Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Reeeeead
To me it was arrogant to point to the initial 1-6 record and 2 points in 7 games as being justification. That you were correct, and then when the same metrics became opposite, and no longer align with your take, it’s painted as luck and unsustainable.
You can’t just pick and choose when the same data points are valid and when they can be written off as noise. It proves your bias, and underlying motive. Consistency is key.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
|
Right ... except the posters in favour of the Kane signing have done the same thing but in reverse. There are people who had a preconceived notion of the player being effective who didn't buy the early results and have jumped in on the more recent ones. That's just how the ballgame works. Feels like a bit of a double standard.
To me, my perspective hasn't changed because the only demonstrable difference with Kane of late is his shooting percentage. The rest is much like the last 5-ish years of his tenure in Chicago. If anything, I feel like I would be betraying my own integrity to change my opinion at this point in the face of the underlying results.