2022-23 NHL Thread

[L K]

Ah two posts to reach the alphabet agenda argument.  Well done

 

[Kin]

But if players opposed Trump fans, that would be the same thing as what Provorov did. According to the "right," that would mean that NHL players don't support anyone in the dressing room or anyone outside of it that supports Trump and may be bullied for it.

What's the difference?

Again, it would only be "the same thing" if you entirely detached this discussion from the fact that people are specifically basing their comments on the stance Provorov is taking. Not that he's taking a stance at all. If someone said "I like this person because they're a passionate campaigner for anti-racism" they would not, in order to be ideologically consistent, have to have equally positive views of someone who is a passionate campaigner in favour of racism.

Being a fan of Trump, or any politician, is a statement about the things you believe. And, quite reasonably, people are judged on the things they believe. Here in Canada one's political beliefs does not make someone a member of a protected class against whom discrimination is illegal. Someone's sexual orientation does in the exact same way it would for matters of race or disability(as you point out someone's sexual orientation does not necessitate ideological conformity). Now, people are free to judge someone else for their sexual orientation if they want but if they make that stance public they will be subject to public scrutiny and, perhaps, criticism for those judgements.

Matters of virtue are, of course, never "facts" but are always the products of argument and synthesis and societal norms. You are, of course, free to think Provorov's stance is virtuous just as other people are free to put forth that it isn't. But, given that you're commenting on a board where the majority of posters are Canadian(and given the demographics inherent to his being an internet message board) it really shouldn't come as a surprise that most of us are informed by our cultural norms which are that A) Provorov's stance runs contrary to what we think of as "good" and B) it is not the equivalent of someone taking a strong stance against endorsing a political figure (in large part because said political figure also supports stances that would run afoul of A).

 

[Wendel's Fist]

But if players opposed Trump fans, that would be the same thing as what Provorov did. According to the "right," that would mean that NHL players don't support anyone in the dressing room or anyone outside of it that supports Trump and may be bullied for it.

What's the difference?

Again, it would only be "the same thing" if you entirely detached this discussion from the fact that people are specifically basing their comments on the stance Provorov is taking. Not that he's taking a stance at all. If someone said "I like this person because they're a passionate campaigner for anti-racism" they would not, in order to be ideologically consistent, have to have equally positive views of someone who is a passionate campaigner in favour of racism.

Being a fan of Trump, or any politician, is a statement about the things you believe. And, quite reasonably, people are judged on the things they believe. Here in Canada one's political beliefs does not make someone a member of a protected class against whom discrimination is illegal. Someone's sexual orientation does in the exact same way it would for matters of race or disability(as you point out someone's sexual orientation does not necessitate ideological conformity). Now, people are free to judge someone else for their sexual orientation if they want but if they make that stance public they will be subject to public scrutiny and, perhaps, criticism for those judgements.

Matters of virtue are, of course, never "facts" but are always the products of argument and synthesis and societal norms. You are, of course, free to think Provorov's stance is virtuous just as other people are free to put forth that it isn't. But, given that you're commenting on a board where the majority of posters are Canadian(and given the demographics inherent to his being an internet message board) it really shouldn't come as a surprise that most of us are informed by our cultural norms which are that A) Provorov's stance runs contrary to what we think of as "good" and B) it is not the equivalent of someone taking a strong stance against endorsing a political figure (in large part because said political figure also supports stances that would run afoul of A).

That's fantastic but I guarantee you that there's a bunch of people who normally post on this board that are afraid to now because it isn't inclusive at all.

I barely come here at all and all I see is Left wing views on everything when I do. Don't pretend cancel culture doesn't exist. I personally couldn't care less about being cancelled but others do.

Someone dares to go right wing and they're crucified off of this board.

Just because it's what is ok for now here, doesn't mean it always will be. There was a time when this board was a lot more entertaining than 5 guys pretty much giving their views on things.

Here's a right wing transsexual....I'm a big fan...........

https://twitter.com/MsBlaireWhite?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Maybe some of you guys should open up to more than left wing media and see what's really out there.

 

[Kin]

That's fantastic but I guarantee you that there's a bunch of people who normally post on this board that are afraid to now because it isn't inclusive at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

I barely come here at all and all I see is Left wing views on everything when I do.

Personally I'd rank them:

1. Ovechkin
2. Bobby Hull
3. Brendan Shanahan
4. Luc Robitaille
5. Steve Shutt/Paul Kariya

 

[Wendel's Fist]

That's fantastic but I guarantee you that there's a bunch of people who normally post on this board that are afraid to now because it isn't inclusive at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

I barely come here at all and all I see is Left wing views on everything when I do.

