OPINION
- bodiva88

Well, it's the "reality" of the (Bill's and my own) opinion, which I only put in those terms because MJL had, on a previous thread,: "the reality is that his (Bourdon's) potential is that of a 3rd pair defenseman in this League."

I didn't see you responding with "OPINON" in response to his post at the time.

I'm banking on Mandog


- JoeRussomanno

I look forward to seeing Brandon Manning.

In fact, he goes on to agree with Bill that it would take an equal jump in development to last season for MAB to be a top 4 defenseman. I really don't see the trouble here, it seems like drama for the sake of drama.
- BulliesPhan87

Nobody wants to look like the orange kool-aid man. So everyone keeps writing various forms and degrees of "Bordon could be a good third pairing guy", and adding either "He's unlikley to go further" or "He has the potential to go further". Both statements saying he's got a 1 to 50% chance to play regular minutes on the 2nd pairing at some point in the future.

However as I think everyone believes that not to be happening this year (without injury fill ins) That last part is irrelevant. And Maybe Homer should be looking to add a 2nd paringing guy as Meszaros is going to be out for over half the year and Kimmo needs some more support. We lose one more starter and we go from concern to joke.

Have we set the record for most threads covering Marc-Andre Bourdon's potential yet?

Have we set the record for most threads covering Marc-Andre Bourdon's potential yet?
- Jsaquella

Potentially.... yes.

But some people think Potentially... no.

In fact, he goes on to agree with Bill that it would take an equal jump in development to last season for MAB to be a top 4 defenseman. I really don't see the trouble here, it seems like drama for the sake of drama.
- BulliesPhan87

Some background: MJL and I had been "debating" Bourdon's potential on previous threads. I gave detailed reasoning, based on my own observations of his play and some stats in support of why I think he has potential as a top 4. MJL took issue with my projection and said his potential was only that of a 3rd pairing D man. He asked Bill to chime in, probably in hopes that Bill would support his own premise of MAB's potential...however, Bill's view, that with further improvement, he does indeed think he can be a top-four, was not in line with MJL's view.


Now, I did seem to mix up the responses MJL made because he respoded to jak521 right after Bill replied, so I thought it was his response to Bill, so I apologize for any confusion on that. And yes, MJL hedges a bit in his response to Bill, saying that Bourdon would have to make "as big a leap as he did to get where he is now" to be a top 4, which is a little different than what Bill said, which is "if he improves at a similar clip (as last season) yes, I think he can be a top-four", but that's kind of splitting hairs.

The fact remains, Bill agrees with me that MAB (with continued development) has the potential to be a top 4 NHL D man, in contradiction to MJL's assertion that his potential is only that of a top 6.

We'll see how it plays out.

Have we set the record for most threads covering Marc-Andre Bourdon's potential yet?
- Jsaquella

We can switch to Eminger if you want?

Potentially.... yes.

But some people think Potentially... no.
- flyler

I need another beer.

I need another beer.
- Jsaquella

Definitely, yes.

We can switch to Eminger if you want?
- phantasm

Pretty much is what he is.

I like Bourdon, and feel he's proven he's a NHL caliber guy. He needs to improve his skating to take the next step. Could he be a top 4 someday? Sure. If he puts in the work. Still not sold he will be, though.

Some background: MJL and I had been "debating" Bourdon's potential on previous threads. I gave detailed reasoning, based on my own observations of his play and some stats in support of why I think he has potential as a top 4. MJL took issue with my projection and said his potential was only that of a 3rd pairing D man. He asked Bill to chime in, probably in hopes that Bill would support his own premise of MAB's potential...however, Bill's view, that with further improvement, he does indeed think he can be a top-four, was not in line with MJL's view.


Now, I did seem to mix up the responses MJL made because he respoded to jak521 right after Bill replied, so I thought it was his response to Bill, so I apologize for any confusion on that. And yes, MJL hedges a bit in his response to Bill, saying that Bourdon would have to make "as big a leap as he did to get where he is now" to be a top 4, which is a little different than what Bill said, which is "if he improves at a similar clip (as last season) yes, I think he can be a top-four", but that's kind of splitting hairs.

