Most hated franchise
- Thread starter healer677
- Start date
Well one day the Senators may beat the Leafs in the playoffs but not for a while hehehe
U tell them Ranger! I'm with you on this one lol
U tell them Ranger! I'm with you on this one lol
Could someone explain this to me? I can't understand what he's saying.Ranger68 said:
We are arguing about the meaning of the word "outplay" as it relates to hockey.
Clear?
Good.
Case closed.
Around and around and around we go!
I've explained my definition of outplay to you, and you disagree with it. As it pertains TO THE WHOLE TEAM, the Senators were outplayed by the Leafs in this past playoffs. If you agree with that statement, we can end this. You don't, however, which makes it NOT semantic.
Clear?
Good.
Case closed.
Clear?
Good.
Case closed.
I disagree with your interpretation of the word "outplay", which DOES make this an argument of semantics.
Clear?
Good.
Case closed.
Clear?
Good.
Case closed.
Dipshit, even *I* can agree that given *YOUR* definition of outplay (which, as I've pointed out, is pretty warped and possibly entirely useless) the Senators outplayed the Leafs.
If you want to argue whose "outplay" is more useful, fine.
But, you're not.
Hey, I enjoy the argument. Nobody else does, though, so maybe you should consider your position more carefully, if possible.
If you want to argue whose "outplay" is more useful, fine.
But, you're not.
Hey, I enjoy the argument. Nobody else does, though, so maybe you should consider your position more carefully, if possible.
Okay, let's put an end to this.
By my definition of the word "outplay", the Senators outplayed the Leafs in this year's playoffs.
By your definition of the word "outplay", the Leafs outplayed the Senators in this year's playoffs.
QED
By my definition of the word "outplay", the Senators outplayed the Leafs in this year's playoffs.
By your definition of the word "outplay", the Leafs outplayed the Senators in this year's playoffs.
QED
LOL Well, I've already dealt with this (and note that you could have ended this discussion LOOOOONG ago):
Ranger:
"So, whoever played better in MORE areas of the game outplayed the other team, as a whole? Is that what you're really saying??
So, all those things count the same: shots, goals, hits, faceoffs, takeaways, giveaways, GOALTENDING (which, apparently, is only *one* category in your list), dekes, point shots, can-openers, breakouts, offensive zone faceoffs, defensive zone faceoffs, breakaways, penalty killing, power plays ... all those things are measured equally. Who chooses what those categories are?? Who decides that spitting, or intimidating the officials isn't a part of the game? How do you determine who did that better?
Don't you think that's a bit silly??
Don't you think that's a flawed interpretation of the game? I certainly don't think it reflects reality.
'Cause in my reality, in the series we're now talking about, goaltending was clearly the most important factor. In your *analysis* of the game, goaltending counts the same as, say, one-time shots. In that case, that someone "outplayed" someone else is a pretty useless statement."
Goober:
"I don't understand your reasoning, therefore, that if a team has better statistics in all facets of the game except one, that one trumps them all and makes the latter team outplay the other."
Ranger:
"Hey, if your definition of "outplay" is what I've outlined above, we can stop this discussion.
I think it's utterly useless to any meaningful analysis of the game, but whatever.
IF, on the other hand, you propose that "outplay" includes all facets of the game *outside of goaltending*, and *in proper proportions*, we might be able to wrap this up. That would be fine. The statement would have some meaning, and I'd agree with it, insofar as as agrees with your definition of "outplay".
Just admit that when you say "outplay" you mean everything but goaltending. Fine. I've said this before. This is what you really mean. Because, when you factor in goaltending in its proper proportion, you're then taking EVERYTHING into account, and obviously, taking EVERYTHING into account, the Leafs outplayed the Senators - the Senators lost. (Or, are you back to the argument that everything counts the same - all hundred (thousand?) things that guys can do to win games all count for the same in the end?)"
There's no "correct" definition. We're into the realm of pure "opinion".
And it's my opinion that your definition of "outplay" is meaningless.
But, as Hammy Hamster said, "that's another story".
Ranger:
"So, whoever played better in MORE areas of the game outplayed the other team, as a whole? Is that what you're really saying??
So, all those things count the same: shots, goals, hits, faceoffs, takeaways, giveaways, GOALTENDING (which, apparently, is only *one* category in your list), dekes, point shots, can-openers, breakouts, offensive zone faceoffs, defensive zone faceoffs, breakaways, penalty killing, power plays ... all those things are measured equally. Who chooses what those categories are?? Who decides that spitting, or intimidating the officials isn't a part of the game? How do you determine who did that better?
Don't you think that's a bit silly??
Don't you think that's a flawed interpretation of the game? I certainly don't think it reflects reality.
'Cause in my reality, in the series we're now talking about, goaltending was clearly the most important factor. In your *analysis* of the game, goaltending counts the same as, say, one-time shots. In that case, that someone "outplayed" someone else is a pretty useless statement."
Goober:
"I don't understand your reasoning, therefore, that if a team has better statistics in all facets of the game except one, that one trumps them all and makes the latter team outplay the other."
Ranger:
"Hey, if your definition of "outplay" is what I've outlined above, we can stop this discussion.
I think it's utterly useless to any meaningful analysis of the game, but whatever.
IF, on the other hand, you propose that "outplay" includes all facets of the game *outside of goaltending*, and *in proper proportions*, we might be able to wrap this up. That would be fine. The statement would have some meaning, and I'd agree with it, insofar as as agrees with your definition of "outplay".
Just admit that when you say "outplay" you mean everything but goaltending. Fine. I've said this before. This is what you really mean. Because, when you factor in goaltending in its proper proportion, you're then taking EVERYTHING into account, and obviously, taking EVERYTHING into account, the Leafs outplayed the Senators - the Senators lost. (Or, are you back to the argument that everything counts the same - all hundred (thousand?) things that guys can do to win games all count for the same in the end?)"
There's no "correct" definition. We're into the realm of pure "opinion".
And it's my opinion that your definition of "outplay" is meaningless.
But, as Hammy Hamster said, "that's another story".
Well I love the leafs and will remain on the bandwagon for the rest of my life. Yes this is a Toronto board and what has made the sports forum interesting is all those Sens, Flyer fans, etc who have snuck in here to make their case lol.
So go ahead hate the Leafs cause I know and all the other leafs fans on here agree that the cup will return to Toronto and we will have one helluva party!!
Go Leafs go! Go Leafs go!!
So go ahead hate the Leafs cause I know and all the other leafs fans on here agree that the cup will return to Toronto and we will have one helluva party!!
Go Leafs go! Go Leafs go!!
