HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sather and the Homegrown Rebuilding of the Rangers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-16-2011, 09:26 AM
  #126
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
No but you did something called EXAAAAAGERATING which I then did back to you. You really couldn't figure that out?
Hehe...you remind me of Vizzini. Please tell me you have a very pronounced lisp. That would make my day!

Ever wonder why there are so many A's in exaaaaageration?


Last edited by Shadowtron: 09-16-2011 at 09:56 AM.
Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 09:34 AM
  #127
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,660
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
It's not haters we're dealing with. Sather hate is one thing. It's the Ranger hate that shows how a lot of these fans are just bandwagon babies who only care about seeing a cup victory.
I don't see much Ranger hate. Unless saying they were awful prior to the lockout and above average since is Ranger hate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
It's not about love for the team and hating a GM for standing in the team's way no it's about the fact that many seem intent on pretending they actually are the team so the GM let them down personally the GM got in their way of "winning".

Again, not sure what this supposed to mean exactly. Are you suggesting that there's something wrong with having higher standards than two playoff wins in over a decade? And at the heart of the teams transition from awful to above average has been the one constant — the GM.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 09:47 AM
  #128
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I don't see much Ranger hate. Unless saying they were awful prior to the lockout and above average since is Ranger hate.




Again, not sure what this supposed to mean exactly. Are you suggesting that there's something wrong with having higher standards than two playoff wins in over a decade? And at the heart of the teams transition from awful to above average has been the one constant — the GM.
Wasn't it Howard Zinn who said dissent is the highest form of patriotism? I couldn't imagine all this fervor over a team people hated. The debates are heated BECAUSE of our love for the team. Nothing wrong at all in wanting something better for them.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 09:49 AM
  #129
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,660
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Wasn't it Howard Zinn who said dissent is the highest form of patriotism? I couldn't imagine all this fervor over a team people hated.
Howard Zinn said a lot of things. And much better than I ever could.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:12 AM
  #130
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
Great is arbitrary find something rational to debate. I love this team and stand by it. What they did last year and the organization as a whole as it is constituted is great to me because it provides me with great hockey and excitement. I don't define great by the ridiculous cup only criteria of certian bandwagoners. I agree the GM is a moron I clearly said that.
Terrific for you. Ignorance really is bliss, then. But great is not arbitrary. All it takes is a little common sense to achieve an understanding of what the commonly accepted definition for greatness is as far as pro sports are concerned, at the very least. You need to realize that to others, what they did last year is not great, nor all that exciting, and thus not nearly as satisfying as it might have been for you.

Quote:
Ah so on that point we are now only allowed to love our team if they win the cup or play the hockey style that we arbitrarily deem worthy of the ice. It sounds like "My kid is not an honor student so I don't love him." Only you're even more broad. "My hockey team does not play according to my style so not only do I not love them but nobody is allowed to love them" Sounds like a lonely selfish, miserable way to think. GL with that.
First of all, as someone with experience teaching English, that analogy makes zero sense. The relationship between a fan and his/her sports team is nothing like the relationship between a parent and a child, and any such comparison is foolhardy. It's not that you aren't allowed to love your team if they don't play a certain way. Rather, why would you want to? I understand why YOU, personally, might. You're not a hockey fan. You're a Rangers fan, and that's all that matters to you. Unfortunately, you choose to insult and demean rather than even make a cursory attempt at understanding the perspective of others. The hockey style that I mentioned as being preferable is arbitrary only in the eyes of someone who can't tell the difference between said style and the style of hockey played by the Rangers for the last number of years. This style isn't preferred by just me. I didn't create the standard for hockey excellence, or the definition of it. I simply arrived at the same conclusion that most people who share a deep respect for this game arrived at themselves: Teams that excel at employing tactics, and are able to do so in concert with an advanced ability to pass the puck and feature active and consistent movement, both of the puck and the players, when in the offensive zone are more exciting to watch than teams that play a stagnant, messy, simplistic style of hockey that jettisons passing and cycling in favor of repetitive loose puck battles along the boards.

For example, had you ever watched footage of the classic Soviet teams of the 70s and 80s (generally considered to be arguably the greatest hockey teams ever assembled), you would understand why one might hope to see his favorite team strive to recreate a style of hockey that recalls those great USSR squads, like some of the more successful teams in this league do.

