the more we learn about each other - this becomes common, simple sense and the trappings of racist ideology fall to pieces.

 

2) don't try to sell me "white guilt".  I acknowledge history - and specific history - ie where 'we' live is largely settled by Europeans - and Euro-North-Americans have done some horrible things to Native Americans, black 'Americans' - I am not denying slavery, genocide, etc when I refuse to wear"white guilt".   I'm also not naive about 'everyone else's history' - or 'their' responsibility in the schemes of things/history.  The counterpart to getting sucked into the dysfuntion of it all - is to inform oneself - and take responsbility for oneself.  I'm not a member of any fantasy "white collective" - whether fascist, communist, socialist, left, right, etc.  When people get sucked in to those ideologies, they may have different individual/personal responsibilities to bear in the end, however, personally, I reject the right and the left - I'll take a hard pass on both the fake identity and the flaky guilt.  And I respect the individual decisions of people - to stand with people they feel are being done wrong.   At the same time, I don't consider a middle class black liberal to have any moral superiority that I must defer to - or that can brow beat me with white guilt.  That is not a dismissal of BLM  - in the least.  One thing I have found over the ages - is that the 'real' people - don't play the 'race card' - they don't need to resort to guilt or identity tactics - and can maintain their identity nevertheless. 

 

I'm going to end this with a few of the best lessons that have ever been shared with me in this lifetime - as a relatively "white" person.

 

1) "we" for the most part - are the "tortured children of Europe".  "We" endured atrocities and occupation - and we also, in some places threw that occupation off - however, "we've" brought the spoils of that with us - and like the junior Romans that the British became, "we've" transplanted that to North America, this time, ourselves the disrespectful occupying force.  Now - of course, there are class implications - most people had no say or determination in imperial, colonial enterprises - but in the modern abstract form of our 'identities' - "we" are "Canadians" and perceive ourselves as equal, citizens - equally fortunate and responsible at this point (and not merely subjects of a monarchy).   The complications become endless, on this end, as do the ironies.  For example, many of the surviving victims of genocide in Europe, came to participate and benefit in the genocide in North America.  Some/many  "Jewish" people (or perhaps rather, Zionist people) for example, take real offense to the word "genocide" being applied to Native Americans (in spite of the fact, for example that the pre'"Contact" population of what is now called the United States and Canada, were reduced from the range of 17-20 million people - to 250,000.   The irony - of some surviving victims of  "genocide" - based on utter ignorance - asserting that the concept should be reserved to what happened to Jewish people in Germany.  Again, don't mistake this point for what it is not.  I've had 'debates' with Africans who took offense to the idea that Native Americans have had it as hard, or harder, in general, than they have.  I ask them, in the end, to imagine if Africa were populated with 97% settlers.  Anyhow - there is nothing simple or truly linear about history and responsibility. 

 

2) don't bother feeling "guilty" about who you are.  go and find out who you actually are, instead.  And define that in the right way / a good way, in the end.  There's no need to try to become Native American, or appropriate African-American culture, or go to India to "find yourself".    I'm no better or worse than anyone else.  I seek to live by the Natural Laws of Respect and Consent (which I'm thankful were taught to /shared with me) - and I try to make reparations where possible - not because I am or feel "guilty", buy into flake reductions or buy into fake identities - but because it's the right thing to do - for myself, and everyone in the end. 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by oldnews

[PhillipBlunt]

9 minutes ago, Roberts said:

I vote game-related conversations should begin tomorrow, and other subjects should be brought to a different thread. Thoughts? It would just be nice to get back on track.

[Roberts]

2 minutes ago, You Mad Bro? said:

Maybe keep this one going just change the title? Start a new one with a disclaimer of something. I’m not sure. Would be nice to have a proper Hockey gdt without the politics 

@-Vintage Canuck- @StealthNuck not sure what to do. Either keep this GDT and begin hockey talks tomorrow, or I can create a new thread and have this one stay open for the conversations.

[spook007]

3 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

I woke up, not in a foul mood because there were no games yesterday, and none today. I actually felt proud, to be a Canadian and to be a Canucks fan.