Personally I'd rank them:

1. Ovechkin
2. Bobby Hull
3. Brendan Shanahan
4. Luc Robitaille
5. Steve Shutt/Paul Kariya

I'd advise you to click on the links that I provided again to refresh yourself on things. The Left is dying. You don't want to go with it.

Do you honestly think Trudeau and Jagmeet will ever be back? Invest in eggs and freeze them. They're better than gold under the socialist regime.

 

[Kin]

Sorry, I don't get it.

Those players all have something in common. Hint: It was a very funny joke.

 

[Bender]

How did we get here on this topic?

Anyway, Provarov going against this for religious purposes is absolute bs and a tired, lame smokescreen to hang on to nonsensical "beliefs." Anyone can believe anything behind religion. Exodus says women are property of men. Why is that not ok but using religion to be unprofessional against another group is?

Provarov can do what he wants but he should've sat, at least for a shift. Man takes a knee and he's blackballed from playing a sport. Maybe he should've said it was in relation to religious beliefs too as opposed to human issues and he'd have been in the clear.

And anyway, for all the arguing it literally comes down to this: are we about inclusivity or not? Do we want more people to enjoy the sport and feel safe within the community or do we not? If it's the latter then we will forever be relegated to a niche sports league.

 

[Bender]

But if players opposed Trump fans, that would be the same thing as what Provorov did. According to the "right," that would mean that NHL players don't support anyone in the dressing room or anyone outside of it that supports Trump and may be bullied for it.

What's the difference?

Again, it would only be "the same thing" if you entirely detached this discussion from the fact that people are specifically basing their comments on the stance Provorov is taking. Not that he's taking a stance at all. If someone said "I like this person because they're a passionate campaigner for anti-racism" they would not, in order to be ideologically consistent, have to have equally positive views of someone who is a passionate campaigner in favour of racism.

Being a fan of Trump, or any politician, is a statement about the things you believe. And, quite reasonably, people are judged on the things they believe. Here in Canada one's political beliefs does not make someone a member of a protected class against whom discrimination is illegal. Someone's sexual orientation does in the exact same way it would for matters of race or disability(as you point out someone's sexual orientation does not necessitate ideological conformity). Now, people are free to judge someone else for their sexual orientation if they want but if they make that stance public they will be subject to public scrutiny and, perhaps, criticism for those judgements.

Matters of virtue are, of course, never "facts" but are always the products of argument and synthesis and societal norms. You are, of course, free to think Provorov's stance is virtuous just as other people are free to put forth that it isn't. But, given that you're commenting on a board where the majority of posters are Canadian(and given the demographics inherent to his being an internet message board) it really shouldn't come as a surprise that most of us are informed by our cultural norms which are that A) Provorov's stance runs contrary to what we think of as "good" and B) it is not the equivalent of someone taking a strong stance against endorsing a political figure (in large part because said political figure also supports stances that would run afoul of A).

That's fantastic but I guarantee you that there's a bunch of people who normally post on this board that are afraid to now because it isn't inclusive at all.

I barely come here at all and all I see is Left wing views on everything when I do. Don't pretend cancel culture doesn't exist. I personally couldn't care less about being cancelled but others do.

Someone dares to go right wing and they're crucified off of this board.

Just because it's what is ok for now here, doesn't mean it always will be. There was a time when this board was a lot more entertaining than 5 guys pretty much giving their views on things.

Here's a right wing transsexual....I'm a big fan...........

https://twitter.com/MsBlaireWhite?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Maybe some of you guys should open up to more than left wing media and see what's really out there.

There's so many things to say about this but really it kind of doesn't matter. I do find it kind of funny that you're railing about left wing bias and cancel culture and assuming everyone's political beliefs on the board and acting like beliefs that aren't yours is some sort of media brainwashing or whatever. Maybe you should open up to more than just whatever media you're consuming and like... go outside or something? 

I'm also kind of amused that people talk about this site in the same way they talk about growing up in the 50s - it was great back then but not now. Except so many posters here have been here forever. I've been here for 15yrs and that's nothing compared to some.

And either way, this thread is off the rails more than Ozzy Osbourne at this point, adding more proof that Provarovs actions literally took what was mostly a non-issue and blew it up.

 

[Andy007]

Nice win by the Penguins last night....

