Islanders @ Leafs - Jan. 7th, 7:00pm - TSN, SN 590

[Highlander]

Lets not go back to Phil bashing?.took us till playing Boston to forgetting about the 2 # ones.  And now Sequin is gone to hockey hell, the U.S southwest.

 

[Crucialness Key]

You know what's funny, in roughly the same amount of games played, Kessel has exactly the same amount of GWG as Sidney Crosby. This year he has 4, which is around, or better than all of Crosby, Sharp and Ovechkin, the top 3 goal scorers.

Yeah but GWG in the NHL is kind of silly - wish it worked like Game-winning RBI (the one that puts you ahead to stay, right?)

 

[OldTimeHockey]

You know what's funny, in roughly the same amount of games played, Kessel has exactly the same amount of GWG as Sidney Crosby. This year he has 4, which is around, or better than all of Crosby, Sharp and Ovechkin, the top 3 goal scorers.

Yeah but GWG in the NHL is kind of silly - wish it worked like Game-winning RBI (the one that puts you ahead to stay, right?)

I'm not sure what you mean

 

[Crucialness Key]

You know what's funny, in roughly the same amount of games played, Kessel has exactly the same amount of GWG as Sidney Crosby. This year he has 4, which is around, or better than all of Crosby, Sharp and Ovechkin, the top 3 goal scorers.

Yeah but GWG in the NHL is kind of silly - wish it worked like Game-winning RBI (the one that puts you ahead to stay, right?)

I'm not sure what you mean

In NHL the GWG is awarded to whoever scored the (opponent's total +1) goal, regardless of context.  So if the Leafs go up 5-0 and wind up winning 5-3, then whoever scored goal #4 gets the GWG, even though the first goal was what broke the tie and put the team ahead to stay.

Whereas with MLB rules the first goal would be the GWG since the Leafs were ahead from that point on.

Not that this kind of thing happens all the time, but I've seen a bunch of games where an easy run-up-the-score goal in one period transforms into a GWG by the end of the game.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

You know what's funny, in roughly the same amount of games played, Kessel has exactly the same amount of GWG as Sidney Crosby. This year he has 4, which is around, or better than all of Crosby, Sharp and Ovechkin, the top 3 goal scorers.

Yeah but GWG in the NHL is kind of silly - wish it worked like Game-winning RBI (the one that puts you ahead to stay, right?)

I'm not sure what you mean

In NHL the GWG is awarded to whoever scored the (opponent's total +1) goal, regardless of context.  So if the Leafs go up 5-0 and wind up winning 5-3, then whoever scored goal #4 gets the GWG, even though the first goal was what broke the tie and put the team ahead to stay.

Whereas with MLB rules the first goal would be the GWG since the Leafs were ahead from that point on.

Not that this kind of thing happens all the time, but I've seen a bunch of games where an easy run-up-the-score goal in one period transforms into a GWG by the end of the game.

I had no idea baseball operated that way. Interesting

 

[bustaheims]

I had no idea baseball operated that way. Interesting

To be fair, baseball doesn't actually officially record game winning RBIs. It's more about which pitcher gets credited with the win. If you're pitching when your team takes the lead and it never relinquishes that lead, you get the win. Same with the losing pitcher - if you surrender a lead that is not overcome, you get the loss.

 

[Syntax McLawdog]

I had no idea baseball operated that way. Interesting

To be fair, baseball doesn't actually officially record game winning RBIs. It's more about which pitcher gets credited with the win. If you're pitching when your team takes the lead and it never relinquishes that lead, you get the win. Same with the losing pitcher - if you surrender a lead that is not overcome, you get the loss.

I'm pretty sure there are at least 8 years of MLB that disagree with you, so saying they "don't officially record game-winning R.B.I.s" is incorrect. They don't currently attribute them, though they are recorded.
Your punctuation and use of smarmy adverbs were corrected for free. The rest of this costs about three-fiddy. 

 

[bustaheims]

I'm pretty sure there are at least 8 years of MLB that disagree with you, so saying they "don't officially record game-winning RBIs" is incorrect. They don't currently attribute them, though they are recorded.
Your punctuation and use of smarmy adverbs were corrected for free. The rest of this costs about three-fiddy.

