View Single Post
09-10-2012, 09:52 AM
Registered User
Dreakmur's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,519
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The ultimate ironies.

180 degree shift in your position. Now raw stats have great value.
Actually, it's just that you are having serious comprehension problems.

As I said before (this post), when players played in the same league at the same time, there's no need to adjust.

Then you have the moving goalposts combined with insufficient research time argument. So Extending the Moran excuse logically, your ageism is simply a function of not taking the time to properly research the contributions and accomplishments of young players or short NHL/NHA/PCHA career players. The information is also readily available. Such players deserve the same academic research courtesy as the allegedly "forgotten" players like Moran. Yet you and some other fantasy snobs are strongly opposed to this because it disrupts your preconceived template that helped structure your teams.
What academic research needs to be done on your recent players? We have their statistsics. We have their voting records. We have read contemporary opinions and we've actually seen them play themselves. What's missing?

Academic research shows that Jonathan Quick had one amazing season, but nothing else of significance in a career than lasted only 4 seasons. You can play the victim card all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that many of your key players have career that are incomplete, and therefore short, and therefore less impressive.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote