Injury Report: Andrew MacDonald out for 6 weeks (lower body injury)

[deadhead]

No, but it should be, the Cap'n pretends to be a bee, but in truth he's an American Beauty.

 

[Tripod]

I’m not sure what is so difficult to grasp for people. Sanheim was deployed in situations against Pittsburgh much less likely to lead to ES goals against.

Sanheim had the 2nd highest offensive zone start ratio among the D at 53% of non neutral zone starts (Ghost had 58%, Hagg & Provorov 44%, Gudas 35%, Mac 34%, Manning 29%).

Sanheim faced the easiest xGF% QoC of anyone on the entire roster in the playoffs except Weise. Much behind the other D, except only slightly behind Hagg. (Ghost was 3rd behind Provorov & Mac.)

Despite his relatively weak competition & advantageous zone starts, he only had 1 point in 4 games (and for those, unlike me, who adore Corsi, his CF% was still only 48.68–below Manning who had way more difficult usage).

And frankly he just looked overwhelmed. He got his chance. He didn’t play well despite extremely sheltered use. He wasn’t going to kill penalties. So if there’s a guy to switch up on D after 4 mediocre games, it was going to be him.

And acting like playing Hagg over Sanheim in games 5 & 6 “hurt” the team, as some have said, is ludicrous. The insane overrating of Sanheim’s play last season continues...

So you think you look impartial even though:

You are criticizing him for 1 point in 4 games. And that 1 point was a goal....the last goal the team scored in 2 games.

You are criticizing a Dman for being on the ice for 1 goal against in 4 games.

Maybe Sanheim was playing "scared". You know, focusing on defense 1st....listening to the coach.

Who were his forwards that he played with? Do they have anything to do with getting outplayed?

You think you are impartial and you are not. It's obvious to everyone.

 

[Adtar02]

I’m not sure what is so difficult to grasp for people. Sanheim was deployed in situations against Pittsburgh much less likely to lead to ES goals against.

Sanheim had the 2nd highest offensive zone start ratio among the D at 53% of non neutral zone starts (Ghost had 58%, Hagg & Provorov 44%, Gudas 35%, Mac 34%, Manning 29%).

Sanheim faced the easiest xGF% QoC of anyone on the entire roster in the playoffs except Weise. Much behind the other D, except only slightly behind Hagg. (Ghost was 3rd behind Provorov & Mac.)

Despite his relatively weak competition & advantageous zone starts, he only had 1 point in 4 games (and for those, unlike me, who adore Corsi, his CF% was still only 48.68–below Manning who had way more difficult usage).

And frankly he just looked overwhelmed. He got his chance. He didn’t play well despite extremely sheltered use. He wasn’t going to kill penalties. So if there’s a guy to switch up on D after 4 mediocre games, it was going to be him.

And acting like playing Hagg over Sanheim in games 5 & 6 “hurt” the team, as some have said, is ludicrous. The insane overrating of Sanheim’s play last season continues...

he also had the low quality of teammate. making it hard to do well its all context. and no offense but the playoffs are long gone. mac is a 4-5 at best. same with gudas manning is a 6-7 same with hagg. Sanhiem has the skills to be a 1-4 but is young and need to improve as a rookie I'd say we saw a 4-6 play most nights last year not playoffs. the whole year. at times he flashed a 3 skill set. and could drive play up ice like ghost.

Also would like to know how many of Mac's GF that he was on ice for were game six when Coots went off????

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

No, but it should be, the Cap'n pretends to be a bee, but in truth he's an American Beauty.

That's true, I am adorable.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

So you think you look impartial even though:

You are criticizing him for 1 point in 4 games. And that 1 point was a goal....the last goal the team scored in 2 games.

You are criticizing a Dman for being on the ice for 1 goal against in 4 games.

Maybe Sanheim was playing "scared". You know, focusing on defense 1st....listening to the coach.

Who were his forwards that he played with? Do they have anything to do with getting outplayed?

You think you are impartial and you are not. It's obvious to everyone.

