Playoff Hockey Thread part 2.

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/
Status
Not open for further replies.

zbubble

Registered User
Jul 29, 2005
2,574
209
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/bobby-ryan-senators-playoffs-why-not-us/



Here is what Bobby Ryan said about his less than stellar regular season that a lot of people didn't know about.

To know Ryan’s story is to understand his struggle this season.

By all accounts, those close to Ryan and the Senators say his coping with his mother’s death would help explain his toughest year as a professional hockey player as much as the injuries that caused him to miss 19 games.

It’s not hard to see why. Ryan's mom wasn’t just his mom, she was his everything - the single mother who worked two different jobs so Ryan could play competitive hockey while his father was in jail for assaulting her.

As much as the Senators say Ryan played well, there is no working your way through that. At one point during the season, Senators coach Guy Boucher sat Ryan for a January game for disciplinary reasons.

“He had a lot of things to manage,†Boucher said Saturday night. “Bobby had a tough year also on a personal level, and there’s nothing you can do about that. Some years are tougher than others in that respect.â€

Ryan, 30, called these playoffs a shot at “redemption.â€

“It's a refresh, I think, for me. I think it was a complete restart,†Ryan said post-game. “I just knew at some point those pucks that I had been chasing all year long in front of the net, they were going to come.â€

http://www.tsn.ca/ryan-anderson-lead-senators-to-ot-win-over-penguins-in-game-1-of-ecf-1.751196
 

NotABadPeriod

ForFriendshipDikembe
Oct 28, 2006
52,484
9,521
Time for another OT game.
Ducks' lack of discipline gave the Preds life in the last 8 minutes.

Yet the Ducks PK was very, very good. They really should have been able to get away with it. An extended 5-on-3 and they got what, 3 clears and no shots?

But these Preds keep showing in the playoffs that they just won't be denied.
 

La Cosa Nostra

Caporegime
Jun 25, 2009
14,102
2,375
So happy the Ducks won. Holy cross checking on the Preds gtg too.

And any true Sabres fan can not be rooting for the Preds. Laviolette is literally the biggest ****** in the universe (even bigger then John Edward). I will never hope a team that he is coaching wins a cup.

Still hoping for a Ducks-Pens finals. That would be the most entertaining.
 

AustonsNostrils

Registered User
Apr 5, 2016
7,409
2,535
So happy the Ducks won. Holy cross checking on the Preds gtg too.

And any true Sabres fan can not be rooting for the Preds. Laviolette is literally the biggest ****** in the universe (even bigger then John Edward). I will never hope a team that he is coaching wins a cup.

Still hoping for a Ducks-Pens finals. That would be the most entertaining.

‘No True Scotsman’ Fallacy

Example

The No True Scotsman fallacy involves discounting evidence that would refute a proposition, concluding that it hasn’t been falsified when in fact it has.

If Angus, a Glaswegian, who puts sugar on his porridge, is proposed as a counter-example to the claim “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridgeâ€, the ‘No true Scotsman’ fallacy would run as follows:

(1) Angus puts sugar on his porridge.
(2) No (true) Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.
Therefore:
(3) Angus is not a (true) Scotsman.
Therefore:
(4) Angus is not a counter-example to the claim that no Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.
 

Sabre Dance

Make Hockey Fun Again
Jul 27, 2006
12,600
2,378
If we get a Ducks - Sens final, it will be the playoff series of the Bobby Ryan trade.

Tim Murray Final. Had a lot to do with both teams. I honestly think it's the Hockey God's punishing us again. We fire Murray, teams he helped build play for the cup. Just more torture.
 

sabrebuild

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
10,517
2,770
Pittsburgh
‘No True Scotsman’ Fallacy

Example

The No True Scotsman fallacy involves discounting evidence that would refute a proposition, concluding that it hasn’t been falsified when in fact it has.

If Angus, a Glaswegian, who puts sugar on his porridge, is proposed as a counter-example to the claim “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridgeâ€, the ‘No true Scotsman’ fallacy would run as follows:

(1) Angus puts sugar on his porridge.
(2) No (true) Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.
Therefore:
(3) Angus is not a (true) Scotsman.
Therefore:
(4) Angus is not a counter-example to the claim that no Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.

But who determines what logic is?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad