• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NHL January 2014 |OT| Bobby Orr, Bathroom Stalls, and the Battle at the Big House

Hamhuis has a shot, along with Vlasic, Subban, maybe even Boyle.

They could easily go Doughty-Weber, Keith-Seabrook, Bouwmeester-Pietrangelo for the top six.

I hope Kunitz doesn't make it. Plenty of guys with more skill to choose from. I feel like Crosby can play with anyone.
 
Lame. Deserved a few games.


Joffrey21.jpg

Nope
 

Socreges

Banned
No way Subban gets left off the team. I would love to see the reasoning for that if it happened. And I think Kunitz is making it ;__;
If he doesn't make it, which is entirely possible, this will be the reason:

Canada has an embarrassment of riches at D, combined with (according to Babcock, when asked about Subban):

"The great thing about playing on the Olympic team is you've got to be a 200-footer," he said. "You've got to do it in both ends of the rink consistently and the coach has to trust you.

"What I mean by that is you don't put people on the ice you don't trust, so you have to be dependable. So that's the No. 1 priority. I mean, there's skating, elite hockey sense, but you've got to be a trustworthy player, whether you're goaltender, a defenceman, a centre. That's what we told them at camp. I don't think it's different for anybody."
 

Smiley90

Stop shitting on my team. Start shitting on my finger.
Hamhuis has the advantage that he's a LD, and he should be extremely trustworthy. He's been rock-solid and playing big minutes nearly every game. Would love to see him make the roster.
 

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
Defensive liability? In 2013, no Team Canada candidate was on the ice for fewer goals against per 20 mins than Subban. #Sochi2014

The "Subban isn't responsible defensively" narrative is quite old and tiring at this point. I'm hoping management isn't that blind, but they don't have a good track record with roster management this past decade or so.

I would like to see Keith, Weber, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Subban, and one of Vlasic / Hamhuis as the top 6. Bouwmeester is going on name, and veteran presence, he shouldn't be there. You take the best players, not two guys because they played together.
 

SCHUEY F1

Unconfirmed Member
The "Subban isn't responsible defensively" narrative is quite old and tiring at this point. I'm hoping management isn't that blind, but they don't have a good track record with roster management this past decade or so.

I would like to see Keith, Weber, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Subban, and one of Vlasic / Hamhuis as the top 6. Bouwmeester is going on name, and veteran presence, he shouldn't be there. You take the best players, not two guys because they played together.

Who tweeted that?
 

Silexx

Member

The muzzling of government scientist is pure politicking by the current government and not some rule of law, so I don't see how that exemplifies codified censorship in Canada.
 
Flu is destroying the Dallas Stars.

Started with Alex Chiasson who lost 15lbs due to it.

Then it hit Ray Whitney who has been out a few games and he has lost some significant weight apparently.

Then it hit Shawn Horcoff who has also been out a few games

Now it has hit Seguin and Peverley.

FML.


This is on top of Gonchar, Daley and Robidas being out on our Defense. Jaysus.
 

Socreges

Banned
The "Subban isn't responsible defensively" narrative is quite old and tiring at this point. I'm hoping management isn't that blind, but they don't have a good track record with roster management this past decade or so.

I would like to see Keith, Weber, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Subban, and one of Vlasic / Hamhuis as the top 6. Bouwmeester is going on name, and veteran presence, he shouldn't be there. You take the best players, not two guys because they played together.
To be fair, if you take into account PK and PP time, which you obviously should, that stat is completely meaningless. Subban has the least amount of TOI of the 'candidates' if you take away all PP time (ie, instances in which being defensive matters). Subban also has the least PK time of all 'candidates' (really, much, much less than others), naturally meaning that he has another unfair advantage in this comparison.

That's not to say that Subban is necessarily a defensive liability then, but other people are likewise trying to create or distort a narrative.

He is a guy that takes risks more often than other elite dmen. He also occasionally takes those risks at precipitous moments. High risk, high reward. The question is whether or not Babcock (and Yzerman, among others) would feel comfortable having that kind of player on during crucial times, or if they want someone more conservative.
 

Silexx

Member
It has the same effect does it not?

I would argue that the muzzling of scientist is of greater concern than some comics seized at the border.

Also, looking at that list of seizures, I'm starting to wonder if they were confiscated not because of the obscene sexual content but rather because they're racist as shit.