1. “So you think you look impartial...”
- Don’t know how I look, especially to those who are convinced Hakstol can do no right & Sanheim can do no wrong. But I think I’m a heck of a lot more impartial than those who want to ignore that Sanheim had the easiest deployment among Flyer defensemen & want to blame Sanheim’s nevertheless mediocre at best playoffs on bald conjecture that the coach psychologically held him back.

2. “You are criticizing him for 1 point in 4 games.”
- No, I’m saying he received very advantageous zone starts & the 2nd lowest QoC of the entire roster in the playoffs, & for everyone acting like he was the team’s 2nd best playoff defenseman you’d think he would have done more. People act like he was better than MacDonald, yet MacDonald had 2 goals & played way more difficult minutes. But I’m the biased one for saying AMac was better in the playoffs? Hmmm.

3. “You are criticizing [Sanheim] for being on the ice for 1 goal against in 4 games.”
- No I’m not. (Actually he was on the ice for 2 goals against — one was 5 on 5, another was 4 on 4, hence his -1, but I won’t nitpick.) Anyway, What I’m criticizing are people’s acting like Sanheim’s GA are equally comparable to the other Flyers’ defensemen who all had to play in much tougher situations against better competition. Good for Sanheim, but important context is being ignored.

4. From the eye test, I thought he struggled and was overwhelmed by the playoff pace at times. That’s ok. He was a rookie, he has a history of being hesitant & initially struggling to adapt to new environments, & the experience will be good for him. He’ll be better next season for it.

5. Who were the forwards he played with? Don’t know, but, just like speculating Hakstol is at fault for Sanheim’s mediocre performance because he made him play “scared,” you seem to be digging hard for excuses for Sanheim. Is he ever personally responsible for mediocre play or is it always someone else’s fault?

Do you think Sanheim received the easiest minutes among Flyers’ defensemen in the playoffs or not?

 

[Beef Invictus]

MacDonald is a hockey butthole. He makes people he plays with worse because he sucks. Sanheim's partners perform better with him, because Sanheim doesn't suck.


MacDonald sucks and if he has to be injured to keep Hakstol from grotesquely misusing him, so be it.

 

[Striiker]

>says people think Hakstol can do no right and Sanheim can do no wrong

>counters by pretending Sanheim can do no right and Hakstol can do no wrong.


That’s what I call impartial.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I’m a Sanheim fan & have been for a while. I still have high hopes for him. I simply think his play last season was overrated by a lot of prominent voices on this board. Especially those contending he was the Flyers’ 2nd best defenseman in the playoffs.

I’ve praised Sanheim plenty of times. But he’s a board favorite & people can’t seem to tolerate anything other than praise for him. Saying that I “preten[d] Sanheim can do no right” is flat-out incorrect & more classic Striiker hyperbole.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Sanheim is rated appropriately as being better than Gudas, Hagg, and MacD. That isn't an overrating, that's where he stands.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Sanheim is rated appropriately as being better than Gudas, Hagg, and MacD. That isn't an overrating, that's where he stands.

You think Sanheim was a more effective player in the playoffs than MacDonald?

 

[Striiker]

Sanheim is rated appropriately as being better than Gudas, Hagg, and MacD. That isn't an overrating, that's where he stands.

WHAT?!?

So they you’re saying Sanheim is the best defensemen to ever play hockey and has never made a mistake?!?!?!?!!

Typical overrating of a board favorite.

 

[TB87]

You think Sanheim was a more effective player in the playoffs than MacDonald?

Sanheim was okay (not bad, not great, just meh). Ghost struggled mightily for some reason that I really can’t fit my head around (size/grit had nothing to do with it). MacDonald was just okay. Provorov was very strong. Gudas and Manning struggled mightily. Hagg hit people a lot. Didn’t see much more than average(ish) play from him as well. The only defenseman who had a good series was Provorov. The others need to be better the next time around in order for the team to win a playoff series. Which should now be the expectation. Just getting in isn’t good enough anymore. There needs to be some progression. If they get smoked again in the first round, Hakstol should be on the hot seat. He’s an average coach who ends to be better as well in order to make it out of the first round. Hopefully this scenario occurs. I’d love to be wrong about Hakstol being the coach before the coach to get the team over the top.