The fact remains, Bill agrees with me that MAB (with continued development) has the potential to be a top 4 NHL D man, in contradiction to MJL's assertion that his potential is only that of a top 6.

We'll see how it plays out.
- phantasm

Winner winner chicken dinner

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Can Coburn Take on Bigger Offensive Role?
- bmeltzer

We'll find out

Pretty much is what he is.

I like Bourdon, and feel he's proven he's a NHL caliber guy. He needs to improve his skating to take the next step. Could he be a top 4 someday? Sure. If he puts in the work. Still not sold he will be, though.
- Jsaquella

I like MAB. I think any of the three young d-men can at the very least be solid contributors in the top 6 and offer some cap relief over the next couple of seasons.

I still believe Carlo will be signed by the Flyers, I think it is just negotiating on terms. I think Homer will only use assets to acquire a young stud d-man, and unfortunately I don't think J-Bo fits that bill.

im getting sent friggin PMs about it
- Crimsoninja

Just as long as I'm not getting sent PMs about it.

Some background: MJL and I had been "debating" Bourdon's potential on previous threads. I gave detailed reasoning, based on my own observations of his play and some stats in support of why I think he has potential as a top 4. MJL took issue with my projection and said his potential was only that of a 3rd pairing D man. He asked Bill to chime in, probably in hopes that Bill would support his own premise of MAB's potential...however, Bill's view, that with further improvement, he does indeed think he can be a top-four, was not in line with MJL's view.


Now, I did seem to mix up the responses MJL made because he respoded to jak521 right after Bill replied, so I thought it was his response to Bill, so I apologize for any confusion on that. And yes, MJL hedges a bit in his response to Bill, saying that Bourdon would have to make "as big a leap as he did to get where he is now" to be a top 4, which is a little different than what Bill said, which is "if he improves at a similar clip (as last season) yes, I think he can be a top-four", but that's kind of splitting hairs.

The fact remains, Bill agrees with me that MAB (with continued development) has the potential to be a top 4 NHL D man, in contradiction to MJL's assertion that his potential is only that of a top 6.

We'll see how it plays out.
- phantasm

Your completely incorrect in stating that I've hedged on my opinion of Bourdon. I disagree that Bill agrees with you. Bill just simply said that it's possible, in my opinion. Which is to say if he continues to improve at the same rate as he did last Season. Which is completely different then saying that he has top 4 potential. In my opinion, Boudon's potential is as a top 6 NHL defenseman. And I'll again state what I've stated previously, many times. Player evaluations are not an exact science. Players do on occasion become more then their rated potential.

So we've established that we disagree.

Pretty much is what he is.

I like Bourdon, and feel he's proven he's a NHL caliber guy. He needs to improve his skating to take the next step. Could he be a top 4 someday? Sure. If he puts in the work. Still not sold he will be, though.
- Jsaquella

I think like any young player/rookie type, especially a D man, I have to assume there will be some significant further development in his game with more experience and maturity...with that further development, I think he becomes top 4 caliber. Is it possible he regresses from here? Sure...but I think he has it in him to avoid a significant and lasting regression...with that said, if his concussion issues resurface, all bets are off.

I need another beer.
- Jsaquella

I'm on my fourth since three oclock.

Some background: MJL and I had been "debating" Bourdon's potential on previous threads. I gave detailed reasoning, based on my own observations of his play and some stats in support of why I think he has potential as a top 4. MJL took issue with my projection and said his potential was only that of a 3rd pairing D man. He asked Bill to chime in, probably in hopes that Bill would support his own premise of MAB's potential...however, Bill's view, that with further improvement, he does indeed think he can be a top-four, was not in line with MJL's view.


