Brisson confirms that EP40 dealt with injury which prevented him from Off-season Training.

[Reverend Mayhem]

Elias Pettersson excuse thread.

Slash just make up shit thread

 

[Canucker]

What has changed in his play across the two years?

"I'm fine" is the outlier statement. Both the year end presser and his return statement confirm the presence of injury, even if he thought he could overcome it. His continued play, however, suggests otherwise.

To put it all on that one statement...

It’s not all on that one statement, its also the fact he’s still playing and not taking any time off.

 

[Bleach Clean]

It’s not all on that one statement, its also the fact he’s still playing and not taking any time off.

He didn't do that last year either.

 

[Canucker]

He didn't do that last year either.

Nope, he didn’t do that last year…but he probably should have if he were injured.

 

[Hodgy]

WTF you do it, I ain’t doing shit just because you ask.

You are the one making this argument, not me. The onus is on you to prove out the argument, not me.

Plus, I actually provided a counter example.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Nope, he didn’t do that last year…but he probably should have if he were injured.

But he didn't. Both years, he continued to play. Both years, he's been bad.

The only statement he has made that conflicts with his rationale for his poor play is "I'm fine".

 

[Canucker]

But he didn't. Both years, he continued to play. Both years, he's been bad.

The only statement he has made that conflicts with his rationale for his poor play is "I'm fine".

But only one he was injured.

 

[Bleach Clean]

But only one he was injured.

All good Canucker. Much respect.

 

[arttk]

You are the one making this argument, not me. The onus is on you to prove out the argument, not me.

Plus, I actually provided a counter example.

typically teams don’t play players when they have knee injuries for half a season.

Can you find a team that did that twice with Mik and Petey. I guarantee you won’t be able to find one.

So considering that no team does that, there is no similar case. If anything the most similar case is Mik. We played him for half a season INJURED before shutting him down and then he didn’t have enough to rehab and when he came back, he sucked like shit for a whole season.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

This guy is going to be responsible for closing out our window of opportunity and single handily destroyed the momentum this team had going into the season. And he looks terrible doing it. Management is so foolish to not trade the one guy who has problems with everything, while they could.

Too late and it’s so disheartening to watch.

 

[Canucker]

All good Canucker. Much respect.

To you as well my friend.

 

[arttk]

This guy is going to be responsible for closing out our window of opportunity and single handily destroyed the momentum this team had going into the season. And he looks terrible doing it. Management is so foolish to not trade the one guy who has problems with everything, while they could.

Too late and it’s so disheartening to watch.

This is more of a case of bad medical management. He should’ve been shut down last season as soon as he had tendonitis.

This is Mikhyev all over again.

 

[Rick Rocket]

The rain makes Petey sad.

 

[Hodgy]

I have, you're just caught in flip-flopping on how you select for evidence. Example: Your use of rumours as legitimate sources now and not before.

You are really having a hard time understanding this. I prefer direct testimony to rumours. This is a logical decision because one can expect the actual people in the situation to provide more credible evidence than some third party that is receiving information regarding the situation. This isn’t an absolute rule. In the contract extension debate I applied this rule. Currently, I didn’t, because there is no direct testimony. Pettersson’s previous direct treatment is clearly not relevant. So there is just Dhaliwal’s rumour. Again, I don’t know why you have such a hard time with this. I thought you finally got it when you abandoned your misuse of the term selection bias but I guess not.

You didn't take Pettersson at his word in the offseason either.

I did. I never refuted what Pettersson said. I always accepted that he was injured after he confirmed that. The question was whether his “nagging” injury, in his own words, was the predominant cause of his poor play.

Again, another one of your strawmans.

You posited that because management had the gall to call him out for preparation, that they would not likely do this if he was injured (paraphrase). Then Brisson (another primary source right??) took the legs out from that argument.

Brisson didn’t take the legs out of this argument. He, very tellingly, never said Pettersson was currently injured. My argument, as you stated above, was that I didn’t think Allvin would publicly call Pettersson out for his poor play if he was currently injured. So how does Brisson staying that Petey had a poor off season because of injury change this?

Clearly the parties disagree as to whether Pettersson’s off season was poor just because of injury. But again, next week we will be six months into the season, so whining about a poor off season, for whatever reason, seems ridiculous at this look.

Why don't you prefer Pettersson or Brisson as the primary source now?

You seem to have a really hard time understanding that Petterson’s comments don’t relate to this year. He was speaking about last season, so there is no question as to whether to prefer this direct testimony to Dhaliwal’s rumour of today. If they applied to the same period, and I preferred the rumour, you’d have a point.

As for Brisson, I don’t fully reject this comment. I’ve said a number of times that I believe Pettersson had to train around his injury as he stated in the preseason. That doesn’t mean that he didn’t also not put in the required effort in the off season as Allvin has implied. Both can be true.

What happened? Is management the primary source now? Dhaliwal? When you figure it out, let me

It’s not that complicated. If there are two sources of evidence for one event I generally prefer direct testimony to rumours. This was the case for the Brisson and JR vs. Friedman evidence.