 

It was the Canucks who reached out and got this conversation started. This is a great team we have, on and off the ice. I'm sure the Sedins are at home with their families, feeling good about it as well. For today, all of the players in the bubble will get along and work together, but tomorrow, the games will be back and it will be fierce competition again. Who knows, after getting to know some of the Canucks a little better, maybe Reaves will be less inclined to destroy them with crushing body checks lol  GCG   

If only.... highly doubt it... 

[spook007]

2 hours ago, Roberts said:

BRING BACK THE MINUS!!!!!! (kidding don't ban me)

Ban??? You've got celebrity status on CDC...

 

You can do anything.....almost 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

12 minutes ago, Roberts said:

@-Vintage Canuck- @StealthNuck not sure what to do. Either keep this GDT and begin hockey talks tomorrow, or I can create a new thread and have this one stay open for the conversations.

I was thinking the latter.

 

Cc: @StealthNuck

[-SN-]

18 minutes ago, Roberts said:

@-Vintage Canuck- @StealthNuck not sure what to do. Either keep this GDT and begin hockey talks tomorrow, or I can create a new thread and have this one stay open for the conversations.

I think we can keep it, and off-topic discussion can happen in OT. It's already moving that way naturally. 

[PhillipBlunt]

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, Darius said:

"Race" is a social construct.

 

Yes - it's a little more than that - but essentially, it's only skin (and cultural evolution) deep.  Class even more 'constructed' - and mere abstraction.  Sex is the most tangible 'difference' - arguably resulting in the 'original' abstract ideologies that derived endless 'meaning' from being men and women and both human.  In the end, I think sex and the constructs of gender are the deepest and most problematic.

 

"Race" is a falsely perceived 'reality' that derives from the simple fact of diverse 'evolution' ie - some people lived in Africa for millenia longer than others.  Some people migrated/originated in "Europe" - and evolved along a different path.  The implications are 'real' - have 'objective' differences - but they are only skin deep relative to the fundamental 'sameness' / oneness that underlies all humans.  Europeans - with less exposure to the sun - evolved to be lighter.  Does that consitute "race"?  Only if we take relatively meaningless differences and assign them absurd meanings.  For me the question whether "we" all share a common origin, or are polygenetic - has relatively meaningless imlications in the end - people can make extreme implications of those questions if they seek to, but.....

 

I forgot to mention this in my previous post - but for me - the question becomes relatively simple when we ask:

 

Can we, do we, are we capable of reproducing with one another - by "natural" means? 

 

It's a simple 'scientific' question - that imo destroys the concept of "race" or racial 'identity' in the end.

 

Of course we do, of course we can.   We can and do, naturally, reproduce with one another.  The 'scientific' basis of racism has a real difficulty, imo, grappling with that underlying reality.

 

And every person born of "inter-racial" / "intercultural" families - are every bit 100% naturally human as any other person.  Period. 

[PetterssonOrPeterson]

30 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Norway was occupied by the Roman empire - and the Roman Catholic church.

 

So here is one (of many) instances, where it becomes worth questioning - what is "white" identity?  What is white nationalsim?  White supremacy?

 

Because here is the point.

 

Not only Norway, but what is now called England,  what is now called Germany, what are now called various European nations - were occupied by Romans.

 

What, "racially" - were the Romans?

Were they "white"?  Were they "black"?  Were they mixed blood?

Were "white" nations occupied by other white nations?

Which "white nation" am I supposed to belong to?  Join?

 

Ironically - the 'British' - became junior Romans themselves - or rather, their pretentious ruling people did.

 

But the point runs far broader and deeper than simply Europe.

 

For example - what are the origins of 'white supremacy' in Europe.

Where did the 'aryan' concepts originate?  where did the symbols most identified as racist - the swastika - for example, originate.

"Racism" mutated over centuries - was imported into the "Germanic" world (all of Europe essentially ran through the Germanic tribes at points of history).

There are origins of "racism" that stem from sanskrit, from Hinduism - and perhaps ironically, were transplanted back and forth into what is now known as India, Germany.

How much of the modern ideologies of racism in Europe - originate, ironically, from 'brown' faced thinkers?

