Quote:
Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood
Ok I've had enough, I'm calling you out.
Please don't act like you don't have a bias on Sven Baertschi. I've read your "Sven reports" over the last 3 games and they really are a stretch. You write up 5-7 bashing paragraphs about him on his first 2 games where he had 7 and 10 minutes in those games.
He wasn't at 7 mins in the first period as you report. He had 8 shifts and 5:30 in the first. In the first Monahan was at 7:02. Other players also hovered around 7 mins. You were just trying to make it seem like he got ice in the first, but made mistakes and lost puck battles so thats why he didn't have the same ice time later in the game. Trying to paint a picture that suits your Sven bashing motives. Lame.
As far as your issue with the "disappointing icing" he had in the first, I like how you failed to mention that it was Sven who cut off the pass along the boards, breaking up the shooting gallery that had been going on in our zone for 40 seconds where the Flames were running around in panic mode. He broke up the pass, carried it out of our zone and was met by the TB defender coming at him. He didn't just fire it up the ice for ####s and giggles or because he is lazy. As you say "Just skate a little bit more before dumping it!" Like it was that easy. Watch the play again. I did.
You also failed to mention it was Sven who got the puck out of the zone for the line change off of the icing faceoff in our zone. Big surprise you left that out. You made it seem as though his "disappointing icing" lost us the game or cost us a goal. It actually let us regroup from the relentless attack of TB and got us a line change 9 seconds into that shift.
Also like how you just dismiss the advanced stat line of Sven last night. It doesn't fit your Sven isn't good enough obsession. You constantly saying that he loses puck battles is also not true. He may lose some, but you talk like he has no chance and loses every one of them. The Flames had three takeaways last night. One of them belonged to Sven. How could he possibly get credited with a takeaway if he loses every puck battle or doesn't try hard enough defensively?
If you are just going to continue being passive aggressive when discussing his play and make false statements, trying to paint a picture that simply isn't true for whatever reason, maybe you should stop discussing his play. Just because you keep saying the same crap doesn't make it true.
Baertschi had a much better game than his first two, the work ethic was there and he was engaged even with only 11 mins of icetime. I'm not saying he had some AMAZING game, but give the guy some props for trying to work his way to more icetime and responsibility without bashing him right after you begrudgingly give him a little credit.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood
Ok I've had enough, I'm calling you out.
Please don't act like you don't have a bias on Sven Baertschi. I've read your "Sven reports" over the last 3 games and they really are a stretch. You write up 5-7 bashing paragraphs about him on his first 2 games where he had 7 and 10 minutes in those games.
He wasn't at 7 mins in the first period as you report. He had 8 shifts and 5:30 in the first. In the first Monahan was at 7:02. Other players also hovered around 7 mins. You were just trying to make it seem like he got ice in the first, but made mistakes and lost puck battles so thats why he didn't have the same ice time later in the game. Trying to paint a picture that suits your Sven bashing motives. Lame.
As far as your issue with the "disappointing icing" he had in the first, I like how you failed to mention that it was Sven who cut off the pass along the boards, breaking up the shooting gallery that had been going on in our zone for 40 seconds where the Flames were running around in panic mode. He broke up the pass, carried it out of our zone and was met by the TB defender coming at him. He didn't just fire it up the ice for ####s and giggles or because he is lazy. As you say "Just skate a little bit more before dumping it!" Like it was that easy. Watch the play again. I did.
You also failed to mention it was Sven who got the puck out of the zone for the line change off of the icing faceoff in our zone. Big surprise you left that out. You made it seem as though his "disappointing icing" lost us the game or cost us a goal. It actually let us regroup from the relentless attack of TB and got us a line change 9 seconds into that shift.
Also like how you just dismiss the advanced stat line of Sven last night. It doesn't fit your Sven isn't good enough obsession. You constantly saying that he loses puck battles is also not true. He may lose some, but you talk like he has no chance and loses every one of them. The Flames had three takeaways last night. One of them belonged to Sven. How could he possibly get credited with a takeaway if he loses every puck battle or doesn't try hard enough defensively?
If you are just going to continue being passive aggressive when discussing his play and make false statements, trying to paint a picture that simply isn't true for whatever reason, maybe you should stop discussing his play. Just because you keep saying the same crap doesn't make it true.