It's not part of their official stat pack. It's not a stat they officially release to the public. I don't doubt that organizations like the Elias Sports Bureau record such things, but, as far as MLB is concerned, it's not an officially recognized statistic. They may acknowledge who drove in the winning run, but it's not something they officially keep a tally of.

 

[Crucialness Key]

I'm pretty sure there are at least 8 years of MLB that disagree with you, so saying they "don't officially record game-winning RBIs" is incorrect. They don't currently attribute them, though they are recorded.
Your punctuation and use of smarmy adverbs were corrected for free. The rest of this costs about three-fiddy.

It's not part of their official stat pack. It's not a stat they officially release to the public. I don't doubt that organizations like the Elias Sports Bureau record such things, but, as far as MLB is concerned, it's not an officially recognized statistic. They may acknowledge who drove in the winning run, but it's not something they officially keep a tally of.

I guess I'm thinking of seeing the GWRBI listed in boxscores or something like that. Huh, I always thought it was official. D'oh.

Well I still think they should change how they award GWG in the NHL. 

 

[Syntax McLawdog]

It's not part of their official stat pack. It's not a stat they officially release to the public. I don't doubt that organizations like the Elias Sports Bureau record such things, but, as far as MLB is concerned, it's not an officially recognized statistic. They may acknowledge who drove in the winning run, but it's not something they officially keep a tally of.

It is not currently "official", but was from 1980 through 1988. My only point is that suggesting they don't is a far cry from the truth. They do not currently.
I understand your criticism of the stat, but i think Crucialness Key's point could have done without your erroneous claim.

 

[bustaheims]

It is not currently "official", but was from 1980 through 1988. My only point is that suggesting they don't is a far cry from the truth. They do not currently.
I understand your criticism of the stat, but i think Crucialness Key's point could have done without your erroneous claim.

I never once said they never kept track of it, but, saying that they don't officially keep track of it is the truth. They don't - as in, they currently do not. "Don't" is present tense, not all encompassing.

 

[Crucialness Key]

It is not currently "official", but was from 1980 through 1988. My only point is that suggesting they don't is a far cry from the truth. They do not currently.
I understand your criticism of the stat, but i think Crucialness Key's point could have done without your erroneous claim.

I never once said they never kept track of it, but, saying that they don't officially keep track of it is the truth. They don't - as in, they currently do not. "Don't" is present tense, not all encompassing.

I think we should use the definition of "don't" like they do in MLS.   

 

[bustaheims]

I think we should use the definition of "don't" like they do in MLS. 

I don't follow MLS, so I don't know what that means.

 

[Crucialness Key]

I think we should use the definition of "don't" like they do in MLS. 

I don't follow MLS, so I don't know what that means.

Major League Soccer, where "don't" is defined by who first didn't not do something when they didn't not fail to not hold the lead.

 

[Syntax McLawdog]

I never once said they never kept track of it, but, saying that they don't officially keep track of it is the truth. They don't - as in, they currently do not. "Don't" is present tense, not all encompassing.

I think we both know what you tried to do. This is a big problem with long-term contracts, as well. It leads to a sense of entitlement. Your acumen for basic tense aside, the implications of stating that MLB "do not" officially track this statistic is unfair to my client, Mr. Key. What he said was fair, and you just felt like being a pedantic little man, didn't you?

 

[Crucialness Key]

I never once said they never kept track of it, but, saying that they don't officially keep track of it is the truth. They don't - as in, they currently do not. "Don't" is present tense, not all encompassing.

I think we both know what you tried to do. This is a big problem with long-term contracts, as well. It leads to a sense of entitlement. Your acumen for basic tense aside, the implications of stating that MLB "do not" officially track this statistic is unfair to my client, Mr. Key. What he said was fair, and you just felt like being a pedantic little man, didn't you?

REALLY DUDES I'M FINE JUST STOP FIGHTING  :'(

 

[Syntax McLawdog]

As your attorney, i advise you not to advise me to stop fighting.

 

[Crucialness Key]

 

[Syntax McLawdog]

Can't stop. Won't stop!

 

[Crucialness Key]

Can't stop. Won't stop!