Article content continued

There are a couple of reasons for that.

One, because there are several people in the media who have said continually they are confused by “fans in this market who want a rebuild but get mad when they lose.”

(They could have picked out moj or donny too here).

Two, I know at the very top of the Canucks organization there are executives who continue to be confused by the same thoughts.

So if the Canucks brass and influential media members don’t get the position of a significant percentage of the fanbase, someone needs to step in and explain it.

Enter Jackson.

“What MacIntyre is completely failing to understand here, as others have before him, is the distinction between criticism of process and criticism of results.

“I don’t claim to have insight into the thoughts and feelings of every Canucks fan, but the majority of the criticism I’ve seen and the majority of which we’ve published in this space and others like it, has very little to do with the fact that the Canucks are losing, and much more to do with how they’re losing.

“They’ve been raked over the coals for playing boring, low-event hockey, for doling out undeserved ice time to marginal players, or for scratching promising youngsters, but they’ve rarely been criticized simply for failing to close out games.”

The key being the “distinction between criticism of process and criticism of results.”

As for imac’s response referencing pigs and mud, I would have advised against it, not that he’d listen to me.

Truth is, he has taken shots at the analytics community and now they’ve fired shots back.

It would be better for everyone if they’d hash it out, and give us a good public debate.

And a good show too.

You know, like old times.

imac responded by turning it into analytics vs msm thing

Not what I was hoping for myself. Was thinking Van had grown past this.

Because I really do believe there’s an issue that’s important here.