Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScorpion
For me, it's not so much about wanting to cling to being proven right, because there are so many more numbers at play than goals and points and I don't view the current proceedings as sustainable. I still feel a great degree of conviction about my original take. And — quite frankly — to me, having conversations with multiple people who disagree with a specific take isn't the same as repeating the same take over and over again. It's just the nature of discourse.
I thought Kane wouldn't be productive. Dead wrong, guilty as charged. I thought he wouldn't be effective. I still don't think he is. If that's arrogant of me, well, there's not much I can do about that.
|
How is he not effective though, if he's brought in to provide offense?
No one signs Kane to get a well rounded player at both ends of the ice. A decade and a half in people know what PK is.
Throwing in the caveat about ineffectiveness kind of dodges the whole being wrong part, which I agree is totally true.
I don't even have a horse in this race personally I just think that the larger sample size by default wins out in this argument and there isn't really anything to defend given what Kane has provided for a team that should now see playoffs with their trajectory.
But it's totally fair to predict a rude awakening or that it won't pan out longer term. You're entitled to make that prediction for sure even if you've been incorrect to this juncture. Hopefully the other side will concede if it turns out that way. But hopefully you don't shy away if the Kane experiment continues being a homerun for the rest of their season.