StandingCow
Registered User
- May 15, 2010
- 3,813
- 6
More like: Raffl >>> McGuinn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rosehill.
Post-Game Talk: Wed., Dec. 4, 2013| Flyers 6 at Red Wings 3
- Thread starter MiamiScreamingEagles
- Start date
More like: Raffl >>> McGuinn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Rosehill.
Raffl does everything well or at least decently aside from finishing chances so that's fine for me for a fourth line. Not like a fourth line should ever be needed to score anyhow.
BackToTheBrierePatch
Nope not today.
blinds
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2012
- 3,111
- 526
He's not good, but he seems to understand his role and doesn't make too many mistakes. I mean he's only -4 and his line isn't producing any +'s haha.
I don't think we need him in the lineup so often but I dont think he's been terrible. Not as much of a liability as I thought he would be.
Looking at +/- though, Simmonds is a -10 and worst on the team by far. Man.
Damaged Goods
Registered User
Simmonds has played 450 minutes to Rosehill's 83. If you prorate Rosehill to 450 minutes, he's a -22.
Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
Damaged Goods
Registered User
Yeah, they are easier to work with.
Anyway, continuing to look at conventional +/-, Rosehill is tracking at a -48 over 1000 minutes (a benchmark that regular forwards often reach over a full season). For his career, he is -20 in 570 minutes. I guess his 4:00 a night are not enough to reveal how awful he is to many fans. Small, regular doses of ineptitude are harder to detect to the naked eye.
