[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

With how your original post was framed, there was no indication whatsoever as to your measure of Lack's sense of confidence. Of course, it is anecdotal when not couched in a clearly defined and transparent set of parameters.

I wasn't measuring Lack's sense of confidence. I was measuring my confidence in Lack. How could I know what Lack is feeling? I can only know how I feel about his play. And when I sniff the numbers, I'm not confident.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

After one full game a two periods of work? It doesn't look like anything. There are any number of reasons to explain two individual performances, and Lack's marginal statistics do not in any way obviously correlate to his own self awareness or perception. Results don't necessarily have anything to do with a player's confidence—how can any of us know about how confident Lack feels today without having this discussion with him?

Again, I'm not using Lack's numbers as a measure of his psyche, and never implied that I was. You took a turn of phrase "reeks confidence" and misinterpreted it. The phrase implies how I feel about someone else, not how they feel about themselves. I'm the one doing the smelling, so to speak.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Okay? I am not sure what that has to do with Lack's confidence, except I would imagine he is more confident playing the position the way he has had success doing so in the past.

This doesn't have to do with Lack's confidence in himself, which you are so hung up on and I'm not trying to discuss. This is again a measure of how others are feeling about him. The Flames felt they needed to change his playing style, suggesting they were not confident in the way he was playing in Carolina. Nothing to do with Lack's personal feelings of himself.

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Look, when a poster talks about persona, or character, or emotive traits I think it is fair to say that readers will rightly interpret all of this as anecdotal. As far as I am concerned, these sorts of arm-chair psychoanalysis are completely invalid, and yes, under these conditions qualify as "nonsense."

I guess I'll just say one more time, that I never suggested how Lack felt about himself or that I was attempting 'arm-chair psychoanalysis'.

I feel attacked as a poster, as you didn't take the time to even properly comprehend what I'd written before making a series* of assumptions about me and what I wrote. That's twice, recently, that you've responded to me as such. I get that you have different viewpoints than me, but please try to respond to the post, and not to me as a user that you don't seem to like.

edit: series not serious*