Quote:
No but you did something called EXAAAAAGERATING which I then did back to you. You really couldn't figure that out? Geez I don't mean to talk down to ya kid but it was pretty obvious there...Gj ignoring the important parts that obliterated your awfully bad, poorly thought out comparison b/t masterpieces, fan support ( that doesn't exist in the way you were suggesting it does) and Sather
You probably shouldn't go around insulting other people's analogies when your own are as painfully awkward as the one quoted above. Referring to posters who routinely prove to be more intelligent and valuable to the discussion than yourself as "kid" probably isn't the smartest thing to do, either, IMO.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:31 AM
  #131
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,958
vCash: 500
Wow...the paint is barely dry from the 'In Praise of Glen Sather' thread from July, and now this...different title, same argument.

One side wants to praise Sather because the team appears to be headed in the right direction. I think EVERYONE agrees to that, or is a least hopeful of that.

The other side says praise is earned by results, not by people declaring this team a success before the opening puck is even dropped in training camp.

Sather, rinse, repeat.

Let's drop the puck in October already and start finding out how much praise is warranted. The summer threads get REALLY repetitive.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:33 AM
  #132
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
I also think it's OK to praise good moves made by Sather even if you don't think he's done a good job overall...praise also isn't an all or nothing thing

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:34 AM
  #133
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
Terrific for you. Ignorance really is bliss, then. But great is not arbitrary. All it takes is a little common sense to achieve an understanding of what the commonly accepted definition for greatness is as far as pro sports are concerned, at the very least. You need to realize that to others, what they did last year is not great, nor all that exciting, and thus not nearly as satisfying as it might have been for you.



First of all, as someone with experience teaching English, that analogy makes zero sense. The relationship between a fan and his/her sports team is nothing like the relationship between a parent and a child, and any such comparison is foolhardy. It's not that you aren't allowed to love your team if they don't play a certain way. Rather, why would you want to? I understand why YOU, personally, might. You're not a hockey fan. You're a Rangers fan, and that's all that matters to you. Unfortunately, you choose to insult and demean rather than even make a cursory attempt at understanding the perspective of others. The hockey style that I mentioned as being preferable is arbitrary only in the eyes of someone who can't tell the difference between said style and the style of hockey played by the Rangers for the last number of years. This style isn't preferred by just me. I didn't create the standard for hockey excellence, or the definition of it. I simply arrived at the same conclusion that most people who share a deep respect for this game arrived at themselves: Teams that excel at employing tactics, and are able to do so in concert with an advanced ability to pass the puck and feature active and consistent movement, both of the puck and the players, when in the offensive zone are more exciting to watch than teams that play a stagnant, messy, simplistic style of hockey that jettisons passing and cycling in favor of repetitive loose puck battles along the boards.

For example, had you ever watched footage of the classic Soviet teams of the 70s and 80s (generally considered to be arguably the greatest hockey teams ever assembled), you would understand why one might hope to see his favorite team strive to recreate a style of hockey that recalls those great USSR squads, like some of the more successful teams in this league do.



You probably shouldn't go around insulting other people's analogies when your own are as painfully awkward as the one quoted above. Referring to posters who routinely prove to be more intelligent and valuable to the discussion than yourself as "kid" probably isn't the smartest thing to do, either, IMO.
Its ironic you mention the 70's-80's Soviet hockey teams, and the construction of the Rangers.

Foster Hewitt, during the Summit Series (I believe it was), was asked if he had ever seen anything like the Soviets. His response (paraphrasing, of course) was that the Rangers from the 20's through the 30's were just as good, if not better, specifically the "Bread Line" of Cook-Boucher-Cook, who were dominating, dynamic, fast, and "always had the puck on a string".

I felt that was relevant.

And id assume the "GAG" line was similar. As well as the team that won the 1940 Stanley Cup with Bryan Hextall, Neil Colville, and Lynn Patrick.

All of the most successful Rangers clubs had a line similar.

Hopefully, Dubinsky-Richards-Gaborik, sometime in the future, can be looked back on as one of the better lines in Rangers history... hopefully.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:35 AM
  #134
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 11,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
Wow...the paint is barely dry from the 'In Praise of Glen Sather' thread from July, and now this...different title, same argument.

One side wants to praise Sather because the team appears to be headed in the right direction. I think EVERYONE agrees to that, or is a least hopeful of that.

The other side says praise is earned by results, not by people declaring this team a success before the opening puck is even dropped in training camp.