Remembering that caste in India - is based largely on the depth of darkness of the skin - it becomes a mere relative abstraction - the basis of "race".

 

Don't mistake these points for an attempt to pinpoint racisms origins as Indian.  That is not the point, whatsoever - and undoubtedly reducing 'racism' to a 'racial' origin would prove both reductive and historically inaccurate - or at least only a partial truth.

 

The point is more along these lines:

Europeans have done countless, horrible things to one another - historically there is no such thing as the 'white nation' = it's a delusion and fabrication.

Further - Indians (I mean actual "East Indians", not "Native Americans" = likewise.  And this runs far beyond "race" to intersections of religion - ie "Indians" fight not only over "race" but over Hinduism/Muslim lines, etc.

Africans have and continue to do horrible things to one another - not simply a matter of 'race'.  At what point is a person the same race?  Are Tutsis and Hutus the same "race"?  Are "Africans" a single "race"?  It all falls to pieces when you scratch the surface.  What is the difference between "race" and "nation"/nationalism... or religion.  "Jews" are allegedly a "race" - but they're actually a religion - Judaism.

Asians likewise - do horrible things to one another -  have plenty of "internal" racism to what is considered "Asian".   (Some) Japanese consider "Korean" people, for example, to be subhuman - one step away from "Africans" - perhaps even 'lower' depending on who you speak to.  And of course. millions of Japanese people are not 'racist' in that sense - and would not/don't/can't be bothered to buy into it.  This is just an example - that applies specifically, but in a broader sense, across the spectrum.

 

So, let's pause for a second and ask the question "scientifically".

There has been countless attempts to substantiate "race" scientifically - and some of it as absurd as measuring skulls to see if implications where intellect is concerned can be found/correlated. 

But biologically/scientifically:

 

Kingdom

Phylum

Class

Order

Family

Genus

Species.

 

Where does "race" fall in taxonomic rank?

It falls below species.  It even falls below subspecies. It's informal in the end - not "scientific" and more a cultural abstraction than an actual, identifiable taxonic category.

 

"White" can be Causasian, 'European', can even be 'Middle Eastern', or 'North African'.

Again - what were Romans?   When you think about it - the lines blur and appropriately, start to lack real meaning.

 

So - for me - the bottom line becomes twofold.

 

1) don't try to sell me some kind of 'white identity', nationalism, supremacy - it's a weak abstaction, borderline meaningless 'inclusion', particularly when it's not situated in my 'homeland', but in a settler state.  I understand and respect defensive nationalism - what I don't respect is offensive 'nationalism' - which really, should be called by the other appropriate names.  You're not "my people" by simple virtue of - relatively similar skin tone.   And in the end - white people are and can be highly intelligent, "good people", are and can be utter idiots.  Indians - are and can be highly intelligent, are and can be utter idiots.  Asian people - are and can be intelligent, are and can be utter idiots. And so on, and so on.  And ironically, the more we know about each other, the more we learn about each other - this becomes common, simple sense and the trappings of racist ideology fall to pieces.

 

2) don't try to sell me "white guilt".  I acknowledge history - and specific history - ie where 'we' live is largely settled by Europeans - and Euro-North-Americans have done some horrible things to Native Americans, black 'Americans' - I am not denying slavery, genocide, etc when I refuse to wear"white guilt".   I'm also not naive about 'everyone else's history' - or 'their' responsibility in the schemes of things/history.  The counterpart to getting sucked into the dysfuntion of it all - is to inform oneself - and take responsbility for oneself.  I'm not a member of any fantasy "white collective" - whether fascist, communist, socialist, left, right, etc.  When people get sucked in to those ideologies, they may have different individual/personal responsibilities to bear in the end, however, personally, I reject the right and the left - I'll take a hard pass on both the fake identity and the flaky guilt.  And I respect the individual decisions of people - to stand with people they feel are being done wrong.   At the same time, I don't consider a middle class black liberal to have any moral superiority that I must defer to - or that can brow beat me with white guilt.  That is not a dismissal of BLM  - in the least.  One thing I have found over the ages - is that the 'real' people - don't play the 'race card' - they don't need to resort to guilt or identity tactics - and can maintain their identity nevertheless. 

