Thursday Morning Fly By: Oooh, We Get to Audition Ryan Suter Tonight!

Also:

In my opinion, the Flyers locker room splintered when the team traded Scottie Upshall, breaking up the "Old City Gang". When they brought in Pronger, the splinter became a rift. The Olympics patched up the rift enough to go on a run, but the team just couldn’t survive with Pronger and Briere on one side, Richards and Carter on the other.

That sounds like the random narratives you’d get in CSN Philly comments. Just because you’re disagreeing with the majority opinion, doesn’t make your view any more true than the majority opinion. Both the ‘Carter destroyed the locker room’ and ‘Pronger destroyed the locker room’ rumors are just that; rumors with a very scarce amount of evidence behind them. How is there a difference between the two? If someone comes on here and starts throwing out Carter-and-Richards-were-bad-in-the-locker-room thoughts then they get promptly shut down on account of having no evidence, with comments like (and I paraphrase) “You seem to talk very convincingly about something you know nothing about”. Now, how is this rumor of Pronger being a locker room cancer followed by the Olympics bringing them together for the run followed by more cancer any different?

You may well come back and comment and mention the fact that you also said “But that’s just a theory”. That doesn’t excuse it. We know we’re all talking theories here (unless someone’s been in the locker room).

If I came out and posted the following on BSH (not that I believe it at all):

In my opinion, the Flyers locker room splintered because Richards and Carter weren’t focussed on the game. The other players and in particular Coach Laviolette weren’t able to work with that, and it led to some of the very frustrating slumps the Flyers have had over the last two seasons. Paul Holmgren, aware of what was happening, decided that he’d move them before their NTCs kick in and the Flyers are stuck with the pair forever and lose all leverage in a trade. But that’s just a theory (one that I hold, although I’m not alone).

You tell me how this community would respond to a comment like that. Likely with ’Bob’s, laughter and derision. So how is it any different to say what you said to what I said? Both rumors have appeared in the media. One gained majority approval, one didn’t. Just because one didn’t gain popular approval doesn’t make it any more right than the other.

What’s funny is that Carter was never labeled as the cancer in Philly; that was Richards. Now that Carter is being labeled a cancer in Columbus, people are rewriting history to say he was a cancer in Philly.

Really? Were you there when we lost the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals and people were criticizing Carter because he wasn’t emotional enough in the post-game? Carter was seen (unfairly) to be someone who partied too hard, didn’t focus on his game and was poor in mentoring the younger players. In a fan post in June 2010 I mentioned the wrong reasons to trade Carter and that fan post and comments includes things like ‘Carter doesn’t play with enough heart’, ‘Carter chokes in the big moments’ and ‘Carter won’t play wing even if it helps the team’. So what was Carter seen as in Philly? Someone who played lackadaisical hockey and had attitude problems. What is Carter seen as in Columbus? Someone who played lackadaisical hockey and had attitude problems. There is no rewriting of history. In your quest to find revisionism and prove some point (I don’t even know what you’re trying to prove by condescendingly criticizing our fanbase on other teams’ blogs), you’re revising history.

Disclaimer: in crap mood. Not that it means anything. Hopefully this is considered constructive criticism, not a personal attack. Usually you don’t criticize the masthead, but Geoff sort of has a different role in the masthead with his SB Nation community interaction.

Disclaimer 2: love stats. Just in case people don’t know that about me. So you can’t lump me into the ‘I hate stats nerds’ group and dismiss me right there.

You know as well as I do that that is true. If you are really worried about me using the word “people” and getting offended that you read “everybody”, well, sorry. But I’m not sorry.

To be fair, it’s the crest on the front of that one that gets you crap. I respect Carlson’s game even though he was a (for me) hated Hershey Bear.

I like Knuble and my dad tries to give me crap because he’s on the Caps now. I have to remind him that I don’t like the rest of the Caps, just Knuble.

When I wear his jersey, I get crap.

If wearing his jersey is giving you diarrhea, you should probably wash it.

So maybe not well below, but still below.

If ever online streams were warranted due to blackout restrictions on GCL, I think you’ve knocked the ball out of the damn park.

I would have said “ignoring that Cormier was toxic” rather than ignoring the fall out of Bergfors (who I suggested should be claimed by somebody as a reclamation project).

While Kovalchuk’s rental price was high, I’m stuck thinking A prospect = Schenn/Couturier. Maybe that’s my problem.

YA THINK?!

Careful, you!

I just pictured you slapping the people who made the obvious claim, a la Gibbs from NCIS.

Missing tonight’s game because in a few hours, I’ll be shipping up to Boston until Saturday night.

How much do we think he’s going to earn for his next contract? 6, 7m?

Yes, that’s what I mean. Which is also something that was pointed out here on BSH, but I guess you missed that.

And yes, I’d say calling someone Mr. Irrellevent is ripping him.

Since nobody here has said that today, I’m confused by why you think this is affirming your original claim. In other words, even if I were to grant you that “calling someone Mr. Irrelevant is ripping him”, you haven’t proven that I ripped him, since I didn’t call him that.

Essentially, this sentence of yours is irrelevant. Which is ironic. But mostly in an Alanis Morrisette way.

It’s just odd timing coming off a game where yes he got turned down by Stuart but it’s not like his presense on the ice cost us the game.

It’s odd timing to write a story about him getting turned down by Stuart the day after he got turned down by Stuart?Seriously?

Can you please tell me when an appropriate time to write a story about when Jody Shelley got turned down by Mark Stuart would be?

