The Andrew MacDonald Discussion Thread

madlee

Registered User
Mar 7, 2015
253
71
The only rational explanations for amac's presence on this roster are:
1. already 3 young defensemen (provorov, hagg, gostisbehere) - if it was based on merit, flyers would have 5 defensemen that have TWO years or less experience, with 3 of them being rookies. You can't do that.
2. flyers probably want to trade amac, but are hoping that continued playing time and playing with our best defenseman will increase his value. dumping him in the minors kills his value and also affects the flyers' salary cap.
3. despite the very positive future for this team, the flyers are not cup contenders right now. You see what happens when you have a few bad eggs in the basket and the team isn't strong enough to counter the negative contributions from weisse, amac, et al.

that being said, being overly conservative with an asset can also prevent it from developing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kelmitchell

Tripod

I hate this team
Aug 12, 2008
78,751
86,033
Nova Scotia
The only rational explanations for amac's presence on this roster are:
1. already 3 young defensemen (provorov, hagg, gostisbehere) - if it was based on merit, flyers would have 5 defensemen that have TWO years or less experience, with 3 of them being rookies. You can't do that.
2. flyers probably want to trade amac, but are hoping that continued playing time and playing with our best defenseman will increase his value. dumping him in the minors kills his value and also affects the flyers' salary cap.
3. despite the very positive future for this team, the flyers are not cup contenders right now. You see what happens when you have a few bad eggs in the basket and the team isn't strong enough to counter the negative contributions from weisse, amac, et al.

that being said, being overly conservative with an asset can also prevent it from developing.

Who says? This drives me nuts...playing shittier players is ok because they are older.

It comes down to that Flyers Mgt ACTUALLY think AMac is better and that is concerning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kelmitchell

Sawdalite

SelectLouNolan4PFHoF
Apr 5, 2009
8,574
805
Frost-Bite Fails Minnesota
Who says? This drives me nuts...playing ****tier players is ok because they are older.

It comes down to that Flyers Mgt ACTUALLY think AMac is better and that is concerning.

I don't want to put words in his mouth... but he might be alluding to the belief that playing so many Rookies...or young Players... together on D puts too much pressure on them... and in effect slows down their maturation... and can actually hold them back in development.

BTW: Bill Meltzer gives his take on this three Rookie/ five Young D-Men issue in his HockeyBuzz Blog today... In Part:

"Again, the ever-popular fan cry of scratch/waive/trade MacDonald isn't on the Flyers' radar at present. Any realistic suggestions for rearranging the lineup need to include both the new alternate captain as well as Gudas within the proposed starting six. Hakstol is far from the only NHL coach who would be reluctant to choose five of six blueline starters with less than 150 games of NHL experience on their resumes; no matter how high the collective upsides of that group of five may be."
 
Last edited:

Sawdalite

SelectLouNolan4PFHoF
Apr 5, 2009
8,574
805
Frost-Bite Fails Minnesota
Bill did say his personal opinion would be to play all three rookies.

IIRC he said that (like most fans) he would rather have them all play... but pretty much said that Hak would be far from the only Coach reluctant to play all five young D-Men... no matter the night upsides.

Bill's Blog did detail the concerns with Moran playing off the side he CAN play and why there are problems with the match ups required to make all three Rookies fit... and how well the Team is currently playing.

My point in citing Bill's Blog was to bring his rationale to light... and what he thought the Flyers were thinking... I believe we ALL was the kids up yesterday... Bill included.
 

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
81,647
138,659
Philadelphia, PA
I'd rather see Morin than MacD.

The last two games are MacD playing at his absolute ceiling and he's still only staying afloat because of Provorov.

He’s still a 42.2% in possession in those games. So while he might not being breaking (only one 5v5 goal against to zero goals for while on ice so far) he’s not really helping create anything either. I kind of want to see what Provorov can fully do offensively & MacDonald certainly limits that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kelmitchell

KrazyKat

Registered User
May 27, 2013
1,460
678
Vancouver
He’s still a 42.2% in possession in those games. So while he might not being breaking (only one 5v5 goal against to zero goals for while on ice so far) he’s not really helping create anything either. I kind of want to see what Provorov can fully do offensively & MacDonald certainly limits that.
I agree, I would prefer MacD gets paired with Gostisbehere.

Provorov--Hagg
Macdonald--Gostisbehere
Sanheim--Gudas

And if we can swing a trade Morin would be recalled to play beside Ghost. Myers will battle for Gudas's spot in the following year or two. And Friedman can take Mannings spot at the #7.
 

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
81,647
138,659
Philadelphia, PA
Ideally I’d want him on the bottom pairing if he’s going to play. Limit his minutes & have him up against easier competition. It’s going to come at a cost likely either way if it’s Gostisbehere or Gudas (as the latter isn’t bad producing offensively at 5v5 himself) but it is what it is.

My thought all along as the talent improved on the backend this would be the play but the organization had other ideas.
 

JojoTheWhale

CORN BOY
May 22, 2008
33,325
103,987
You're going to great lengths to be as obtuse as possible. It's not a good quality.

Sanheim took an ill-advised risk that could have been redeemed if executed properly, and it was a waste of time having to explain that.

There are only so many ways to explain to you that I'm objecting to the thought process. Whether the results makes sense or not, the process has to be sound.

The risk is all-advised if it makes no sense in the situation, not if it fails. "If Sanheim gets the puck, then it was a good decision" is the same reactionary, backwards thinking as Dave Hakstol automatically coming back with the same lineup after a win. I know no one around here likes it when that happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captain Dave Poulin

BillDineen

Former Flyer / Extinct Dinosaur Advisor
Aug 9, 2009
9,354
8,049
AMac is prone to horrendous errors. Just like Bundy, Randy Jones and Matt Carle. All of them drove me nuts.

His contract is not an issue at this point. If he was sitting like Lehtera, no one would care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuck Downie

backburner

Registered User
May 6, 2011
1,424
269
NJ, USA
"Only" 5 minutes? Actually he should play zero minutes.

Well given our current D in the NHL, I’d play him at least bottom pair minutes of 12-15. He is 100% better than follin.

Yes, I know we have talent in the A, but until hex er fletcher calls them up. not much of a choice there
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez

FLYguy3911

Sanheim Lover
Oct 19, 2006
52,628
85,326
He's not better than Folin. Folin was disaster in the preseason and Game 1, but he was fine after that. Playing him over MacDonald was actually a good decision by the coach (imagine that).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKingPin

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->