 

[leafsjunkie]

I could be wrong but I believe that the way Physicians are trained means that most of them have some degree of experience in various fields that are still not their specialty.

So, that would mean that he's performed brain surgery, since he's worked on grey matter.

He mentioned himself that he worked on grey matter during Covid.

Was that training?

I could be wrong but I believe that the way Physicians are trained means that most of them have some degree of experience in various fields that are still not their specialty.

So, that would mean that he's performed brain surgery, since he's worked on grey matter.

I've changed the brakes on my truck. That sure as shit doesn't make me a mechanic.

Right and most of them have delivered children too but it would still not be correct to refer to them all as Obstetricians.

And, keep in mind, I spent a lot of time in University getting stoned and watching ER before eking out a degree in the Social Sciences so, you know, kind of an expert.

For the love of God Himself. He said that he worked on grey matter during Covid.

I know because I barely come here at all and that's one of the few things I remember from a doctor that has a hard time with spelling.

Are you able to provide evidence of this god you believe in?

 

[Bill_Berg]

I could be wrong but I believe that the way Physicians are trained means that most of them have some degree of experience in various fields that are still not their specialty.

So, that would mean that he's performed brain surgery, since he's worked on grey matter.

Right and most of them have delivered children too but it would still not be correct to refer to them all as Obstetricians.

And, keep in mind, I spent a lot of time in University getting stoned and watching ER before eking out a degree in the Social Sciences so, you know, kind of an expert.

Ha it was Law & Order for me and a Humanities degree.

 

[Bender]

I could be wrong but I believe that the way Physicians are trained means that most of them have some degree of experience in various fields that are still not their specialty.

So, that would mean that he's performed brain surgery, since he's worked on grey matter.

Right and most of them have delivered children too but it would still not be correct to refer to them all as Obstetricians.

And, keep in mind, I spent a lot of time in University getting stoned and watching ER before eking out a degree in the Social Sciences so, you know, kind of an expert.

Ha it was Law & Order for me and a Humanities degree.

For me it was Planet Earth and Social Sciences. Gotta love David Attenborough.

 

[Arn]

I?d missed this story at the time, but way to not actually own or apologise for being a cretin

https://theathletic.com/4128805/2023/01/26/nhl-pat-maroon-jack-edwards-apology/

I hate the NESN broadcasts any time I have to watch them, purely because of that guys commentary.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/pr_nhl/status/1547266506945331207
https://twitter.com/frank_seravalli/status/1575510531737374722
https://twitter.com/friedgehnic/status/1619208516358770688
https://twitter.com/taj1944/status/1619213128071512065

 

[Bender]

So insanely irresponsible of the organization.

 

[L K]

Pretty freaking impressive he was able to put up 13G/15A in 48 games on a torn ACL.  He was on pace for career highs.

Rutherford is incompetent.

 

[Guilt Trip]

So insanely irresponsible of the organization.

I don't agree and neither does Mikheyev....taken from his twitter...

I understand there is a lot of debate about my decision to play with an ACL injury. Here are the facts: when I was injured in the preseason, I went through several tests and realized I could play without causing any more damage. That?s what I wanted to do.

Twice per week, we consulted with team doctors about how things were progressing. Never did I feel pressure, never did I feel worse. It was my decision. Finally it reached a point where I wanted to be ready on time for next year.

If I continued to play, I wouldn?t be ready for training camp. I appreciate everyone?s concern, but I have no complaints with the way this was handled.

 

[Guilt Trip]

Miss this guy. He gets pretty emotional when asked about his season ending. I watched a few games this year and he didn't look quite as fast as he did here...Now we know why.

https://twitter.com/Canucks/status/1619221046162513920

 

[Bender]

So insanely irresponsible of the organization.

I don't agree and neither does Mikheyev....taken from his twitter...

I understand there is a lot of debate about my decision to play with an ACL injury. Here are the facts: when I was injured in the preseason, I went through several tests and realized I could play without causing any more damage. That?s what I wanted to do.

Twice per week, we consulted with team doctors about how things were progressing. Never did I feel pressure, never did I feel worse. It was my decision. Finally it reached a point where I wanted to be ready on time for next year.

If I continued to play, I wouldn?t be ready for training camp. I appreciate everyone?s concern, but I have no complaints with the way this was handled.

This guess he didn't want to lose 6 months or whatever in case the team was contending. Still, seems a bit odd to me.

 

[Arn]

https://twitter.com/moneypuckdotcom/status/1615553528495218688
Moneypuck with the money-tweet

So, the New York Rangers, eh?