 

I'm going to end this with a few of the best lessons that have ever been shared with me in this lifetime - as a relatively "white" person.

 

1) "we" for the most part - are the "tortured children of Europe".  "We" endured atrocities and occupation - and we also, in some places threw that occupation off - however, "we've" brought the spoils of that with us - and like the junior Romans that the British became, "we've" transplanted that to North America, this time, ourselves the disrespectful occupying force.  Now - of course, there are class implications - most people had no say or determination in imperial, colonial enterprises - but in the modern abstract form of our 'identities' - "we" are "Canadians" and perceive ourselves as equal, citizens - equally fortunate and responsible at this point (and not merely subjects of a monarchy).   The complications become endless, on this end, as do the ironies.  For example, many of the surviving victims of genocide in Europe, came to participate and benefit in the genocide in North America.  Some/many  "Jewish" people (or perhaps rather, Zionist people) for example, take real offense to the word "genocide" being applied to Native Americans (in spite of the fact, for example that the pre'"Contact" population of what is now called the United States and Canada, were reduced from the range of 17-20 million people - to 250,000.   The irony - of some surviving victims of  "genocide" - based on utter ignorance - asserting that the concept should be reserved to what happened to Jewish people in Germany.  Again, don't mistake this point for what it is not.  I've had 'debates' with Africans who took offense to the idea that Native Americans have had it as hard, or harder, in general, than they have.  I ask them, in the end, to imagine if Africa were populated with 97% settlers.  Anyhow - there is nothing simple or truly linear about history and responsibility. 

 

2) don't bother feeling "guilty" about who you are.  go and find out who you actually are, instead.  And define that in the right way / a good way, in the end.  There's no need to try to become Native American, or appropriate African-American culture, or go to India to "find yourself".    I'm no better or worse than anyone else.  I seek to live by the Natural Laws of Respect and Consent (which I'm thankful were taught to /shared with me - and make reparations where possible - not because I am or feel "guilty", buy into flake reductions or buy into fake identities - but because it's the right thing to do - for myself, and everyone in the end. 

 

 

.......we really need tomorrow to come quickly...

[Smashian Kassian]

 

22 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

How are lives always on the line? Yet these same situations are de-escalated and resolved peacefully in places like the UK, Germany, Australia, Canada?

 

I think part of this is the US culture of guns. And also how much of the black communities are historically ridden with crime. That's not to blame Black people for that, the white man has certainly helped foster this systemically (redlining for example). But it is part of the conversation that needs to happen here, as is the culture of guns.

 

It must be hard down there to police. Anyone could have a gun. Its crazy to see Kenosha & all the people out on the streets with rifles, contrast that to Canada where you would never see that. Same goes for Australia & the others I'm sure. Imagine having to enforce law when your life could be on the line at any second. That's not an excuse for the bias towards blacks - which is absolutely clear, and not just against people in the higher crime areas - but its part of the conversation in moving forward.

 

 

22 hours ago, DonaldBrashear said:

The media isn't interested in covering this aspect of it. It's almost like they don't want people to know he had a knife and was likely reaching for it. It makes the story not so much fun. Sort of like the coroner report that came out for George Floyd where the coroner said there was no damage to his neck and he did not die of asphyxiation. Or that George Floyd had insane amounts of meth in his system and a heart condition. The media doesn't want to tell those stories.

 

 

And its not even that these details excuse the actions of Police either. Those details about George Floyd don't excuse kneeling on his neck for 8 minutes. But its still relevant to know the facts.

 

As a benevolent person, you don't want to believe that's there a narrative being blatantly driven, or a purposeful manipulation of facts, but things like this make the idea harder to refute. And it just fuels the divide that needs to be overcome to progress more quickly on these issues. 

 

 

[oldnews]

7 minutes ago, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

.......we really need tomorrow to come quickly...

who is the "we" of whom you speak?

[Smashian Kassian]

23 hours ago, dexterwang said:

 

Hate police brutality? Let’s talk funding more police training, reforming police unions that protects bad cops, and better recruitment. But nope!!! let’s defund the police, antagonize them and riot. This have hurt and will hurt minority neighborhood. 
 