Sather, rinse, repeat.

Let's drop the puck in October already and start finding out how much praise is warranted. The summer threads get REALLY repetitive.
Very cute. Veeeeeery cute, indeed. Well played.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:44 AM
  #135
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Hehe...you remind me of Vizzini. Please tell me you have a very pronounced lisp. That would make my day!

Ever wonder why there are so many A's in exaaaaageration?
I'll explain why. To emphasize the word since you seemed so clueless that exaggeration occurred.
Maybe I'm crazy but aren't posts like these usually automatically removed? There is no point to even debate in this post...it's very childish. Pretty dumb too you're attacking me over a lisp some other dude had? Uh okay... you're...mom? I mean what do I say here someone help me out.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:50 AM
  #136
Blueshirt Special
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,288
vCash: 500
I feel pretty good about our upcoming season, and about a bit of recent progress. But my feelings towards the job Sather has done is best described in as he seems to be doing better?

But it's still a ?

__________________
WIN NOW
Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 10:53 AM
  #137
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I don't see much Ranger hate. Unless saying they were awful prior to the lockout and above average since is Ranger hate.

Again, not sure what this supposed to mean exactly. Are you suggesting that there's something wrong with having higher standards than two playoff wins in over a decade? And at the heart of the teams transition from awful to above average has been the one constant — the GM.
If this team is top 6 in the East for the next half a decade and has an ECF appearance or SCF appearance or two to me I will remember this time iN Ranger history and I will remember these guys and I won't consider this time period (Initial post lockout period - the next 4 or 5 years) a worthless waste. The point you are missing is that I'm saying IF we have that level of success it is enough success for me to remember this team and consider them a great team. To me the expectation in 05-07 was so low I considered that a great time period and loved that team and will always remember Jagr's time here as well. Others whine b/c we didn't win a cup and "hamstrung" our organizations ability to win a cup by not tanking and getting a high pick. Even worse people like Sting and Boom are so pushy that they insist if they don't love the team nobody should. Boom said it himself if we don't win a cup we will never remember this team...well we had such great teams for 54 years (not all 54 obviously) and we remember them so i took issue with that comment more than any other.

But this idea that no matter what if we don't win a cup than this team is not great I don't agree with it. Great does not equal the best.

Separately I've said it repeatedly Sather sucks and he has sucked for a long time. Nothing not even 4 cups would change how horrible his initial years were.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:05 AM
  #138
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
Separately I've said it repeatedly Sather sucks and he has sucked for a long time. Nothing not even 4 cups would change how horrible his initial years were.
Perhaps it wouldn't change the initial years, but 4 cups would erase those initial years from our memories.

Let's move up to where we are at the very least not fighting for the 7-10 spot every year first, however, before we start talking 4 cups. Baby steps.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:12 AM
  #139
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
Terrific for you. Ignorance really is bliss, then. But great is not arbitrary. All it takes is a little common sense to achieve an understanding of what the commonly accepted definition for greatness is as far as pro sports are concerned, at the very least. You need to realize that to others, what they did last year is not great, nor all that exciting, and thus not nearly as satisfying as it might have been for you.

Yet you failed to define it lol. cool story tho. Great does not mean the best. I'm saying a team can be great without winning a cup. If you have a difference of opinion on great you shouild be smart enough to realize the whole world may have a different opinion. instead you try to be absolute about something so arbitrary.

First of all, as someone with experience teaching English, that analogy makes zero sense. The relationship between a fan and his/her sports team is nothing like the relationship between a parent and a child, and any such comparison is foolhardy. It's not that you aren't allowed to love your team if they don't play a certain way. Rather, why would you want to? I understand why YOU, personally, might. You're not a hockey fan.

Good thing I gave you a hockey specific analogy.

You're a Rangers fan, and that's all that matters to you.
Really? I never said that. In fact since I don't live and die based on cup wins I'd argue the opposite...
Unfortunately, you choose to insult and demean rather than even make a cursory attempt at understanding the perspective of others.

Disagreeing means insulting? I really need that encyclopedia of yours. Very hypocritical to talk about insulting people tho.

The hockey style that I mentioned as being preferable is arbitrary only in the eyes of someone who can't tell the difference between said style and the style of hockey played by the Rangers for the last number of years.

So again if someone doesn't agree with you they are inferior...Does your eminence prefer a stool for that high horse?