I told Rex this, but the last couple of weeks I’ve been more excited to watch the 6ers than I have the Flyers

Huh? Oh, when I joined SBN…3 years ago today…longest 3 years of my life. LOL. Only 22,000ish comments, too on all the sites combined. Not bad. I bet Kreider has that here alone. ;-)

it’s sourdough bread with a side of fog. i live in SF now.

To replace the ones we lost.

No way Zidlicky is worth that much to obtain, nor to receive as much in a dump in the offseason.

I saw the Hawks when they were in town. I wasn’t disappointed

Yeah, it’s great. before I had the whole specials offered at Flyers game to rely on for tickets as well. I’ve really become a bigger Sixer fan because of the relative low cost to go to games.

ou can be a smart and logical blog without having to prove ‘people’ wrong about everything; /blockquote>

Easy or easier for us humans but Geoff Detweiler is a robot, cyborg, or android of some sort who dreams of electric sheep.

Geoff-2-Dett-2 thinks in binary code 0’s and 1’s right and wrong there is no middle ground and emotions don’t exist.

You can be a smart and logical blog without having to prove ‘people’ wrong about everything;

Easy or easier for us humans but Geoff Detweiler is a robot, cyborg, or android of some sort who dreams of electric sheep.

Geoff-2-Dett-2 thinks in binary code 0’s and 1’s right and wrong there is no middle ground and emotions don’t exist.

I understand what you mean. I think what might be meant as “challenging preconceived notions”, and would be seen by the regulars who are used to the tone and atmosphere of this blog and the type of discussions that go on around here, can sometimes trigger a strongly defensive reaction from a new visitor who isn’t used to interacting with us. They could view it as hostile or outside opinions aren’t welcome here, when among “us”, it’s just the normal way we talk. And a defensive reaction by the new visitor can then be read as hostile by the regulars, who get defensive in turn with “look man, we just want to give you a different way of thinking about it.” And then it quickly devolves into a shouting match. I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with how things are around here, and it’s nobody fault. It’s a downside of being on the internet and conversing via text instead of in person. A lot of emotion and subtlety of meaning is lost. You know, something about some humongous big percentage of communication being non-verbal. So while trying to be nice to the new guy is a good idea, it’s difficult in practice because we don’t single out who the new people are and many times they just jump into conversation without anyone realizing they’re new and might not know how to handle us. And I love the solid debates and multiple lines of thought that we have around here and would hate to see that go away in an attempt to not step on anyone’s toes. It can be a tough crowd, and I love it. But I can totally understand if that doesn’t work for everyone and that it takes some getting used to.

In short, I have no idea what to do. I don’t want to chase away new faces, but I’m not sure how to gently introduce them to this atmosphere without killing the whole thing. :-p

Don’t sweat it buddy, I think what you did was great. I also know what you are saying with the tone, but it is all in good fun around here. Geoff is just Geoff, I mean look at the way he spells his name there has to be something wrong with a guy who can’t spell his own first name the right way.:) Just kidding Jeff.

Kind of odd coming a day after an opinion was mentioned and this was said:

I think your opinion of him is fine, you’re allowed to not like him or his game. I think it’s the proof thing that takes us down in to the, wait a second, what’s this guys saying path. I’m fine with people that hate Carter, I play with a lot of guys that hate him. I also agree with a lot of their perceptions; I just go farther than them looking at it and they say they have no interest in that because they just don’t like him…I’m okay with that. Some people have strong opinions of a player, those opinions have no requirement to be based on stats.This particular scenario started a bit differently, so it went a bit differently.

Wow.

I’m not going to comment on much because I don’t feel like getting in a shouting match through through a computer screen, but I just want to comment on one thing:

because I feel I would be challenged if I just went out and said that I really like how Mez plays, or that I think Bryz could be vital for us come playoffs, or I want to let Carle walk.

I don’t think that’s an issue. I think the issue comes when people want to prove something about how Mez plays or whoever plays; more of a results based discussion. I don’t think there is much issue if people say, I enjoy watching Mez play, or I like his game. I think it becomes I think when it’s; “Mez is the best Dman on the Flyers”. Then someone will likely respond, “what makes him the best Dman”. Then we go from there (granted it can go the other way sometimes on occasion, but generally I believe this to be true). Wanting to let Carle walk is more similar to something you would see a debate from, but you know how many times I see something posted about someone not liking Carle, and then none of the “regulars” say anything; it’s been quite a lot. It just depends on the type of statement. If it’s clear opinion or no kind of burden of proof type of statement, a lot of regulars/stat nerds will ignore it. If it is some kind of hey this is the way it is, then the regulars will typically start the debate from there.

I don’t see that as a problem personally; but then again that’s literally the only reason I come here, because through the shit, this site doesn’t bow down to narratives or radio talk or even bar talk. It happens here, but there is also a higher level of discussion that is literally the only reason why I come here. It may alienate some people, which might be a problem if this was the only Flyers site on the internet, but since it’s not, I don’t see it as a big deal (then again I’m happy to be an a-hole). Heck it’s part of the reason I stay out of game threads, I’m not looking to ruin any one’s time; there are different parts to this site and different people have their different comfort zones.

Geoff got a chance to know what it feels like to feel attacked for a random comment you made that you never intended to be controversial. He reacted by getting defensive.

This is where I really don’t follow what you were trying to do. It’s not like Geoff never gets attacked around here. He’s been attacked over things that OTHER bloggers say in articles he links to, or for the headline he attaches to the link. And being defensive when someone unexpectedly attacks your comments is human nature, we all do it, and have all done it here. His reaction should not be surprising at all. Sorry, like I said, I just don’t get it. I know you don’t want us to attack comments by new visitors, but I stick with what I said earlier, I don’t think we’re trying to attack, it’s just questioning things in our normal manner around here and sometimes it isn’t taken well and force is met with more force.