Player Discussion Juraj Slafkovsky Discussion

[River Meadow]

It's weird here at times. I was called a hater of Kirby Dach, and to this day, there are long-time posters who won't interact with me because of my takes on his game. He ended up injured but up till that point, he was in the running for the green jacket, even when the team had turned it's fortunes around.

I have been accused of being a Xhekaj lover/worshipper, when, in reality, I loved the physical element he brought to the team and how it allowed everyone to grow taller and bigger on the ice.

People defend David Savard because he kills penalties lol. That's not the only thing he kills, he is killing the careers of Struble and Xhekaj while he rides off into the sunset.

Message boards are strange. Even when the team is doing well, there are some who are more fixated on grinding axes than forgetting old grudges and enjoying the moment.

Yeah... I really dislike the "all or nothing" type of approach that we sometime see. I think it's definitely a newer thing as we didn't see this as much back in the day.

Interestingly, I think the below adds a lot of insight into this 'hater' phenomena and why a lot of people resort to it:

Pitfalls of Blanketly Labeling as "Hater"

Stifles Genuine Dialogue: When disagreement or criticism—no matter how politely expressed—is dismissed as "hate," it shuts down opportunities for productive conversation and learning. This can prevent the exchange of new ideas and perspectives, leading to echo chambers where only supportive voices are tolerated.

Conflation of Disagreement with Malice: Not all critical feedback is hateful. Polite, thoughtful dissent is often mischaracterized as trolling or hating, which discourages nuanced discussion and fosters a hostile environment for those who wish to engage respectfully.

Encourages Defensive or Tribal Behavior: Quickly labeling someone as a "hater" can be a defensive mechanism to protect one's ego or group identity. This often leads to polarization, where any challenge to the prevailing view is seen as an attack, rather than an opportunity for dialogue.

Promotes Low Emotional Intelligence Responses: Resorting to name-calling or dismissive labels is frequently a sign of low emotional intelligence. It reflects an inability to articulate thoughts or manage emotions constructively, often rooted in insecurity or envy.

Reinforces Toxic Online Culture: Overuse of such labels can create a toxic cycle, where people are less willing to engage in meaningful discussion and more likely to respond with further hostility or disengagement.

Reasons Why People Use the "Hater" Label Blanketly

Avoiding Discomfort or Criticism: Labeling dissenters as "haters" is an easy way to avoid confronting uncomfortable feedback or engaging with challenging ideas. It allows individuals to dismiss criticism without reflection or self-examination.

Seeking Social Validation: In online communities, there is often pressure to conform to group norms. Dismissing outsiders or critics as "haters" can be a way to reinforce in-group solidarity and gain approval from peers.

Lack of Argumentation Skills: Some resort to labeling because they lack the tools or confidence to engage in substantive debate. Using loaded terms can be a shortcut to discredit opposing views without addressing their content.

Emotional Reactivity: Emotional impulses, such as feeling attacked or threatened, can prompt defensive labeling. This is especially common when people feel insecure or perceive criticism as a personal affront.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Is this a real claim?

You've never cried in your life?

Yeah I’m too tough

 

[Le Tricolore]

So let me get this straight.

People bash Slafkvosky for not caring enough when he plays. Those same people are now bashing him for being emotional after a game? So which is it? Does he care too much or not enough?

Slaf, despite not putting up points, has been great, IMO. Winning battles, moving the pucks and trying to create chances.

Canadiens fans are so much more annoying when the team wins a few games than they are when the team's in last place.

 

[Redux91]

Conflation of Disagreement with Malice: Not all critical feedback is hateful. Polite, thoughtful dissent is often mischaracterized as trolling or hating, which discourages nuanced discussion and fosters a hostile environment for those who wish to engage respectfully.

If what you couple of guys think you do is 'critical feedback' and that it's 'polite and thoughtful' I got news for ya bud..

 

[TomKosto]

So let me get this straight.

People bash Slafkvosky for not caring enough when he plays. Those same people are now bashing him for being emotional after a game? So which is it? Does he care too much or not enough?

Slaf, despite not putting up points, has been great, IMO. Winning battles, moving the pucks and trying to create chances.

Canadiens fans are so much more annoying when the team wins a few games than they are when the team's in last place.

It just kinds strange seeing someone almost cry after a game 2 lost. I have no problem with him being emotional but it was a bit too much lol. We are still in this series, only lost games by one goal. If we win next one, it changes everything. Take a deep breathe Slaf.

 

[rien]

So let me get this straight.

People bash Slafkvosky for not caring enough when he plays. Those same people are now bashing him for being emotional after a game? So which is it? Does he care too much or not enough?

Slaf, despite not putting up points, has been great, IMO. Winning battles, moving the pucks and trying to create chances.

Canadiens fans are so much more annoying when the team wins a few games than they are when the team's in last place.

The Slaf criticism since the beginning of last season are not based on good faith. Not even 10% of the negative posts towards him are constructive.

 

[Balthazar]

People bash Slafkvosky for not caring enough when he plays. Those same people are now bashing him for being emotional after a game?