This style isn't preferred by just me. I didn't create the standard for hockey excellence, or the definition of it. I simply arrived at the same conclusion that most

(Most not all ...some people can just enjoy their team so what's the problem then?)

people who share a deep respect for this game arrived at themselves: Teams that excel at employing tactics, and are able to do so in concert with an advanced ability to pass the puck and feature active and consistent movement, both of the puck and the players, when in the offensive zone are more exciting to watch than teams that play a stagnant, messy, simplistic style of hockey that jettisons passing and cycling in favor of repetitive loose puck battles along the boards.

Great but you yet again failed to realize I'm not argueing that. You indicated that not only do YOU feel that way but that everyone else should too. That's what I said is wrong...again really read and understand things before you respond please.

For example, had you ever watched footage of the classic Soviet teams of the 70s and 80s (generally considered to be arguably the greatest hockey teams ever assembled), you would understand why one might hope to see his favorite team strive to recreate a style of hockey that recalls those great USSR squads, like some of the more successful teams in this league do.

Wayne Gretzky can go with his son at the age of 5 and just enjoy the game no matter how bad the hockey may be now why is that? It's because people go to enjoy the experience both as fans and as people, as father and son or as friends. They are not consumed by winning nor are they consumed with being armchair coaches and demanding a specific play style. Winning a championship or seeing a great play are huge parts of the overall experience but they are not the be all, end all. The JD's of the world are not forgettable simply b/c there was no cup. The Leetch's, Richter's and Messier's would not be forgettable if they lost game 7. The dissappointment would be heart wrenching but the highs and lows are remembered and appreciated. A great team is in part great because of the experience we as fans derive from them hence the arbitrary nature of great when it comes to fans and sports teams or players. You can't put a definition on an individual's experience. You can try to be controlling and try to force your definitions and strict worldview on others it's just that nobody cares.

You probably shouldn't go around insulting other people's analogies when your own are as painfully awkward as the one quoted above. Referring to posters who routinely prove to be more intelligent and valuable to the discussion than yourself as "kid" probably isn't the smartest thing to do, either, IMO.

Problem is your insulting me proves nothing other than your own lack of anything tangible or intellectual to add to the discussion and the same can be said for a guy like shadowtron. I appreciate your input on e-etiquette and will file it away for future consideration in this conveniently placed incinerator.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:12 AM
  #140
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
I'll explain why. To emphasize the word since you seemed so clueless that exaggeration occurred.
Maybe I'm crazy but aren't posts like these usually automatically removed? There is no point to even debate in this post...it's very childish. Pretty dumb too you're attacking me over a lisp some other dude had? Uh okay... you're...mom? I mean what do I say here someone help me out.
Wait a minute...


so you put all those A's in?


But in all seriousness...my point was about labels and a finished product. Nothing more nothing less. For whatever reason you chose to come out swinging as if we had past differences. However that approach is never conducive to healthy discourse, so I figured I'd amuse myself at your expense.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:18 AM
  #141
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
Perhaps it wouldn't change the initial years, but 4 cups would erase those initial years from our memories.

Let's move up to where we are at the very least not fighting for the 7-10 spot every year first, however, before we start talking 4 cups. Baby steps.
No arguement from me on this point. Again tho someone insinuated that 54 years of no cup= compeltely forgettable and worthless years, players, and teams. I'm saying hypothetically if we DO have success on some level even if it falls short of a cup that experience and those memories will not be worthless and we will remember the teams and players we cheered so hard for. I'm not talking missed playoffs and a decade of horrible drafting and player development from the late 90's to mid 2000's I'm talking post lockout till the next few years there is reason to be excited. You don't have to be but if people are going to act as if a team that "only" makes the PO's and "Only" makes it a couple rounds in doesn't matter I will disagree. It may not matter to them but to insist others are stupid for remembering teams and players who don't win championships is elitist, insulting and wrong

No matter what though we won;'t forget the awful first years. We would hypothetically remember Sather as a guy who turned himself around, adapted and achieved something wonderful. Again though we'd remember the level of pure suckness that he started out with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Wait a minute...


so you put all those A's in?


