[strombad]

Sorry in advance for this epic novel, maybe HBO will turn it into a miniseries.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I provided thoughts on all of his responses.


My point was in part because of where people have chosen to focus their attention, and I think that your instance about what we ought not "care" about is quite telling in this regard. If you actually take the time to read it carefully, then you will see in his second sentence that he DID make a (half-hearted) gesture to improving away from the puck:



If you did in fact comprehend the quotation as you claim, then you would notice that the conjunction indicates an exception to the preceding clause; namely, that these are things that he WILL "maybe" change.


I agree that his response is an issue, but you are still assuming a lot from what he actually says. He says that skating, forechecking, and hitting is all HARD WORK, and that it is not part of the game he plays. He DID NOT SAY that he will not do these things, only that I finds them difficult, unpleasant, and has never paid them much heed in the past. It's entirely possible that he is just being honest, since I would imagine that virtually every professional hockey player finds it difficult to skate hard, forecheck, and to hit every shift. He has conceded the obvious here (which itself is a problem, since this is likely not something that most professional hockey players will admit to in public), but has not really said one way or the other whether he will make the necessary changes to his game. Again, yes, this looks bad, but it is entirely possible that some of his meaning or intent is indeed lost in translation.


Except he NEVER SAID THIS. You assume that this is what he meant from his statement, but it is most certainly not so clear. In the end, much of this issue rests on ASSUMPTIONS.


Some here can read pretty well, but I don't believe that you are one of them. My point was to show that while there are legitimate concerns about Yakupov's response to being a healthy scratch, there are also a lot of assumptions being made about his personal feelings and intentions. In short, you need to read more carefully.

Great, speaking of wild assumptions, let's look at a few you just made while being wildly hypocritical:

- "He says skating, forechecking, and hitting are all HARD WORK...only that I finds them difficult, unpleasant, and has never paid them much heed in the past." - except he never says that. He says he doesn't like them and that they aren't part of his game, here's the quote - Y: "I really don’t like skating all the time, and forechecking, and hitting somebody every shift. I don’t think it’s my game.” - notice no mention of "difficult", "hard work", or "never paid them much heed". All assumptions on your part, and as baseless as any other assumption you feel comfortable attacking.

- "the conjunction indicates an exception to the preceding clause; namely, that these are things that he WILL "maybe" change." - except it doesn't, conclusively. You can argue with absolute validity that he suggests things he MIGHT do, but at no point does he suggest he WILL do them. That's an assumption that you make and then justify based on your understanding of the conjunction, but in no way does that make you correct, you're simply assuming you're right based on the assumption you made over his meaning. Again, the actual quote - Y: “I’m going to play my game,” he said. “I’m not going to change but maybe play better without the puck, or forecheck more, but I love playing with the puck." - notice no definitive "will" or "will not" but rather a simple suggestions of what he MIGHT do. If you weren't aware, "WILL" and "MIGHT" are different things, and "WILL MAYBE" is flawed speech, it's a redundant impossibility. You will or you might. If you are attempting to argue he might, it would be "MAYBE will" and in that case, anyone could argue "MAYBE will not", because maybe is not definitive and by definition could go either way.

- "but has not really said one way or the other whether he will make the necessary changes to his game" ... "these are things that he WILL "maybe" change." - oh, so he hasn't said whether or not he WILL change, but you felt it necessary to capitalise that he WILL maybe change for effect? So part of your defence is that he's thinking about changing? Or humming and hawing? Oh, wait - Y: “I’m not going to change" - and here I though you said he hadn't said whether or was going to change or not, even though he said he wouldn't, but then you said "oh he said maybe he'll change!" but then you go back to saying he hasn't said whether he'll change. Interesting.

- "Except he NEVER SAID THIS" - true, he didn't, but you've claimed he said plenty of things he never said, so I'll explain why I believe, in short, he believes he shouldn't have to - Y: “I’m going to play my game ... I’m not going to change ... I love playing with the puck. I really don’t like skating all the time, and forechecking, and hitting somebody every shift. I don’t think it’s my game.” - So no, never said it. He did say he didn't like those things and wasn't going to change, and that they weren't part of his game, which is why I made the logical assumption. This is different from your ILLOGICAL assumptions, which argue things that you've not inferred from speech, but rather created entirely from your imagination. Yakupov suggests things aren't a part of his game and he won't change, thus you can infer he believes he shouldn't have to do them. Where can you infer that he believes they are hard work? No where.

- "Some here can read pretty well, but I don't believe that you are one of them. My point was to show that while there are legitimate concerns about Yakupov's response to being a healthy scratch, there are also a lot of assumptions being made about his personal feelings and intentions. In short, you need to read more carefully." - quoted for humour. After a post thick in assumptions of what Yakupov actually said, I fully believe you're an expert in the assumptions department. You said several things he never said, so either your post is thick with assumptions, or you can't read. Either way, you're a hypocrite and your opinion is about as valid at this point as the people who say "He refuses to work hard", an assumption, much like the ones you made throughout your failed argument.

I get that you obviously don't like assumptions, but I'd suggest you try making fewer if you're attempting to make a point against them. That, or I suggest you read more carefully. I can read just fine, but it appears based on all your assumptions about what Yakupov said that you couldn't even get through two sentences. In short, that was one of the most delightfully hypocritical posts I've read in a while. Thanks!