This principle didn’t apply to the Dhaliwal evidence since there was no contradictory direct evidence; I.e., Pettersson’s testimony related to an earlier period and Brisson’s testimony never stated Pettersson was injured.

typically teams don’t play players when they have knee injuries for half a season.

Can you find a team that did that twice with Mik and Petey. I guarantee you won’t be able to find one.

So considering that no team does that, there is no similar case. If anything the most similar case is Mik. We played him for half a season INJURED before shutting him down and then he didn’t have enough to rehab and when he came back, he sucked like shit for a whole season.

Petey, by his own account, described his injury as “nagging”. Star players play through nagging injuries all the time.

I’m waiting for you to find even one example.

 

[TraderJim]

Tried to find the post but you have a ton of very emotional EP posts so gave up.

Lets count the amount of posts you've made regarding EP compared to mine. I'm not the one that has to defend my position dozens of times every day.

 

[SillyRabbit]

Speaking of Mikheyev, the guy who we are retaining salary on for all of this season and next...

Can anyone guess who has more goals this season? Pettersson or Mikheyev?

If only Pettersson had a linemate like him to play with.

 

[nowhereman]

This is more of a case of bad medical management. He should’ve been shut down last season as soon as he had tendonitis.

This is Mikhyev all over again.

Okay, doc. Except the majority of athletes diagnosed with tendonitis return to play after only a week and you're suggesting Pettersson has an outlier case very rarely seen in hockey.

 

[arttk]

You are really having a hard time understanding this. I prefer direct testimony to rumours. This is a logical decision because one can expect the actual people in the situation to provide more credible evidence than some third party that is receiving information regarding the situation. This isn’t an absolute rule. In the contract extension debate I applied this rule. Currently, I didn’t, because there is no direct testimony. Pettersson’s previous direct treatment is clearly not relevant. So there is just Dhaliwal’s rumour. Again, I don’t know why you have such a hard time with this. I thought you finally got it when you abandoned your misuse of the term selection bias but I guess not.


I did. I never refuted what Pettersson said. I always accepted that he was injured after he confirmed that. The question was whether his “nagging” injury, in his own words, was the predominant cause of his poor play.

Again, another one of your strawmans.


Brisson didn’t take the legs out of this argument. He, very tellingly, never said Pettersson was currently injured. My argument, as you stated above, was that I didn’t think Allvin would publicly call Pettersson out for his poor play if he was currently injured. So how does Brisson staying that Petey had a poor off season because of injury change this?

Clearly the parties disagree as to whether Pettersson’s off season was poor just because of injury. But again, next week we will be six months into the season, so whining about a poor off season, for whatever reason, seems ridiculous at this look.


You seem to have a really hard time understanding that Petterson’s comments don’t relate to this year. He was speaking about last season, so there is no question as to whether to prefer this direct testimony to Dhaliwal’s rumour of today. If they applied to the same period, and I preferred the rumour, you’d have a point.

As for Brisson, I don’t fully reject this comment. I’ve said a number of times that I believe Pettersson had to train around his injury as he stated in the preseason. That doesn’t mean that he didn’t also not put in the required effort in the off season as Allvin has implied. Both can be true.


It’s not that complicated. If there are two sources of evidence for one event I generally prefer direct testimony to rumours. This was the case for the Brisson and JR vs. Friedman evidence.

This principle didn’t apply to the Dhaliwal evidence since there was no contradictory direct evidence; I.e., Pettersson’s testimony related to an earlier period and Brisson’s testimony never stated Pettersson was injured.


Petey, by his own account, described his injury as “nagging”. Star players play through nagging injuries all the time.

I’m waiting for you to find even one example.

We know what his injury is, patellar tendinitis. We know the nature of the injury, the tendon is inflamed, and guess what inflamed tendons don’t transfer loads as well because instead of it being stiff and strong, it gets flabby and soft. Considering it’s the main way force is transferred from quads to the tibia, it explains the reduction in speed.
Him saying how he feels about the injury is qualitative. Guess what, we have edge data that shows quantitively the impact of this “nagging” injury, It turned him from a 95th percentile skater to below averages.

I am pretty damn sure there are no athletes that plays with a “nagging” injury that reduces their speed down from 95th percentile to below average. Like I said, the only comparable is Mik and even with a torn ACL, his speed drop off wasn’t even as dramatic.

Okay, doc. Except the majority of athletes diagnosed with tendonitis return to play after only a week of rest and you're suggesting Pettersson has an outlier case very rarely seen in hockey.

Well he didn’t even get any time off, he just continued to play with it for like 4 months.
I mean that itself is an outlier because other athletes at least get rested right away.

 

[IslandBeast]

This needs to be studied

 

[aight]

This is the worst thread on this company's servers.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Jesus Christ I can't tell if the 'Pettersson doesn't care' posters are blinded by emotion, completely binary thinkers, or just struggle with reading comprehension.