EDIT: What equipped said along with the same level of sarcasm. :p
 

Socreges

Banned
You're right the difference between a policy being de jure and de facto has never ever been relevant.
Not to mention, from his own link:

"There is no clear rubric that the Canadian Border Services Agency uses to determine what is prohibited and what is admissible. Some of the titles that have aroused the suspicions of the CBSA include Gundam H, Grendel, and even Sailor Moon. By looking at the list, it is clear that the decisions about your comics are at the discretion of individual border agents, and that those decisions are inconsistent at best."

He had his out before with "I was joking". But now he's made it kinda awkward.
 
You're right the difference between a policy being de jure and de facto has never ever been relevant.

Not what I'm saying, only that they have the same intended effect.

I would argue that the muzzling of scientist is of greater concern than some comics seized at the border.

Also, looking at that list of seizures, I'm starting to wonder if they were confiscated not because of the obscene sexual content but rather because they're racist as shit.

EDIT: What equipped said along with the same level of sarcasm. :p

I agree on your first point but completely disagree with the idea that the censoring of racist bullshit is alright.

Not to mention, from his own link:

"There is no clear rubric that the Canadian Border Services Agency uses to determine what is prohibited and what is admissible. Some of the titles that have aroused the suspicions of the CBSA include Gundam H, Grendel, and even Sailor Moon. By looking at the list, it is clear that the decisions about your comics are at the discretion of individual border agents, and that those decisions are inconsistent at best."

He had his out before with "I was joking". But now he's made it kinda awkward.

So censorship is alright if the policy is "use your own discretion?" I was joking, now I'm just curious. I have a feeling if any of the links were about the US the three of you would have very different tones.
 

Curufinwe

Member
The "Subban isn't responsible defensively" narrative is quite old and tiring at this point. I'm hoping management isn't that blind, but they don't have a good track record with roster management this past decade or so.

I would like to see Keith, Weber, Doughty, Pietrangelo, Subban, and one of Vlasic / Hamhuis as the top 6. Bouwmeester is going on name, and veteran presence, he shouldn't be there. You take the best players, not two guys because they played together.

Bouwmeester has been one of the best eight Canadian defensemen this year. They would be foolish not to take him.
 

Socreges

Banned
Not at all because I couldn't give a shit less about nationalistic pride.
This isn't about nationalistic pride. This is about you a) distorting past events to frame a narrative, and b) shifting the goalposts to make it seem like you're still proving the same point.

No one here is going to argue that Canada doesn't suffer from censorship in some way, in some area of the country. But we will point out the ways in which your ever-shifting argument is ridiculous.
 
This isn't about nationalistic pride. This is about you a) distorting past events to frame a narrative, and b) shifting the goalposts to make it seem like you're still proving the same point.

No one here is going to argue that Canada doesn't suffer from censorship in some way, in some area of the country. But we will point out the ways in which your ever-shifting argument is ridiculous.

Please give me a timeline of the stages of this argument you think I'm making, other than "Canada suffers from censorship just like every other place on earth and I disagree with it".
 

Silexx

Member
Not what I'm saying, only that they have the same intended effect.

Are you sure you want to qualify that with "intented"? Because they absolutely do not. The seizure of the comics is intended to prevent the circulation of materials too obscene for general consumption and the muzzling is to prevent any scientist disclosing any findings that could potentially contradict any of the sitting government's current policies.

I agree on your first point but completely disagree with the idea that the censoring of racist bullshit is alright.

I wasn't making any value judgments, just wondering aloud if the materials were deemed obscene for another reason other than it's porn.

So censorship is alright if the policy is "use your own discretion?" I was joking, now I'm just curious. I have a feeling if any of the links were about the US the three of you would have very different tones.

I certainly wouldn't say that, but we're trying to make clear that there is a difference between a codified law that renders certain works as too obscene for consumption by the general population and a policy that directs border agents to use their own discretion in deeming what is offensive to our sensibilities.

Believe me, I don't like the latter, but it's effects are not at all on par if this was a law that banned any kind of material like this.

