- Sep 28, 2014
- 76,699
- 123,246
Jesus, this place is Yikes City nowadays.
I don't care if you or anyone else thinks Gostisbehere is better than X or Y. That's not interesting to me.
What interests me is process. I object to yours because it makes no sense and explained why. How you take that is on you. Feel free to ignore it or me. It's all good.
Nah I ain't gonna ignore you, you're a good hockey fella. I like having back-and-forths about hockey because I like hockey and I like a good argument, that's why most of us are here. But if you're actually here to police logical fallacies or the presentation of opinion as fact or arguments that begin with an undecided conclusion, you're doing a very poor job of it, quite selective, and I found that kinda irksome right there. It's endemic, and my perception there was that it was only an issue because it was an instance you disagreed with.
Oh yeah, not at all. I know I come off harsher than I intend and that it's usually my fault alone.
I'm weird in that I laser focus on process. The whole journey is more fun than the destination thing is me in a sports nutshell. The reason I read about analytics so much and do so much draft prep is that I want to be more likely to be correct in my evaluations every single day. You've got to have drive to improve yourself, you know? To me, that's equal parts hard work and brutal introspection. I'm that harsh to myself, so it's definitely nothing about you or agreeing/disagreeing.
That's the same reason I do absolutely no draft prep and don't talk really at all about prospects until they've been in the system for like two years.
Knowing what you don't know is a massive strength.
I did no NHL draf prep this year, so I said nothing.
The entirety of my draft analysis is based off of names. The Flyers drafted four alliterations this year, so it was a really good draft, but Caufield would've made it five, so I can't help but think they missed a real opportunity to turn a strong draft into an unforgettable bonanza.
I'm not trying to criticize, but I feel this was begging for an adjective describing bonanza that started with B. Baffling bonanza? Bankable? Bacchanalian? I trust you to find the right one. Words are not my strongsuit.
It’s situationally based. But all six should be able to start out at similar minutes totaling twenty.Honestly based on the players we have, all 3 pairs should get similar TOI at 5V5 next season. Shouldnt be more than 1 minute separating each pair if I had it my way. Then let special teams sort out the rest of the TOI.
Which is why the argument on the other side is to utilize his strengths, still find a way to get him 20 minutes, but let sturdier defenders handle harder defensive assignments and use him where he'll shine. His career TOI average is right around 20 minutes, with about 15:30+ of that at ES and 3:30+ on the PP. Nearly 50% of his points come on the PP. If you have him specialized like that, you'll still get a ton of production out of him, probably more durability, and you'll be in good shape no matter what happens.
because you want an all ahl lineup, you dont want any upgrades, everything has to be internal because you want to be cheap, any player that comes here externally according to you is a downgrade.If Braun and Niskanen aren't expected to play key roles, why are we spending $11M in cap and putting them in the top 4?
We made our top 2 pairs worse. The contortions people are making to justify these moves are hilarious.
because you want an all ahl lineup, you dont want any upgrades, everything has to be internal because you want to be cheap, any player that comes here externally according to you is a downgrade.
My unicorn argees with you.... 110%Those are upgrades. Niskanen and Braun aren't.
I've been the most vocal advocate on this board for acquiring:
Spurgeon
Zucker
Panarin
Karlsson
Marner
Nylander
Kapanen
and, retroactively (knowing how cheap the price was)
P.K. Subban
Joe Pavelski
Those are upgrades. Niskanen and Braun aren't. Some of these guys may not have been available, but really we'll never know if Panarin would have said yes to 7X12 or what would happen if we forced Toronto to trade us Kapanen under the threat of having space to offer sheet Marner.
I don't want to use the word "fallacy" because it isn't that, so I'll just go with "position": the position at the heart of your argument here is that Ghost is the best or second-best defenseman on the team. That's not one that everyone shares.
There's arguments to be made in each direction, and it comes down to priorities. Ghost is a really weird player. A homeless man's Karlsson or a billionaire's Del Zotto, let's say.
Ghost is really good at what he's really good at, and he's not downright bad at anything else. Very good at defending the rush, incredible on the breakout, obviously a beast in the offensive zone when he's on his game. His in-zone defense is a bit lacking: He tends to lose position and he's not phenomenal in the trenches.
If I had to give you a forward comparable, I'd say Kessel is a good one. Fantastic player, but there's areas where you're just not sure he's ever going to be complete.
Unlike for forwards, though, a defenseman has got to be really, really well-rounded to be one of the best defenders on your team. Ghost does things no other Flyers defenseman can do, and what only a handful of others in the league can do. He also is worse at things that literally dozens of lesser players can handle.
The disconnect is that many of us don't see him as an all-situations defenseman, and that's not to say we don't love the guy.
Which is why the argument on the other side is to utilize his strengths, still find a way to get him 20 minutes, but let sturdier defenders handle harder defensive assignments and use him where he'll shine. His career TOI average is right around 20 minutes, with about 15:30+ of that at ES and 3:30+ on the PP. Nearly 50% of his points come on the PP. If you have him specialized like that, you'll still get a ton of production out of him, probably more durability, and you'll be in good shape no matter what happens.
Not trying to change your mind about anything, because your mind is unchangeable--part of your youthful beauty. That's just kinda where the divide is. I'd be all for playing him like the top defenseman on the team if I saw him as that, but I don't really know where to rank him. His skillset is hard to pigeonhole.
Jesus, this place is Yikes City nowadays.
seriously. there are people here who think Myers (who has played 21 games) deserves more ice time than Niskanen, who was a #2 D on a cup winning team a year ago. people are too damn obsessed with our young players. if they were that good, we wouldn't have been suck in eternal mediocrity for the last decade.
Has Myers been on the team for the last decade?
Sanheim?
Provorov?
Ghost?
TK?
Patrick?
Any of the young guys?
How many of these guys are even 1% to blame for the last decade of mediocrity?
You can say you think it’s too early for Myers to be above Niskanen but that last sentence is nonsense.
Meanwhile people are fine with gifting spots to vets who just came off awful years. Having them in large roles could easily backfire too.the point is, common sense needs to be made here. Myers shouldn't be gifted anything until he has proven he can play at a high level for a lengthy period of time. there is nothing wrong with having him 3RHD next year. it annoys me seeing people put him in the top 4 over a proven vet like Niskanen. Myers is simply not good enough yet. someday? perhaps. next season? highly unlikely.
we all make the mistake of putting too much on these kids. i've been guilty of it too. we have a history of putting young players in roles that they are clearly unprepared for.