"lack of scoring from the top paid player (Vanek)"...

[MikeInRoch]

... How's that prediction working out??

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showpost.php?p=3546123&postcount=62

[casdhf]

He'll have some sort of excuse.

Vanek is playing incredible right now though. Lets hope he can keep it up.

[jamze132]

Vanek's defense has been less than desirable thus far but he is making up for it with his offense right now. Hopefully they won't "even out" as the season goes on as that makes for a very expensive contract that doesn't do anything for the long run.

[Skooby]

Vanek's defense has been less than desirable thus far but he is making up for it with his offense right now.

I made a joke on the skating thread that mentioned about Vanek getting taught to come back on defense, LOL. He's a scoring machine early on, let's hope it continues.

Mike, I wouldn't point fingers right now because OP is basing things on years & not a small stretch of games.

[OpIv37]

... How's that prediction working out??

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showpost.php?p=3546123&postcount=62

lmao. Six games hardly makes up for the last 3 years or so.

[OpIv37]

And Roy is more than happy to pick up the slack in the "not scoring" dept.

[ddaryl]

It would be so nice to see Vanek break the 50 goal mark... finally.

[hydro]

Sorry Mike but this was a bit premature. Got to allow for a little more of a sample size to bring this type of "How about this!" to Opiv. Saw his reply coming from a mile away.

[Skooby]

Sorry Mike but this was a bit premature. Got to allow for a little more of a sample size to bring this type of "How about this!" to Opiv. Saw his reply coming from a mile away.

That train had crushed pennies already, lol.

[psubills62]

Sorry Mike but this was a bit premature. Got to allow for a little more of a sample size to bring this type of "How about this!" to Opiv. Saw his reply coming from a mile away.
I saw it too (and nearly posted my prediction of it), but Op always has some reason to complain about the situation. If Vanek scores a bunch of goals this year, it will be that he had one good year and that doesn't erase the last 3 bad ones..."let's see him do it more consistently." If he starts to do it more consistently over 2+ years, Op will just start complaining about how he'll cost way too much money to re-sign and won't end up being worth it.

[OpIv37]

I saw it too (and nearly posted my prediction of it), but Op always has some reason to complain about the situation. If Vanek scores a bunch of goals this year, it will be that he had one good year and that doesn't erase the last 3 bad ones..."let's see him do it more consistently." If he starts to do it more consistently over 2+ years, Op will just start complaining about how he'll cost way too much money to re-sign and won't end up being worth it.

First, this is a bull**** debating technique:
1. Make up a scenario
2. Guess how someone would react if that hypothetical scenario actually occurred.
3. State your guess of how someone would react in a situation that never actually happened as if it's a legitimate point.

Second, if that happens, it will mean Vanek will have 4 or so mediocre seasons sandwiched between a couple of good ones on either end. Is that the kind of guy you want to pay $6 or $7 million a season (probably more by the time Vanek's contract expires)? If so, that's a recipe for disaster. Anyone who takes up that much cap space has to be a CONSISTENT 40 goal scorer- not some guy who scored 40 goals once 5 years ago.

[psubills62]

First, this is a bull**** debating technique:
1. Make up a scenario
2. Guess how someone would react if that hypothetical scenario actually occurred.
3. State your guess of how someone would react in a situation that never actually happened as if it's a legitimate point.

Second, if that happens, it will mean Vanek will have 4 or so mediocre seasons sandwiched between a couple of good ones on either end. Is that the kind of guy you want to pay $6 or $7 million a season (probably more by the time Vanek's contract expires)? If so, that's a recipe for disaster. Anyone who takes up that much cap space has to be a CONSISTENT 40 goal scorer- not some guy who scored 40 goals once 5 years ago.
It's not guessing when that's what you do. Isn't it you who likes to say that we can predict the future based on what happens over and over and over in the past?

I'm having a very hard time finding the words to express my thoughts regarding your second paragraph. Are you purposefully trying to be ironic here? Let me see if I have this straight. You swear me out for predicting how you'd complain, then proceed to follow my prediction to the letter?

[OpIv37]

It's not guessing when that's what you do. Isn't it you who likes to say that we can predict the future based on what happens over and over and over in the past?

I'm having a very hard time finding the words to express my thoughts regarding your second paragraph. Are you purposefully trying to be ironic here? Let me see if I have this straight. You swear me out for predicting how you'd complain, then proceed to follow my prediction to the letter?

Yes.

First, it's bull**** to use your guess as to how someone would react as a point, regardless of whether it ends up being right or wrong.

Second, even if that situation happens and that does end up being my thoughts on it, they're the correct thoughts so there is no reason to complain about it.

[DMBcrew36]

It has only been 6 games. Players get hot, they go cold, they get hot, they go cold.

Let's see where Vanek and the rest of the team are after 41.

[psubills62]

Yes.

First, it's bull**** to use your guess as to how someone would react as a point, regardless of whether it ends up being right or wrong.
Not BS at all - that's simply how you operate, I was using Vanek's situation as an example. And by the way, it also wasn't a "debating technique," as you described in your first reply.