You call it emotional but "I suck and should have done more" is getting old.

 

[Le Tricolore]

You call it emotionl but "I suck and should have done more" is getting old.

He's hard on himself. All of his life he was dominating, and now he's in the NHL, in his first playoffs, and isn't. It'll happen.

He definitely hasn't sucked.

 

[TomKosto]

Why do we get crybabies like Slaf, Crosby and McDavid. We need real men like Mike Ribeiro that laugh and never take anything too seriously.

McDavid just lost game 7 of the finals while carrying the team.Didnt cried after game2…it’s ok to cry, not just mid series IMO. Anyway it’s not that big of a deal, but it was def weird seeing that.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

He's hard on himself. All of his life he was dominating, and now he's in the NHL, in his first playoffs, and isn't. It'll happen.

He definitely hasn't sucked.

I want to clarify that I love the emotion and that he cares, but it’s definitely gonna pump Washington up that they got one of our best players in tears after two games

He is gonna hear some chirps in game 3 lol

 

[rien]

You call it emotional but "I suck and should have done more" is getting old.

Reading this type of post is getting old.

 

[Miller Time]

Not to be "that guy" but if I wrote what you wrote here you would call me an insensitive asshole in one form of wording or another.

?

Not sure what you mean.

Appears we have a very different understanding of the word "hope".

Hoping a player can channel emotion into motivation isnt a complaint nor a critique, if anything, it's an optimistic statement that, unless offered sarcastically, comes from a belief in the future potential...

I hope CC scores 50 goals one day.
I hope Guhle becomes a top tier #1D
I hope Slaf has a career trajectory that makes him a HOF.

That's a far different type of statement than the heavy and largely baseless complaints about Slaf's play... Particularly the ones used to justify overly pessimistic outlooks on his future performance potential.

2 entirely different perspectives imo, I find it odd that you'd conflate them

Also not to be that guy either but if I wrote that (Hopefully he translates all that emotion into drive in the offseason.) in relation to him putting that into his play on the ice I'd get called a "hater".

Not by me.

So I guess where we draw the line is questioning or criticizing any on ice stuff, but anything related to the offseason is fine.

Only line drawn is between baseless hot takes and grounded ones.

Some differing assessments are as simple as "you see 6, I see 9"... But that's a matter of vantage point. Once we can agree on what side we're looking from, it's either 6 or 9. Looking at a 6 and calling it a 9 is a bad take... Bad takes are bad takes.

 

[River Meadow]

If what you couple of guys think you do is 'critical feedback' and that it's 'polite and thoughtful' I got news for ya bud..

I'm sorry if it feels hurtful and not polite at times.

Slaf still has a lot of time to get better though and be more consistent.

You would agree he has room to improve on various things, including but not limited to his consistency... right?

 

[Redux91]

You call it emotional but "I suck and should have done more" is getting old.

Accountability.
And taking it for others too because we didn't lose because of HIM

What you want him to flat out say "yeah well, shit happens eh, but ill tell ya, we lost because of fat ass over there and I don't even KNOW what Matheson is doing out there most times..
And don't get me started on those Refs blah blah blah"
?

 

[Redux91]

I'm sorry if it feels hurtful and not polite at times.

Slaf still has a lot of time to get better though and be more consistent.

You would agree he has room to improve on various things, including but not limited to his consistency... right?

Finally a sensible post lol, I knew you had it in you,

And yes I would agree.

 

[Balthazar]

He's hard on himself. All of his life he was dominating, and now he's in the NHL, in his first playoffs, and isn't. It'll happen.

He definitely hasn't sucked.

I get that he has to face the media weekly and there's a language barrier but it's the kind of stuff that loses its meaning if you repeat it all the time.

I'm not mad at the kid, Chantal or someone else should coach him for this.

 

[River Meadow]

You call it emotional but "I suck and should have done more" is getting old.

Valid point.

Showing SO much emotion after the game and on the bench, but not so much on the ice, is getting a bit old.

Lay that sh*t all out on the ice.

 

[Miller Time]

Yeah... I really dislike the "all or nothing" type of approach that we sometime see. I think it's definitely a newer thing as we didn't see this as much back in the day.

Interestingly, I think the below adds a lot of insight into this 'hater' phenomena and why a lot of people resort to it:

Pitfalls of Blanketly Labeling as "Hater"

Stifles Genuine Dialogue: When disagreement or criticism—no matter how politely expressed—is dismissed as "hate," it shuts down opportunities for productive conversation and learning. This can prevent the exchange of new ideas and perspectives, leading to echo chambers where only supportive voices are tolerated.

Conflation of Disagreement with Malice: Not all critical feedback is hateful. Polite, thoughtful dissent is often mischaracterized as trolling or hating, which discourages nuanced discussion and fosters a hostile environment for those who wish to engage respectfully.

Encourages Defensive or Tribal Behavior: Quickly labeling someone as a "hater" can be a defensive mechanism to protect one's ego or group identity. This often leads to polarization, where any challenge to the prevailing view is seen as an attack, rather than an opportunity for dialogue.

