Exactly it's the revision of the history of John Scott that is annoying. This is a guy people were calling to be kicked out of the league and one point
Next year they should pick Raffi Torres as the target. Turn him from heel to golden boy over night.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Next year they should pick Raffi Torres as the target. Turn him from heel to golden boy over night.
One of these things is not like the other...
As far as I remember, Scott only has one dirty hit (Eriksson) and the rest of his suspensions were for things like leaving a bench for a fight. Torres has what feels like dozens of hits that were comparable to the Eriksson one.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to codynw For This Useful Post:
Next year they should pick Raffi Torres as the target. Turn him from heel to golden boy over night.
Yeah, no. This is the sort of thing that is a one-off. It only worked this time, but any future attempts to re-create the same story using a different player will get tired and old very, very quickly.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Really the thing that made Scott a hero in this has nothing to do with himself, and everything to do with how piss poor the NHL were at handling this.
If he would have just been voted in with no NHL controversy then it's just a throwaway vote.
But the NHL handles it terribly, there is a shady-ish trade that goes down, and then it gets released that somebody from the NHL brought his kids into the whole situation.
And then just like that A Players Tribune article turned him into a sympathetic figure that we all cared about overnight.
I was initially against John Scott being included in this thing. Then I saw people celebrating him being sent down to the AHL just because they didn't want him being included in the all star weekend, which is when I realized how ######y that stance was.
Really glad I came around before this weekend, I was able to actually enjoy this whole thing without being overly uptight about such a silly event.
I didn't watch the game, but I see that they showed on together a few times on the score card.
Honestly, they looked great together. Hall may not be the smartest but he has speed, shot and finishing ability. Johnny kept putting the puck right on his tape in scoring areas. Some players just click together.
On the other hand it was an all star game, who knows what they'd be like in regular season at 5v5 when guys are going 100%.
So basically: "No offence, but I feel bad for you and you're pathetic."
I don't know, maybe Jiri isn't the one letting this whole John Scott thing affect him too much.
That's an oversimplification.
But yes, I'll admit I was emotional about John Scott. I like seeing people happy. That's difference than being bothered by seeing others happy. One is antisocial, or Schadenfreude, the other is acceptable.
Glad it all worked out and John Scott Day was a rounding success.
I too saw a bit of what Jiri was talking about with everyone treating JS a little bit 'special'. And for me that somewhat ruined it, but whatever - everyone seemed to enjoy it so, great.
It would be nice to just move on now. I thought Johnny was fun to watch, and one of the more noticeable players.
he looked decent out there, skated ok, made good crisp passes. If you rewatch it, Burns was caught up ice Scott defended a couple of 2-on-1s. When the Atlantic pulled the goalie Scott was on for the first part and played the triangle.
His fundamentals were quite good.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
But yes, I'll admit I was emotional about John Scott. I like seeing people happy. That's difference than being bothered by seeing others happy. One is antisocial, or Schadenfreude, the other is acceptable.
Here you are, bothered by the fact that a random person you don't even know doesn't feel the same way about Scott as you do. Of all the issues, this is what bothers you. You said something condemning letting such simple things be bothersome.
Can't we all agree that arguments against enjoying John Scott's participation are completely valid? He does NOT have a great track record. Whether you loved it or hated it (I loved it), neither is close to invalid. Anyone who didn't just buy into the magic blindly isn't a pathetic person.
As usual, media is ruining this. They were negative when he was voted in, and now I just read an article titled "For just one day, John Scott saved hockey." Ugh.
The guy has more suspensions then he does points, the guy has almost ended careers and I highly doubt everyone was in full support of having him there but what are they going to do? I'm pretty sure they didn't ask Loui Erickson what he thought about Scott... Just google John Scott and weed through all the All Star stuff and see what you find. The whole thing wasn't controversial because he was a "goon" it was because he's a dirty player. Check out any thread here on CP where he's been mentioned that isn't about the ASG and see what just about everyone thought of the guy...it's not that positive and people aren't bringing up that "he's a real person"
Not even close. 3 career suspensions, 11 career points.
He hasn't been suspended in over a year.