But in all seriousness...my point was about labels and a finished product. Nothing more nothing less. For whatever reason you chose to come out swinging as if we had past differences. However that approach is never conducive to healthy discourse, so I figured I'd amuse myself at your expense.
Swinging...yeesh I'd hardly call that swinging I think maybe you were a bit too sensitive about it. I likewise amused myself at yours. We are both fools now. I generally don't like how you post at people so maybe I did come too strongly so I can apologize but the point stands. I'd say if you want to avoid it then don't say everybody is thinking of Sather as the "best artist" when nobody is even coming close to saying it. Even accidentally misrepresenting an entire group of people will cause them to assume you are either trolling or a fool and respond accordingly. Since you portray yourself as someone smart enough to avoid such silly mistakes I took you for a troll...maybe I was wrong you are only human and you failed to realize the points being made by those saying Sather sucks but has been alright lately (hardly an endorsement as best artist or GM).


Last edited by JimmyStart*: 09-16-2011 at 11:44 AM.
JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:33 AM
  #142
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
 
I Eat Crow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 6,808
vCash: 500
Can't spell "Praise" without Parise

I Eat Crow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:35 AM
  #143
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
Wow...the paint is barely dry from the 'In Praise of Glen Sather' thread from July, and now this...different title, same argument.

One side wants to praise Sather because the team appears to be headed in the right direction. I think EVERYONE agrees to that, or is a least hopeful of that.

The other side says praise is earned by results, not by people declaring this team a success before the opening puck is even dropped in training camp.
There's one of the problems with that side tho. Almost nobody is saying that. I see many saying that the bolded PLUS the last 6 years PLUS our own logical inferences and we like what we see... NOT that the team is winning the cup guaranteed and NOT that all people must agree with us. My biggest problem is not that people want even more results that's fine my problem is this attitude that everyone who does not share their sentiment is wrong or inferior somehow. So between "the other side" misrepresenting what's being said and being so heavy handed and insistent that "one side" is wrong this is what creates arguement. Sather does deserve some credit for putting the team in a position to succeed. That is VASTLY different from saying he's done a great job and it is vastly different from saying that the team is great. The team is great moreso because of otuside factors and luck than b/c of Sather. Problem is people don't separate crediting Sather as no longer awful with the separate notion that the team and future looks damn good. To them Sather is a cancer and the team's greatness is tied to Sather so any admission of how good the team is is an admission of Sather's greatness so they take umbrage to it and overreact. (This is a small minority who do this). but the reality is too manyf actors are involved with this team to link the team and GM as a lifeline. one can be great while the other is not awful.


Last edited by JimmyStart*: 09-16-2011 at 11:41 AM.
JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:37 AM
  #144
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
Perhaps it wouldn't change the initial years, but 4 cups would erase those initial years from our memories.

Let's move up to where we are at the very least not fighting for the 7-10 spot every year first, however, before we start talking 4 cups. Baby steps.
4 cups and I'll anoint Sather the best GM the Rangers have ever had and pretend I was in a coma from 2000-2006 or so

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:49 AM
  #145
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
Swinging...yeesh I'd hardly call that swinging I think maybe you were a bit too sensitive about it.
Bah...you know what I mean. How's this: Your initial response was less than cordial, and, dare I say, a tad frosty, hence I came to the conclusion that an open and friendly discussion would probably be difficult to achieve and seeing as how I had already explained myself to mullenchicken...I figured I'd have a little fun on this chilly Friday morning!


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
I generally don't like how you post at people so maybe I did come too strongly so I can apologize but the point stands.
No worries. I wasn't insulted/bothered by anything you said. My explanation was already out and I, to be frank, didn't feel like wasting a whole lot of time trying to get you to land your plane...so to speak.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
I'd say if you want to avoid it then don't say everybody is thinking of Sather as the "best artist" when nobody is even coming close to saying it.
Well...there in lies the rub. Your dislike for me has lead to jump to conclusions I've not made. I never said EVERYBODY. I said "there are those..." which is another way of saying some. And all too often in these types of threads, one reads: "best GM post-lockout" "brilliant" "great". Now if you think those phrases don't "even come close" to the point I was making...then we'll bow and agree to disagree. But I ask you, how can someone be "best post-lockout" or "brilliant" or "great" when the team has yet to achieve even glancing success as either you or I define it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
Even accidentally misrepresenting an entire group of people will cause them to assume you are either trolling or a fool and respond accordingly.
I think it's more of a case of misrepresenting what I said due to past prejudices and then "exaaaaaagertating" (sorry...couldn't help it) those misinterpretations. To clarify: The point of my silly little analogy was to basically say what Levitate has said a few times in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less. There was no deeper or hidden message in it. I was not, at any point, attempting to "paint" (for you mullet ) EVERY poster whose opinion was contrary to my own. Just a select few.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:52 AM
  #146
Stepanformayor*
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 581
vCash: 500
Hey Blue Ranger Blue how can you not call Step and Mcd blue chippers? Step is a second rounder, never thought he would make this team last year, and was called a blue chipper on draft day, and Montreal had all but given up on McD. Blue chippers for sure!