Hate disparity? Let’s talk about culture, valuing education, supportive family structure, and improving community safety... but nope!!! According to BLM website, let’s dissolve the nuclear family, kill capitalism and blame everyone else. 

 

 

There's definitely something to this.

 

And at face value its hard to blame people for jumping behind it. Everyone agrees with the sentiment that Black Lives Matter. Its just the conversation about the facts & how to move forward is where things fall apart. 

 

At this point the debate isn't (or shouldn't be) about whether racism is acceptable or not. Everyone agrees that it isn't, & those who don't hold extreme views politically that wider social rejects. Point blank, period. 

 

Yet.... it feels like alot of people on the internet are acting as if this is still the debate - whether they realize it or not. (And I don't think alot of them do).

 

For example, there'll be these vague statements like 'be apart of the solution' or 'time for difficult conversations', exc. But then its just left at that. None of it is actually concrete ideas. And if someone who they perceive to be against them pushes it further, they run the risk of being labelled a racist & dismissed - as if they are debating that racism is acceptable - when in many cases that's not it at all. 

[IBatch]

Want to reply to several things on this topic.  First off anyone who mentioned socioeconomic conditions is thinking big.   That’s a big part of the issues on both sides of the border.   People don’t usually go to crime if they can make a decent living.  Bingo.   Systematic poverty is also a root problem.  So is jailing for profit (more people are incarcerated in the US then any other country).  

 

Second -   One poster said he’s been around for 50 years and has seen a lot of change over that time.   Would have to agree to that.  Not enough change but definitely quite a bit.  A lot of things that would be considered social suicide these days by what the “greatest generation “ said casually.  Anyone who likes to eat licorace babies and remembers what they used to be called will get it.  Or if you were working too hard physically and got told to “stop working like - the N word” understands where I’m coming from.   Not far enough but definitely some big steps.   You can be racist just from naivety and that generation is virtually dead.   Their kids ( baby boomers) were rebels - and definitely made a lot of headway. 

Have two kids one going to university right now first year and another in high school.  It’s disgusting and disturbing to them what’s going on.   I’d say for my generation racism wasn’t nearly as bad as how we treated sexually different people growing up - always called each other gay or lord of the gays or the F word etc thinking we were pretty cute and it was funny?). Have to live with that shame - but at least I see it in a different lense now - again progress.  The world has gone a long way in acceptance on both fronts over the past four generations.  
 

What I’d suggest anyone who’s right wing, proud to be white or a stupid supremacist is go do the DNA test to find out your lineage.  It’s 99% accurate 4 generations and very accurate all the way back to 12 plus.    My daughter did it ... and we found out that we have roots all over the world.   Including Chinese only four generations down which means my wife’s very white great grandmother who she knew as a kid, slept with an Asian man.  Hilarious.   99% certain.  Also have African, Vietnamese , Italian, Peru,  and a whole bunch of other things going on.   Sure she’s blonde hair blue eyed kid but she’s not white inside.  Neither are ANY of us.   Learn your history and find out where man started out.   Neanderthals ha ha.  

 

Never in my life understood why skin colour mattered and had a lot of friends not white.  But get now that things are ass backwards still South of the border and that we haven’t treated our First Nations people much better.  Agree all lives matter because of course they do - but all lives have to be equal FIRST.  And they are not yet.  Thankfully the trend is definitely in the right direction and this movement should keep it at the foreground.   Don’t mind missing hockey for a couple days.   And also folks - be kind to each other some people aren’t fast learners.  

[Jaimito]

100 pages before the puck is even dropped.  

 

Let's go 200.

[PhillipBlunt]

7 minutes ago, Jaimito said:

100 pages before the puck is even dropped.  

 

Let's go 200.

[Nuxfanabroad]

Holy Jumpin'! Whatta' GDT!

[Junkyard Dog]

Game is at 6:45 correct?

[wai_lai416]

Lol nice the only team to have 2 back to back games in 1 series if it goes 7. Have another team ever played 2 back to back in 1 playoff series in the recent 20 years lol thats 4 back to back in 2 rounds of playoff plus play in series