I realize it is foolish for me to attempt an explanation ... but this just goes to show I'm a fool.
Saint Nik said:
princedpw said:
That is not what I said or what I meant...
Actually that is what you said. You said that my standard, which is that Kessel needs to improve for the team to be successful and the team to improve, is mine and "everyone else" has another.
In the previous paragraph of your post, which I didn't quote in its entirety, you said this:
But, of course, nobody looks at those guys and says "They need to improve their consistency, right?". Well, yeah, but that's because those guys are for the most part PPG players. Kessel isn't. That's probably around the level of offense a hockey player has to produce in order to avoid criticism with their play.
The words "
That's the standard" are ambiguous unfortunately. "
That's" is an ambiguous reference. I assumed (part of) the standard you were referring to was that one should not be satisfied with a pure goal-scorer who has a slump unless that player is also a PPG player.
If the point of your post, as you later said, was to say that "Kessel needs to improve in order for the team to improve", well then, I certainly agree with that. There's no disagreement there. You seemed to be arguing with cw and I can't imagine cw not wanting Kessel to improve or grow; in fact he mentioned the possibility of using him in new ways such as on the penalty kill, which would require some growth. So certainly, one of the most likely ways for the team to improve is for Kessel to improve. A substantial improvement from other players that play big minutes on the team would also help a lot.
When I said this:
It doesn't seem like that is the standard everyone else on the board is holding him to... which is fine. It is bound to happen that different people will be more or less satisfied with different levels of play.
you interpreted my first sentence incorrectly.
"It is not the case that (everyone thinks Kessel has to be a PPG scorer)." ===> universal agreement does not exist
is different from
"Everyone does not (think Kessel has to be a PPG scorer)." ===> universal agreement does exist
I intended to say: there are differences in opinion. Some posters' opinions align with the idea that Kessel has to be a PPG scorer to have significant value, other posters' opinions do not. The second sentence, which you didn't quote, was my attempt to clarify my meaning. It emphasized the idea of differences of opinions. That was what I was trying to get at, which is quite the opposite of everyone thinking one or everyone thinking the other.
As an example, I'd be pretty happy with 40 goals, 70 points and a 10-game goalless streak from Kessel. That kind of player is pretty rare. I believe that kind of player, especially with mediocre linemates, and even if their defense is pretty suspect, is likely to be pretty valuable. Perhaps you agree with that, perhaps you don't. Of course, even if I was happy with that, I'd still of course want him to improve further! Being satisfied that a certain level of play contributes positively isn't in contradiction with hoping for further improvement.
Again, this is all in the name of clarifying my own position a little. To be honest, our opinions are often fairly similar. You, Nik, do find a particular joy in finding the differences, putting a knife in, and twisting.