It's like if I said "the Bills will be giving up lots of points and yards on defense against our next opponent." And actually, I posted something just like that in the John Beck thread. There's no difference between the two. Just in one case I'm talking about the Bills, the other I'm talking about you. And since this thread is about you and one of your predictions, I'm pretty sure my post fits right in.


Second, even if that situation happens and that does end up being my thoughts on it, they're the correct thoughts so there is no reason to complain about it.
Even if they are correct, it's simply proof that you will never see the positive in these situations. If he's not playing well, you ***** about it. If he's playing well, you ***** about the times he wasn't playing well or about some hypothetical scenario in the future regarding his contract. You can't just take something and enjoy it, there's always something to ***** about. Guys are either overpaid or they will eventually be overpaid, yada yada yada.

[Skooby]

It has only been 6 games. Players get hot, they go cold, they get hot, they go cold.

Let's see where Vanek and the rest of the team are after 41.

All Star break is usually a good point to assess where you've been & where you're going.

[OpIv37]

Not BS at all - that's simply how you operate, I was using Vanek's situation as an example. And by the way, it also wasn't a "debating technique," as you described in your first reply.

It's like if I said "the Bills will be giving up lots of points and yards on defense against our next opponent." And actually, I posted something just like that in the John Beck thread. There's no difference between the two. Just in one case I'm talking about the Bills, the other I'm talking about you. And since this thread is about you and one of your predictions, I'm pretty sure my post fits right in.


There is a WORLD of difference between trying to pick an actual outcome based on actual events and trying to predict an individual's thought process. You're using the old justa technique of comparing apples to oranges then trying to make someone look inconsistent because they don't act/ think the same way in completely different situations.



Even if they are correct, it's simply proof that you will never see the positive in these situations. If he's not playing well, you ***** about it. If he's playing well, you ***** about the times he wasn't playing well or about some hypothetical scenario in the future regarding his contract. You can't just take something and enjoy it, there's always something to ***** about. Guys are either overpaid or they will eventually be overpaid, yada yada yada.

I'm not *****ing about him playing well at all. You're reading my posts based on your perception of me instead of what I actually said.

Now, if Vanek's contract was up at the same time he was playing well then MAYBE I'd ***** about it in terms of the contract, because there have been plenty of players who have played well in their contract years only to return to mediocrity after getting their payday. Tim Connolly comes immediately to mind.

And, in fact, you thanked my post in the other thread that was about 90% positive, so this "there's always something to ***** about" is nonsense.

[hydro]

PSU really backed Opiv in a corner here and Opiv doesn't like it! :snicker:

[Skooby]

PSU really backed Opiv in a corner here and Opiv doesn't like it! :snicker:

There might be a silver lining here somewhere but this dog is barking whether or not there is a bone in front of it.

[OpIv37]

PSU really backed Opiv in a corner here and Opiv doesn't like it! :snicker:

no he didn't. All he did was make an illogical comparison between two dissimilar situations.

[psubills62]

There is a WORLD of difference between trying to pick an actual outcome based on actual events and trying to predict an individual's thought process. You're using the old justa technique of comparing apples to oranges then trying to make someone look inconsistent because they don't act/ think the same way in completely different situations.
Actually, there was pretty much no difference in this case. I predicted an actual outcome (the way you would complain about Vanek if X happened), and you confirmed that my prediction is sound by saying you would say those exact things.

These vast differences are minuscule at best. They're both predictions based on what has happened in the past. It's not apples to oranges - it's more Cortland apples to Empire apples.

I'm not *****ing about him playing well at all. You're reading my posts based on your perception of me instead of what I actually said.

Now, if Vanek's contract was up at the same time he was playing well then MAYBE I'd ***** about it in terms of the contract, because there have been plenty of players who have played well in their contract years only to return to mediocrity after getting their payday. Tim Connolly comes immediately to mind.

And, in fact, you thanked my post in the other thread that was about 90% positive, so this "there's always something to ***** about" is nonsense.
I did thank your post because it was a good one. But as you are fond of saying, the exception doesn't prove the rule. Or maybe "[one post] hardly makes up for the last 3 years or so."

[OpIv37]

Actually, there was pretty much no difference in this case. I predicted an actual outcome (the way you would complain about Vanek if X happened), and you confirmed that my prediction is sound by saying you would say those exact things.

These vast differences are minuscule at best. They're both predictions based on what has happened in the past. It's not apples to oranges - it's more Cortland apples to Empire apples.

I did thank your post because it was a good one. But as you are fond of saying, the exception doesn't prove the rule. Or maybe "[one post] hardly makes up for the last 3 years or so."

3? More like 9. Give credit where credit is due.

[psubills62]

3? More like 9. Give credit where credit is due.
My fault. I'll blame it on the fact that I've only been around for 3 years.

[Skooby]

My fault. I'll blame it on the fact that I've only been around for 3 years.

You seem older than 3, lOl.