To clarify: If this material was created in Canada, then it would be protected under Freedom of Expression. Because the comics are coming from outside, however, it comes under a bit of a legal grey area where border agents have almost total discretion as to what can enter the country. No, it's not ideal, but it does not quite created the kind of censorship hellscape that you seem to be framing.
 

yyzjohn

Banned
If he doesn't make it, which is entirely possible, this will be the reason:

Canada has an embarrassment of riches at D, combined with (according to Babcock, when asked about Subban):

"The great thing about playing on the Olympic team is you've got to be a 200-footer," he said. "You've got to do it in both ends of the rink consistently and the coach has to trust you.

"What I mean by that is you don't put people on the ice you don't trust, so you have to be dependable. So that's the No. 1 priority. I mean, there's skating, elite hockey sense, but you've got to be a trustworthy player, whether you're goaltender, a defenceman, a centre. That's what we told them at camp. I don't think it's different for anybody."

Babcock sounds racist.
 

Socreges

Banned
Please give me a timeline of the stages of this argument you think I'm making, other than "Canada suffers from censorship just like every other place on earth and I disagree with it".
Good God you are tedious

- You tried to say that Canada doesn't have freedom of speech because of books that were banned decades ago
- That was shot down, so you came back with obscene comics, many likely already available in Canada and freely disseminated, that isn't being let in at the border because of officials that are trained to be overly-cautious given border sensitivities, and you frame it as tantamount to book banning to keep up the vestige of your previous argument
- That was also shot down
- You bring up the climate change/Harper gov't debacle (of grave concern to Canadians and currently being addressed widely), but cannot understand how it's distinct from codified censorship
 

Smiley90

Stop shitting on my team. Start shitting on my finger.
This has got to be one of the weirder discussions we've had in here.

And we have TUSR and zedge.
 

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
To be fair, if you take into account PK and PP time, which you obviously should, that stat is completely meaningless. Subban has the least amount of TOI of the 'candidates' if you take away all PP time (ie, instances in which being defensive matters). Subban also has the least PK time of all 'candidates' (really, much, much less than others), naturally meaning that he has another unfair advantage in this comparison.

That's not to say that Subban is necessarily a defensive liability then, but other people are likewise trying to create or distort a narrative.

He is a guy that takes risks more often than other elite dmen. He also occasionally takes those risks at precipitous moments. High risk, high reward. The question is whether or not Babcock (and Yzerman, among others) would feel comfortable having that kind of player on during crucial times, or if they want someone more conservative.
Even taking away the PP and PK time, Subban has some of the top possession numbers and goals at even strength while playing on a much shittier team then the likes of Keith, Pietraneglo, Doughty, etc. He was also used on the top PK unit two years ago with Gorges when it was one of the top 5 PK's in the league, Therrien shelters him because he doesn't know how to use him. If Canada falls behind and needs a goal in the last 5 minutes, Subban is the guy they'll want on the ice, and that's the reason they would bring him, even if I think he should be used in a higher role.

Bouwmeester has been one of the best eight Canadian defensemen this year. They would be foolish not to take him.
I'm referrering to him being in the top 6. Bring him in the case of an injury sure, but he shouldn't be taking a top 6 spot at this moment.
 
To clarify: If this material was created in Canada, then it would be protected under Freedom of Expression. Because the comics are coming from outside, however, it comes under a bit of a legal grey area where border agents have almost total discretion as to what can enter the country. No, it's not ideal, but it does not quite created the kind of censorship hellscape that you seem to be framing.

I wasn't trying to frame any hellscape. Not sure what wording I used to give that impression but I can assure you that wasn't my intent. You actually did clarify something for me here so thanks for that.

Good God you are tedious

- You tried to say that Canada doesn't have freedom of speech because of books that were banned decades ago
- That was shot down, so you came back with obscene comics, many likely already available in Canada and freely disseminated, that isn't being let in at the border because of officials that are trained to be overly-cautious given border sensitivities, and you frame it as tantamount to book banning to keep up the vestige of your previous argument
- That was also shot down
- You bring up the climate change/Harper gov't debacle (of grave concern to Canadians and currently being addressed widely), but cannot understand how it's distinct from codified censorship

As I said, I was joking with the wikipedia link. Whether or not you deem that believable is irrelevant to me. The comic stuff is exactly what I said it would be, evidence that Canada has censored book circulation in recent years. If you find this tedious then I urge you to stop participating because I really think you misinterpreted virtually everything I was trying to say.
 
Top Bottom