Now, I did seem to mix up the responses MJL made because he respoded to jak521 right after Bill replied, so I thought it was his response to Bill, so I apologize for any confusion on that. And yes, MJL hedges a bit in his response to Bill, saying that Bourdon would have to make "as big a leap as he did to get where he is now" to be a top 4, which is a little different than what Bill said, which is "if he improves at a similar clip (as last season) yes, I think he can be a top-four", but that's kind of splitting hairs.

The fact remains, Bill agrees with me that MAB (with continued development) has the potential to be a top 4 NHL D man, in contradiction to MJL's assertion that his potential is only that of a top 6.

We'll see how it plays out.
- phantasm

I, like everyone else, am well aware of your 'debate'. We get it, you disagree with him and he's not backing down either. There's no need for a big dramatic call out. You can't compel one another to suddenly agree, so why not leave it at that? I'm rather unconcerned with the territorial cries of whom Bill agrees with one way or the other.

It's still August, there's no 'next step' for this disagreement to take until the season starts anyway.
/rant

Your completely incorrect in stating that I've hedged on my opinion of Bourdon. I disagree that Bill agrees with you. Bill just simply said that it's possible, in my opinion. Which is to say if he continues to improve at the same rate as he did last Season. Which is completely different then saying that he has top 4 potential. In my opinion, Boudon's potential is as a top 6 NHL defenseman. And I'll again state what I've stated previously, many times. Player evaluations are not an exact science. Players do on occasion become more then their rated potential.

So we've established that we disagree.
- MJL

Bill did NOT just simply say "it's possible" he said: "If he improves at a similar clip next season, yes, I think he can be a top-four" This indicates that Bill believes that MAB does, with further development, have the potential to be a top 4 NHL D man.

In my very similar view, I feel that with continued development he has the potential to reach a top 4 level. By contrast, in your view, you feel that his potential is that of a top 6. You can try and spin it if you want, but the reality is that Bills view is much closer to being in line with mine than yours.

A year ago, I'd have said I doubt it, and I'd be happy if he simply became a serviceable fill-in at the NHL level. But I think he took a big jump in his third pro season before the concussion issues. If he improves at a similar clip next season, yes, I think he can be a top-four. If his continued improvement falls a bit shy of that, he's at least a top 6. He still needs to read-and-react a bit faster, but he came a long way in that area last season compared to where he was before.
- bmeltzer

Here is what Bill said. Make your own judgements, and please stop the Richard wagging trying to tell us all what he meant.

I, like everyone else, am well aware of your 'debate'. We get it, you disagree with him and he's not backing down either. There's no need for a big dramatic call out. You can't compel one another to suddenly agree, so why not leave it at that? I'm rather unconcerned with the territorial cries of whom Bill agrees with one way or the other.

It's still August, there's no 'next step' for this disagreement to take until the season starts anyway.
/rant
- BulliesPhan87

I wouldn't have responded to MJL at all in this debate if he didn't first label certain aspects of my previous posts on the matter (to others) as "foolish" and then proceeded to pose his own view on the matter as "the reality" implying that my view is not realistic. This guy consistently insults the intelligence of other posters and trolls and enters conversations he isn't involved in to interject his own opinion, oftentimes as if it is fact....maybe others take it laying down, but I'm not wired that way.

Here is what Bill said. Make your own judgements, and please stop the Richard wagging trying to tell us all what he meant.

- MBFlyerfan

Does that go for your boy MJL too?

I wouldn't have responded to MJL at all in this debate if he didn't first label certain aspects of my previous posts on the matter (to others) as "foolish" and then proceeded to pose his own view on the matter as "the reality" implying that my view is not realistic. This guy consistently insults the intelligence of other posters and trolls and enters conversations he isn't involved in to interject his own opinion, oftentimes as if it is fact....maybe others take it laying down, but I'm not wired that way.
- phantasm

Maybe others aren't overly concerned about what MJL thinks.

Maybe others aren't overly concerned about what MJL thinks.
- bodiva88

Bingo. He's only one of many voices.

We get it you both do not agree on the players potential..........I believe it's safe to move on.