Baertschi had a much better game than his first two, the work ethic was there and he was engaged even with only 11 mins of icetime. I'm not saying he had some AMAZING game, but give the guy some props for trying to work his way to more icetime and responsibility without bashing him right after you begrudgingly give him a little credit.
|
This is a funny post
Lame? Calling me out? Passive-Aggressive? Begrudgingly giving him credit? When you post aggressively like this, you don't generally get a discussion, you get an argument. Let's try and have a discussion anyways.
First off, did you listen to Sven get criticized for that icing? Not sure what you are seeing, but he had other options than icing it. It was a lazy play. It happens, but he had more time, or could have chipped it out, or skated it out a bit more. You don't ice it from that spot. You disagree, that's fine. He got criticized for it on-air, and I think that rightfully so.
His TOI in the first period - maybe I was wrong about that, but when I looked to see how much time he was getting near the end of the 1st period, I could have sworn he was ~7 minutes. Maybe I didn't match it up properly? Point taken, and I won't make such an assertion in the future without being completely sure. However, if he got 5 minutes in the first, he still got his ice-time reduced as the game progressed (ending at 11:02 TOI). However, I can accept that he got his time shortened as a product of Hartley shortening his bench in an effort to play catch-up. Implying that I was merely trying to write some sort of narrative to for my 'obsession with knocking him down' is simply a fallacy.
Regardless, I thought he came out with more jump, much more effort, but just kept losing too many puck-battles. He is simply not as tenacious as Gaudreau, and not as strong as Granlund it seems. He IS getting better, however, and I agree with you there. What I posted wasn't the same CRAP. Did I say he lost every puck-battle? I didn't realize I would have to go into perfect detail describing every single positive and negative play - I saw him lose many more puck-battles than he won, so this is an 'area of concern' for me regarding him. That doesn't mean he loses every single one - just he loses more than he wins. So he gets credited with a takeaway - great! Doesn't show that my point is wrong. Again, this is what I said:
Quote:
|
He does lose quite a number of puck battles
|
"Quite a number" is not the same as "Every single".
If Sven improves his play and earns a permanent roster spot this season and becomes a great player (something I think is within his ability, actually), he will not even 'prove me wrong'. I have maintained that Baertschi is a very skilled prospect, and I am glad that the Flames do indeed have him in the organization. I am just thinking his development is just taking longer. I am hardly someone who 'has it in' for Baertschi. Once again, just because I see him as a different player at the moment than how you see him, doesn't make what I say "Crap".
Funny that you think I have some "Anti-Sven" bias going on and that I have some sort of evil and insidious motive to bash him at every turn. I have stated numerous times that this kid will be a pretty important player, but that it seems it will just take some time. Guess we are seeing two very different players on the ice there. You really don't think that happens? Someone has to be fabricating a fictional narrative when it doesn't agree with your own, so you must call them lame, accuse them of having a bias, and insist they are being passive-aggressive? Please point out where I was passive-aggressive in that post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx
As Mike F pointed out, it is absolutely comfirmation bias. C4L and others are focusing in and looking for mistakes. The issues that they've pointed out are mistakes that every single player on this team makes and would like to improve on.
That doesn't mean a player didn't have a good game. It just means he wasn't perfect.
Again, considering his role with the team right now, I don't understand why people are expecting perfection. All things considered, Baertschi had a very good game last night.
Somebody on HF Flames posted what C4L posted here and one person responded with this before the game:
People keep using these buzz words. Intensity. Energy. Apparently Sven needs to be moving his feet at all times to be considered intense (even when he's already in the right position). It's odd. I don't know what people want to see.
Does Sven need to sit on the bench with intensity? Is he otherwise pouting?
|
No idea what post from here I wrote that got copy/pasted onto HF (don't really care either way), but if I feel like having a discussion based on what someone from over there said, I will go over there and have a discussion. I don't see the point in discussing here what someone from there has said about a post I made here that got copied and pasted there (partially, fully, out of context?) and whose reply was copied from there and pasted here (again - partially, fully, out of context?) so we can end up arguing over he said, she said... See how confusing it is already? If I want to address what a poster on HF has said about a post I wrote here, I will go there and do so, not form any rebuttal (if I even disagree or have a rebuttal to give) and write it here so you can copy/paste it there.
This is CalgaryPuck. I come here to have discussions here. If I felt my time was better served in HF, I would do so. I do visit that other site from time to time, but rarely (if ever) in the Flames forum there, as I find it is just not active enough and I get all the information I am looking for regarding the Flames here. I mostly go there just to read what is going on with other teams when I have time. I find this site meets my needs.