This exhausting and repetitive false dichotomy of 'either he's hurt and it's malpractice by our medical staff, or he doesn't care and sucks and f***ed my wife' is just deciding on a conclusion and working backwards.

There's. A. Third. Option.

Most evidence points to him being hurt before and still nursing some pain. But the injury made it so he couldn't train properly (or didn't train properly) and he can't regain that strength and is trying to catch a moving train as he tries to recover from a lack of muscle and fitness.

This would not be a reason for a medical staff to shut a player down. But it would be a reason that player would look worse, have his confidence affected, be bullied by a MAGA dipshit teammate, have his confidence affected further, and then look worse, then have our shit media pile on (and he handles the media poorly, no question), then play worse.

I will say it again for the people in the back. He isn't going to magically look like Datsyukian Petey again this year. if you need that to stop screaming into your pillow, PLEASE STOP WATCHING for all of our sakes.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Someone called in last night and the one thing I agreed with them on was "The easiest part of the job is talking to the media. The easiest."

Just because you're an introvert doesn't give you carte blanche to treat people in a way you wouldn't like. And that sword really does cut both ways.

This is what got the foolish Van fans driving Gillis out of town

i’ve stayed out of the pettersson injury truther discussions, but last night in the third when he whiffed on that shot from the right circle, he seized for a good two seconds before he was able to move again. i’m not a doctor but it really looked like something was physically wrong with him, though i have no idea what.

anyone else notice this?

Most people watching did.

The Hateful 8 posters here dont know what you are talking about. #excuse

 

[Green Blank Stare]

They should shut him down for the season.

 

[Bleach Clean]

You are really having a hard time understanding this. I prefer direct testimony to rumours. This is a logical decision because one can expect the actual people in the situation to provide more credible evidence than some third party that is receiving information regarding the situation. This isn’t an absolute rule. In the contract extension debate I applied this rule. Currently, I didn’t, because there is no direct testimony. Pettersson’s previous direct treatment is clearly not relevant. So there is just Dhaliwal’s rumour. Again, I don’t know why you have such a hard time with this. I thought you finally got it when you abandoned your misuse of the term selection bias but I guess not.

I did. I never refuted what Pettersson said. I always accepted that he was injured after he confirmed that. The question was whether his “nagging” injury, in his own words, was the predominant cause of his poor play.

Again, another one of your strawmans.

Brisson didn’t take the legs out of this argument. He, very tellingly, never said Pettersson was currently injured. My argument, as you stated above, was that I didn’t think Allvin would publicly call Pettersson out for his poor play if he was currently injured. So how does Brisson staying that Petey had a poor off season because of injury change this?

Clearly the parties disagree as to whether Pettersson’s off season was poor just because of injury. But again, next week we will be six months into the season, so whining about a poor off season, for whatever reason, seems ridiculous at this look.

You seem to have a really hard time understanding that Petterson’s comments don’t relate to this year. He was speaking about last season, so there is no question as to whether to prefer this direct testimony to Dhaliwal’s rumour of today. If they applied to the same period, and I preferred the rumour, you’d have a point.

As for Brisson, I don’t fully reject this comment. I’ve said a number of times that I believe Pettersson had to train around his injury as he stated in the preseason. That doesn’t mean that he didn’t also not put in the required effort in the off season as Allvin has implied. Both can be true.

It’s not that complicated. If there are two sources of evidence for one event I generally prefer direct testimony to rumours. This was the case for the Brisson and JR vs. Friedman evidence.

This principle didn’t apply to the Dhaliwal evidence since there was no contradictory direct evidence; I.e., Pettersson’s testimony related to an earlier period and Brisson’s testimony never stated Pettersson was injured.

Brisson never said Pettersson was uninjured either.

What is true remains true until proven untrue.

The base state is that Pettersson himself said that his January injury last year impacted his performance down the stretch. He cites this as the cause to his decline in performance. (Lalji, year end presser)

That you have reset that base state is one of the most two-faced maneuvers I have seen done here. Pettersson's statement carries over, just like his speed data has... Dhaliwal isn't speaking into a vacuum because you want to clean the slate.

And about Dhaliwal, this is what you had to say about him when he broke their intent to draft Willander: "No one should take these rumours seriously".

Last, Brisson confirming the injury directly refutes management's 'no injury' position last year. Disconnect (you were wrong). It also outlines the misalignment in offseason training expectations. It assails management, the authority you relied upon for your conjecture.

Re: Brisson and JR vs Friedman: It was more like JR + Friedman + Dhaliwal + Seravalli vs Brisson. JR implied the CAR rumour may have had an impact on Pettersson, not that it was a fait accompli. None of the intel aligns with Brisson's statement then.

But I guess we shouldn't take those rumours seriously, just take them seriously now...? Or take Brisson as the primary source,, but not now when he speaks against management? Or pretend all info is lost because it happened before the off-season? You know, pick the right cherries...

(Selection bias)

Anyway.

 

[I am toxic]

This is the worst thread on this company's servers.

There is an ignore button

But please don't , we want to keep the title-holder of worst post in worst thread on this company's servers watching this