 

[deadhead]

Sanheim was okay (not bad, not great, just meh). Ghost struggled mightily for some reason that I really can’t fit my head around (size/grit had nothing to do with it). MacDonald was just okay. Provorov was very strong. Gudas and Manning struggled mightily. Hagg hit people a lot. Didn’t see much more than average(ish) play from him as well. The only defenseman who had a good series was Provorov. The others need to be better the next time around in order for the team to win a playoff series. Which should now be the expectation. Just getting in isn’t good enough anymore. There needs to be some progression. If they get smoked again in the first round, Hakstol should be on the hot seat. He’s an average coach who ends to be better as well in order to make it out of the first round. Hopefully this scenario occurs. I’d love to be wrong about Hakstol being the coach before the coach to get the team over the top.

That's pretty accurate, won't make the bees happy with you so I'd lay down some smoke, makes 'em sleepy.

I thought Pittsburgh pressured Ghost, who like Giroux, is best on the PP where the man advantage gives him more room to work. Against an aggressive forechecking team with speed (without speed you just deke around them) size matters because if a guy is on top of you all the time you need some mass to protect the puck. That's Voracek's strongest quality.

The two teams in the playoffs who played that style were the Pens and Vegas, TB could but they're too offensive minded to really pressure teams on defense, and Toronto was top heavy.

Which is why I'm interested in seeing Sanheim in camp, Myers got stronger and faster, did Sanheim? Because I think against aggressive forechecking teams you need your defensemen to be able to handle the puck in crowds and still be able to skate out of trouble and pass it down ice. If there's at least one guy on each pair who can do that, you can break the full ice press and create scoring opportunities. Last year it wasn't that hard to bump Sanheim off the puck.

 

[Adtar02]

1. “So you think you look impartial...”
- Don’t know how I look, especially to those who are convinced Hakstol can do no right & Sanheim can do no wrong. But I think I’m a heck of a lot more impartial than those who want to ignore that Sanheim had the easiest deployment among Flyer defensemen & want to blame Sanheim’s nevertheless mediocre at best playoffs on bald conjecture that the coach psychologically held him back.

2. “You are criticizing him for 1 point in 4 games.”
- No, I’m saying he received very advantageous zone starts & the 2nd lowest QoC of the entire roster in the playoffs, & for everyone acting like he was the team’s 2nd best playoff defenseman you’d think he would have done more. People act like he was better than MacDonald, yet MacDonald had 2 goals & played way more difficult minutes. But I’m the biased one for saying AMac was better in the playoffs? Hmmm.

3. “You are criticizing [Sanheim] for being on the ice for 1 goal against in 4 games.”
- No I’m not. (Actually he was on the ice for 2 goals against — one was 5 on 5, another was 4 on 4, hence his -1, but I won’t nitpick.) Anyway, What I’m criticizing are people’s acting like Sanheim’s GA are equally comparable to the other Flyers’ defensemen who all had to play in much tougher situations against better competition. Good for Sanheim, but important context is being ignored.

4. From the eye test, I thought he struggled and was overwhelmed by the playoff pace at times. That’s ok. He was a rookie, he has a history of being hesitant & initially struggling to adapt to new environments, & the experience will be good for him. He’ll be better next season for it.

5. Who were the forwards he played with? Don’t know, but, just like speculating Hakstol is at fault for Sanheim’s mediocre performance because he made him play “scared,” you seem to be digging hard for excuses for Sanheim. Is he ever personally responsible for mediocre play or is it always someone else’s fault?

Do you think Sanheim received the easiest minutes among Flyers’ defensemen in the playoffs or not?

QoT is quality of teammate. It is also context you are ignoring. thats the problem with advance stats you cant use one and ignore the others for context. Biggest problem here is you keep using a extremely small sample size to try and convey some stupid point. In a series that really didnt go well for most the team. And they were severely out coached. all while coughing up dumb turnovers exiting the d zone.

He and ghost surely had the easiest mins. But QoC isnt as good a representation that one use to think. Zone starts dont effect as much as many think. Ask our Statistics guy Appleyard.