Promotes Low Emotional Intelligence Responses: Resorting to name-calling or dismissive labels is frequently a sign of low emotional intelligence. It reflects an inability to articulate thoughts or manage emotions constructively, often rooted in insecurity or envy.

Reinforces Toxic Online Culture: Overuse of such labels can create a toxic cycle, where people are less willing to engage in meaningful discussion and more likely to respond with further hostility or disengagement.

Reasons Why People Use the "Hater" Label Blanketly

Avoiding Discomfort or Criticism: Labeling dissenters as "haters" is an easy way to avoid confronting uncomfortable feedback or engaging with challenging ideas. It allows individuals to dismiss criticism without reflection or self-examination.

Seeking Social Validation: In online communities, there is often pressure to conform to group norms. Dismissing outsiders or critics as "haters" can be a way to reinforce in-group solidarity and gain approval from peers.

Lack of Argumentation Skills: Some resort to labeling because they lack the tools or confidence to engage in substantive debate. Using loaded terms can be a shortcut to discredit opposing views without addressing their content.

Emotional Reactivity: Emotional impulses, such as feeling attacked or threatened, can prompt defensive labeling. This is especially common when people feel insecure or perceive criticism as a personal affront.

"Some resort to labeling because they lack the tools or confidence to engage in substantive debate."

"Bust"
"Soft"
"Low IQ"

Exactly the types of labels applied to Slaf often by the very same posters crying about being "labelled a hater".

That kind of hypocrisy and incoherence is what makes for the worst takes, and that kind of toxic posting has flooded these boards of late.

If the shoe fits, wear it, if it doesn't, why bother trying to rationalize or justify the poor posting from those for whom it fits.

 

[OldCraig71]

Yep. If he can bring his dominant self…awesome.

I don’t see crying as a bad thing(NOT saying you do at all). I had a bunch of therapy and I’m WAY better now after having it. And I cry a LOT more lol.

I cry here and there, not ashamed to admit it. I think it's good once and a while, a reset if you will.

 

[waitin425]

When feeling shame, people often mask it with anger. I didn't see tears but his voice certainly cracked. I think he will feel shame because of that. That shame is going to come out as anger. I expect Slaf to be unleashed tomorrow. I actually worry about him doing something stupid.

Also.....like my old buddy above.....I cry too. Everybody cries.........sometimes.......so hold on.........hold on

 

[OldCraig71]

Is this a real claim?

You've never cried in your life?

He cried when he broke the Demidov story.

 

[Andy]

So let me get this straight.

People bash Slafkvosky for not caring enough when he plays. Those same people are now bashing him for being emotional after a game? So which is it? Does he care too much or not enough?

Slaf, despite not putting up points, has been great, IMO. Winning battles, moving the pucks and trying to create chances.

Canadiens fans are so much more annoying when the team wins a few games than they are when the team's in last place.

The Slaf expectations are completely bonkers right now.

He is not allowed to make a mistake. He doesn't make any more wonky plays or misreads than Suzuki and Caufield do and I am being 100% serious.

There is an insane underappreciation for all the dirty work he does for Cole and Nick that allowed them to have had their two most successful years with him on their line. There hasn't been another player tried on that line that has been able to keep up and active contributes to its success.

Then there is all these stupid comparisons to Drouin, KK, Galchenyuk and its complete horseshit. Slaf keeps up every game with his first line linemates. He is not out of place and actively contributes to it. Those guys could not keep up at a first line pace for massive stretches.

Dude is constantly deep in the defensive zone (playing a solid defensive game at 21 which no one acknowledges) where he plays like a de-facto puck moving dman. He is constantly at the circles springing cole and nick with passes through the neutral zone. His board play has become underrated because fans want him to crush people. But he effectively wins many of his battles to keep possession and the cycle going. His net front presence, which isn't even his game, has been responsible for so much success. The habs don't score two goals in game 1, and they don't score 2 goals in their clinching game against Caroline without him causing disruption.

And it's absolutely bonkers that this thread exploded with criticisms AFTER last nights game where he was probably the best forward and by far the best on his line. But as soon as he makes one or two misreads, it's game over.

There is so much bad faith here where people are deliberately downplaying his strengths and contributions and overemphasizing mistakes.

It's 100% bizzarro world in this thread.

 

[OldCraig71]

When feeling shame, people often mask it with anger. I didn't see tears but his voice certainly cracked. I think he will feel shame because of that. That shame is going to come out as anger. I expect Slaf to be unleashed tomorrow. I actually worry about him doing something stupid.

Anything short of the police coming on the ice to arrest him is fine by me.

 

[Miller Time]

If what you couple of guys think you do is 'critical feedback' and that it's 'polite and thoughtful' I got news for ya bud..

Cognitive dissonance on full display lol

 

[Balthazar]

Accountability.
And taking it for others too because we didn't lose because of HIM

It you do the same thing every day and apologize for it every day that's not accountability. It means that your apologies are meaningless.