Stepanformayor* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:54 AM
  #147
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Bah...you know what I mean. How's this: Your initial response was less than cordial, and, dare I say, a tad frosty, hence I came to the conclusion that an open and friendly discussion would probably be difficult to achieve and seeing as how I had already explained myself to mullenchicken...I figured I'd have a little fun on this chilly Friday morning!




No worries. I wasn't insulted/bothered by anything you said. My explanation was already out and I, to be frank, didn't feel like wasting a whole lot of time trying to get you to land your plane...so to speak.




Well...there in lies the rub. Your dislike for me has lead to jump to conclusions I've not made. I never said EVERYBODY. I said "there are those..." which is another way of saying some. And all too often in these types of threads, one reads: "best GM post-lockout" "brilliant" "great". Now if you think those phrases don't "even come close" to the point I was making...then we'll bow and agree to disagree. But I ask you, how can someone be "best post-lockout" or "brilliant" or "great" when the team has yet to achieve even glancing success as either you or I define it?




I think it's more of a case of misrepresenting what I said due to past prejudices and then "exaaaaaagertating" (sorry...couldn't help it) those misinterpretations. To clarify: The point of my silly little analogy was to basically say what Levitate has said a few times in this thread. Nothing more, nothing less. There was no deeper or hidden message in it. I was not, at any point, attempting to "paint" (for you mullet ) EVERY poster whose opinion was contrary to my own. Just a select few.
So I say I'm sorry I may have allowed bias to get the better of me (bias you earned btw) and your response is to repeat I may have been bias and hammer me for it? Geez while we're talking bout holding onto grudges. You're saying one thing and doing another there. Anyway since nobody even came close to likening Sather to "the best artist" it would seem youa re either backtracking or were completely off base to the point of being insulting because it shows a lack of respect you didn't read people's posts and seemed to be accussing them of saying borderline moronic things like that "Sather is the best artist". perhaps you can point to the man and quote in this courtroom who inspired you to insinuate that multiple people are praising Sather as "the best artist"...actually since "there are those" is plural can you show the men and their quotes? There's the difference b/t us. I explicitly stated before anyone even complained about my post that I was chiefly referring to boom's post and I never said "everybody" I said "with many people it SEEMS they feel cup or bust" and I even capitalized seems so I could emphasize I realize not all people felt as Boom did even if they seemed to be saying cup or bust. You on the other hand are about 4 or 5 posts in with me here and have not attempted to clarify an obvious misconception likely b/c you can't.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:58 AM
  #148
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stepanformayor View Post
Hey Blue Ranger Blue how can you not call Step and Mcd blue chippers? Step is a second rounder, never thought he would make this team last year, and was called a blue chipper on draft day, and Montreal had all but given up on McD. Blue chippers for sure!
Theyre very good - not bluechippers. Maybe we just have different definitions of the word.

You're obviously a Stepan fanboy, but I dont see him as a legitimate #1C. He'll be a very good 2C, which is just fine. In fact, its the top tier of the forwards we've been drafting over the last several years.

Thats the problem.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:58 AM
  #149
Mint Berry Crunch
hfbrods pls...
 
Mint Berry Crunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: Pakistan
Posts: 1,963
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Mint Berry Crunch
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
4 cups and I'll anoint Sather the best GM the Rangers have ever had and pretend I was in a coma from 2000-2006 or so
This, & anyone that says otherwise is a bloody imbecile. Four cups would well worth the suffering we endured nearly a decade, hell - I'd say ONE would justify the struggles given how long it took a Cup to make its way to NYC after 1940 & leave most of us absolutely elated. Some of you are bitter just for the sake of being bitter, I feel.

Mint Berry Crunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2011, 11:59 AM
  #150
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
Howard Zinn said a lot of things. And much better than I ever could.
"You guys are reading the wrong books."

I'm beginning to believe we're over thinking it a bit in this thread.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.