 

[Adtar02]

I’m a Sanheim fan & have been for a while. I still have high hopes for him. I simply think his play last season was overrated by a lot of prominent voices on this board. Especially those contending he was the Flyers’ 2nd best defenseman in the playoffs.

I’ve praised Sanheim plenty of times. But he’s a board favorite & people can’t seem to tolerate anything other than praise for him. Saying that I “preten[d] Sanheim can do no right” is flat-out incorrect & more classic Striiker hyperbole.

you $hit on him alot for being a fan of him.

 

[Adtar02]

You think Sanheim was a more effective player in the playoffs than MacDonald?

Not what he said Goal posts.

 

[Tripod]

1. “So you think you look impartial...”
- Don’t know how I look, especially to those who are convinced Hakstol can do no right & Sanheim can do no wrong. But I think I’m a heck of a lot more impartial than those who want to ignore that Sanheim had the easiest deployment among Flyer defensemen & want to blame Sanheim’s nevertheless mediocre at best playoffs on bald conjecture that the coach psychologically held him back.

2. “You are criticizing him for 1 point in 4 games.”
- No, I’m saying he received very advantageous zone starts & the 2nd lowest QoC of the entire roster in the playoffs, & for everyone acting like he was the team’s 2nd best playoff defenseman you’d think he would have done more. People act like he was better than MacDonald, yet MacDonald had 2 goals & played way more difficult minutes. But I’m the biased one for saying AMac was better in the playoffs? Hmmm.

3. “You are criticizing [Sanheim] for being on the ice for 1 goal against in 4 games.”
- No I’m not. (Actually he was on the ice for 2 goals against — one was 5 on 5, another was 4 on 4, hence his -1, but I won’t nitpick.) Anyway, What I’m criticizing are people’s acting like Sanheim’s GA are equally comparable to the other Flyers’ defensemen who all had to play in much tougher situations against better competition. Good for Sanheim, but important context is being ignored.

4. From the eye test, I thought he struggled and was overwhelmed by the playoff pace at times. That’s ok. He was a rookie, he has a history of being hesitant & initially struggling to adapt to new environments, & the experience will be good for him. He’ll be better next season for it.

5. Who were the forwards he played with? Don’t know, but, just like speculating Hakstol is at fault for Sanheim’s mediocre performance because he made him play “scared,” you seem to be digging hard for excuses for Sanheim. Is he ever personally responsible for mediocre play or is it always someone else’s fault?

Do you think Sanheim received the easiest minutes among Flyers’ defensemen in the playoffs or not?

1. I didn't say LOOK impartial. I said you think you ARE impartial.

2. Ok. Why are we discussing only Sanheim to AMac? How was Manning looking with his -4 in 4 games and no points? Benching him was not an option? And before you mention "Sanheim doesn't PK" again...Provy, Gudas, AMac and Hagg could still PK, right? You know, if Manning was removed.

3. Sure, context matters. But you only want GA to be put into context and mention nothing else. What about linemates? Do those not matter?

4. I think at times he struggled, at times he did not. He certainly was never our worst Dman.

5. Mediocre- "If you describe something as mediocre, you mean that it is of average quality but you think it should be better." Even if you say that's how he was playing, was no one playing bad? Reality is, he went up against who who was deployed against and with teammates he has no control over. And he played them even 5vs5. Looks like others are the ones that did not outplay the opponent.

If you say he did, I believe you. Who determines icetime? Who determines who plays against who? Was what we were doing, working? Was there any matchups we were winning? Maybe the change needed to be someone who was loosing the matchups and not one that was playing things even. Or is playing things even while being down 3 games to 1, a bad thing.

I look forward to your impartial response. Actually, don't bother. Your attempt to try and look impartial just makes you look dumb and that's not fair because you aren't.

 

[Adtar02]

You think Sanheim was a more effective player in the playoffs than MacDonald?

I believe his rating is from watching his Season not just a 6 game series in which he only played four games. Before being Benched for Hagg.

