It's also rather easy to spot the intellectually dishonest, who spout BS and then run away behind sarcasm and snark when they get called out on their displayed ignorance.
Just like Paul Holmgren runs a multi-million dollar organization, right? Or is that Peter Lukko?
It's very easy to be smug when you spout ******** (regularly) and neither back it up, nor admit to it when your incorrect observations are pointed out to you. George W. Bush has made a career of it.
No one forgets that they are dealing with real living people. You just constructed the definition of a straw man argument, which defines the rest of the post.
Actually, yes, they did. Everyone was very confused why the Sedin twins didn't develop quicker. However, more importantly, you should internalize the following observation: there are exceptions to every rule.
Look above, however, Hockeypete49 rattled off a slew of names of supposed players that somehow backed up his defensible position and they almost all conformed perfectly to what I was arguing. The Peter Stastny one was just pure gold.
And your belief that you cannot predict anything in the NHL is... certifiably false. Given enough evidence, you can predict within a reasonable margin of error a great deal quite accurately. For example, given the history of the league and the thousands of players that have spent time in the NHL, by the age of 23 most elite scorers have begun putting up big point totals and you can make determinations based on that.
Who the **** is writing off Giroux? He's a very good scorer now, and I expect him to put up good point totals throughout his career (I always have). I don't expect him to be a 100 pt guy in this league, and I doubt we will see significant change from the level he's at now. And... late bloomer? He scored 103 pts his first season in the Q. There's also a difference between being a late bloomer as a teen (physically maturing) and later on in life.
However, the original argument was made by Sawdalite, that Giroux was "young" if you're talking about scoring in the NHL (specifically in relation to guys that hit 100 pts). That is an empirically false claim. NHL players with extreme consistency start putting up high point totals at or before the age of 23. 23 is NOT young by any argument you might want to make when it comes to scoring in the NHL. The majority of the skill-set required to put up high point totals: quickness, twitch reflexes, durability, etc. are stuff that doesn't age well.
If you want to argue that he may be a "late bloomer" that's fine... but you are applying the term "late bloomer" for a reason, no? Maybe, because he didn't bloom when most do?
Jester when I made that comment I was not talking about you. Sorry you took offence. It was meant for another boarder who always spin doctors facts his way only And makes up excuses why facts go against what he believes in. I hope this clears this up. However if this gives you something do in your day and you find some semblance of enjoyment out of this. Then by all means continue.
Take care,
I said Giroux back when this poll started. He's got a shot this year but he has to keep playing the way he has been.
He has to stay healthy and not burn out... but he is proving in my mind that I was originally correct that he can do it... given the chance.
I want to hear the people who thought in this day and age it is too hard and may not be done with the style the Flyers play and their spreading the goals around... It can be that he won't, but I like his chances at this point.
With a balanced attack I doubt that anyone could reach that mark on this time. However to answer your poll G would be the one to have a shot. I read where someone said he was not a young player. He just turned 23!! OMG I guess if you hit say 27,28 its over
Well I wonder what our so called expert has to say for himself now. He says "G" is old at 23. Every player is different. However some people just suck up stats and that is all they have to base crap on. Maybe now they will have changed their minds about Claude.
Well I wonder what our so called expert has to say for himself now. He says "G" is old at 23. Every player is different. However some people just suck up stats and that is all they have to base crap on. Maybe now they will have changed their minds about Claude.
Trends are established to be broken... G is putting up the numbers and could end up being a Hart contender in the process; not from the numbers but when and how he is doing it, IMO.
I find it amazing how he and the top line can share the minutes yet still put up such numbers.
Well I wonder what our so called expert has to say for himself now. He says "G" is old at 23. Every player is different. However some people just suck up stats and that is all they have to base crap on. Maybe now they will have changed their minds about Claude.
I just skimmed the thread, I might have missed that post but I can't see anyone saying Giroux is "old". It was said that 23 years old isn't that young when it comes to offensive production. Which is true. Most of the players that top the league in scoring are up there at a fairly young age.
Giroux had an awesome game tonight, and is really having a great season so far. His main weakness offensively in past years has been his shot. That is much improved this season, he is a lot better in getting himself into shooting positions this year, and also shoots a lot more where he would have passed the puck previously. I wouldn't expect his shooting percentage to remain as high as 20.5 when the season ends though.
I just skimmed the thread, I might have missed that post but I can't see anyone saying Giroux is "old". It was said that 23 years old isn't that young when it comes to offensive production. Which is true. Most of the players that top the league in scoring are up there at a fairly young age.
Giroux had an awesome game tonight, and is really having a great season so far. His main weakness offensively in past years has been his shot. That is much improved this season, he is a lot better in getting himself into shooting positions this year, and also shoots a lot more where he would have passed the puck previously. I wouldn't expect his shooting percentage to remain as high as 20.5 when the season ends though.
We must take into consideration his high amount of helpers... In his four point night tonight he had one goal and three assists... So, while his goal scoring chances may have improved, his play making and getting his stick in so much action has to be a major role in his tally.
Also, he has improved every season to-date, IIRC... which was one of my original points, way back, I believe.
I guess if you hit say 27,28 its over