__________________
Need a great deal on a new or pre-owned car? Come see me at Platinum Mitsubishi — 2720 Barlow Trail NE
The Following User Says Thank You to TheScorpion For This Useful Post:
he looked decent out there, skated ok, made good crisp passes. If you rewatch it, Burns was caught up ice Scott defended a couple of 2-on-1s. When the Atlantic pulled the goalie Scott was on for the first part and played the triangle.
His fundamentals were quite good.
I think most forget that he did make it to the show playing hockey. Yes, his role is a enforcer and a goon but for all of this life he played and competed with the best, he is not some second year bear-leaguer that thinks he's going to the show. That said, is he All-Star worthy, absolutely not, but that should not be the point discussed here.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ragz For This Useful Post:
Here you are, bothered by the fact that a random person you don't even know doesn't feel the same way about Scott as you do. Of all the issues, this is what bothers you. You said something condemning letting such simple things be bothersome.
Can't we all agree that arguments against enjoying John Scott's participation are completely valid? He does NOT have a great track record. Whether you loved it or hated it (I loved it), neither is close to invalid. Anyone who didn't just buy into the magic blindly isn't a pathetic person.
As usual, media is ruining this. They were negative when he was voted in, and now I just read an article titled "For just one day, John Scott saved hockey." Ugh.
I'm not bothered by him having a different opinion than me. I've discussed the merits and flaws of his opinions and counters to my own like a gentlemen and with fair consideration and openness. I said I felt sorry for him and pity his perspective, because it's such a minuscule event that we as people will encounter. Likewise, his opinion is minuscule and meaningless to me. You confuse my courtesy of replying to being bothered.
Agreeing with his participation is separate from being upset that someone is enjoying themselves. The participation issue was closed the minute he stepped on to the ice. If that issue lingers long enough to create an antipathy towards someone who's having one of the best day of their lives at the expense of nobody, then it's now excessive hostility. For such a negative emotion to conquer someone over something that impacts their lives none is sad IMO.
I was initially against John Scott being included in this thing. Then I saw people celebrating him being sent down to the AHL just because they didn't want him being included in the all star weekend, which is when I realized how ######y that stance was...
Why is that a "######y stance"? How is that any different from being happy that Mason Raymond, or Derek Dorsett, or Shawn Thornton, or Clarke MacArthur, or Kyle Brodziak, or any other number of journeymen and role players would also not playing in the All Star game?
The fact is, John Scott is not good enough to be a NHL player. And by "NHL player," I mean a player who can crack the lineup of any team, and play a full season of games. He is arguably a worse player than all of those others that I listed, and I am sure as hell thrilled that none of them were playing in the ASG. It is possible to not hold any animosity for John Scott, the person, and to simultaneously also not want him attending and participating at the ASG, in accordance with his limited skills as a professional hockey player.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Maybe instead of the anti-John Scott crowd bringing their disdain for this whole affair into every thread on the topic, we could perhaps have one where you refrain from telling us just how much you didn't enjoy this. We know, we've seen your posts ALL OVER every other thread on the subject, so maybe just leave the MVP one off your radar and let those who enjoyed this interesting and fun sports story have one thread to discuss the matter without your negativity.
I know, tall order.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to woob For This Useful Post:
Why is that a "######y stance"? How is that any different from being happy that Mason Raymond, or Derek Dorsett, or Shawn Thornton, or Clarke MacArthur, or Kyle Brodziak, or any other number of journeymen and role players would also not playing in the All Star game?
The fact is, John Scott is not good enough to be a NHL player. And by "NHL player," I mean a player who can crack the lineup of any team, and play a full season of games. He is arguably a worse player than all of those others that I listed, and I am sure as hell thrilled that none of them were playing in the ASG. It is possible to not hold any animosity for John Scott, the person, and to simultaneously also not want him attending and participating at the ASG, in accordance with his limited skills as a professional hockey player.
Because it is, I doubt you really need it explained to you. Why celebrate some guy being sent to the minors right before an all star appearance? It's incredibly petty. The idea that a single player could ruin a game for anybody is ridiculous.
In the end he made the game much more entertaining.