If you look at his season its a fair rating. Made mistakes as a rookie. The same exact mistakes that Mac at 32 still makes. not to mention Manning Gudas and Hagg. they all made those mistakes.

His underlining numbers show he pushes the play to the offensive zone at a better rate than the aforementioned D-man. I for one am excited to see how his offseason went and how he plays this year. He could be a stud in the NHL or still flake. But based on how he has proggressed through all other levels I have faith. Honestly why I still have faith in Morin too. Those two prospects/players seem to have a drive and want to improve. Myers has it too but think there is a little less in the IQ side hence he is so aggressive

 

[Ghosts Beer]

QoT is quality of teammate. It is also context you are ignoring. thats the problem with advance stats you cant use one and ignore the others for context. Biggest problem here is you keep using a extremely small sample size to try and convey some stupid point. In a series that really didnt go well for most the team. And they were severely out coached. all while coughing up dumb turnovers exiting the d zone.

He and ghost surely had the easiest mins. But QoC isnt as good a representation that one use to think. Zone starts dont effect as much as many think. Ask our Statistics guy Appleyard.

Zone starts have a significant impact over small sample sizes.
And don’t tell me I’m the one ignoring context when you’re the one who cited “MacDonald was on the ice for 7 5 on 5 GA” by itself, with zero context, ostensibly as evidence he wasn’t the Flyers’ 2nd best defenseman in the series.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I believe his rating is from watching his Season not just a 6 game series in which he only played four games. Before being Benched for Hagg.

If you look at his season its a fair rating. Made mistakes as a rookie. The same exact mistakes that Mac at 32 still makes. not to mention Manning Gudas and Hagg. they all made those mistakes.

His underlining numbers show he pushes the play to the offensive zone at a better rate than the aforementioned D-man. I for one am excited to see how his offseason went and how he plays this year. He could be a stud in the NHL or still flake. But based on how he has proggressed through all other levels I have faith. Honestly why I still have faith in Morin too. Those two prospects/players seem to have a drive and want to improve. Myers has it too but think there is a little less in the IQ side hence he is so aggressive

I was asking a simple question based on the playoffs, since Beef seems to think MacDonald is never capable of being more effective than Sanheim.

 

[Beef Invictus]

You think Sanheim was a more effective player in the playoffs than MacDonald?

He was at minimum the same level, and I recall he had a game where he flat-out outplayed MacDonald.


His reward for that was to be replaced with an inferior player as unsuited to face a team like the Pens as anyone we have.

 

[Adtar02]

Zone starts have a significant impact over small sample sizes.
And don’t tell me I’m the one ignoring context when you’re the one who cited “MacDonald was on the ice for 7 5 on 5 GA” by itself, with zero context, ostensibly as evidence he wasn’t the Flyers’ 2nd best defenseman in the series.

no I was adding to your F-ing post that left out info and was F-ng incorrect. Mac did not have the best Plus minus Hagg. and the way it was writen made it seem as though this was a big deal. All i did was add more to the info you F-ing gave didnt need extra context as you put in Zone start and QoC. You are really ignorant when caomes to following a F-ing convo. I was argueing just inserting other info to the convo.

 

[Adtar02]

Zone starts have a significant impact over small sample sizes.
And don’t tell me I’m the one ignoring context when you’re the one who cited “MacDonald was on the ice for 7 5 on 5 GA” by itself, with zero context, ostensibly as evidence he wasn’t the Flyers’ 2nd best defenseman in the series.

plus you used Plus minus i gave info on all parties being discussed. I wasnt $hit on mac just give more context instead of manipluting stats for an agenda. Jesus your are dense

 

[Adtar02]

I was asking a simple question based on the playoffs, since Beef seems to think MacDonald is never capable of being more effective than Sanheim.

Just like when I asked a simple question your answer was a ton of Justification instead of simply answering the question

 

[Adtar02]

If Myers proves he belongs, & can be relied on to play a responsible game at the NHL level, he’ll play.

The way some people talk you’d swear Hagg played over Sanheim in the playoffs.

Here you are. Did hagg play over Sanhiem in the Playoffs??????????????