[FanIn80]

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

Hot take: Kane won't help the Red Wings.

Detroit goes 1 and 6, and Kane only has 2 points.

"See? I told you!"

Detroit then goes 17, 9 and 2 with Kane getting 11 goals and 26 points in 21 games. 4 game winners, with 2 coming in OT.

"I'm still right!"