Nobody wants to pay out the nose for Byfuglien... we've all made that clear.

I'd be more than happy to give up the Flyers' equivalent of Stajan/Hagman/Aulie for him, if Chevyldayoff was in a panic like Sutter was back in '10, though.

He fits a lot of the needs this team has that guys like Streit and AMac can only try to fill... big-minute eating, possession-driving, physically able to match up to anybody, plays against toughest players, etc.

I'm not dismissing him out of hand just because he isn't a complete Pronger clone.
- Tomahawk

Yup, Pronger's gone, never coming back. I certainly have the conversation regarding Buff, but I doubt he comes cheap.

And I'm not sold at all that he fills a hole on this team. The Flyers are already in the top half of the league for Goals For, and the bottom half of the league for Goals Against.

Shouldn't have ever let him go
- PhillySportsGuy

He is my hero. He stole my heart and rode into the sunset

I don't really like Byfuglien that much, but he's a better overall player than MacDonald.
- PhillySportsGuy

Absolutely he is. MacDonald's a 4/5th defenseman. He generally gets killed in terms of possession, and provides limited offensive ability. He's a good shot blocker and he's adept at making simple, smart plays.

That's not worth $5mm to me, because that can be had from other guys, who won't cost as much.

Shouldn't have ever let him go
- PhillySportsGuy

Should have kept him just for this

I don't really like Byfuglien that much, but he's a better overall player than MacDonald.
- PhillySportsGuy

It's dumbfounding that anybody would even try to make that case.

AMac is Matt Carle w/o the offensive gifts, and likely not as good at D to boot.

Buff is a legit #1 dman by any metric or eyeball measure.

Of course he's not infallible... but neither is AMac.

He is my hero. He stole my heart and rode into the sunset
- BulliesPhan87

Mine too. After all those years of unreasoning hatred I discovered he was the one all along.

I don't really like Byfuglien that much, but he's a better overall player than MacDonald.
- PhillySportsGuy

I disagree. Byfuglien is not good defensively. He's very good offensively, and plays more physical. But he is not a better all around player. Can't be with the defensive game that he has.

He is my hero. He stole my heart and rode into the sunset
- BulliesPhan87

It's dumbfounding that anybody would even try to make that case.

AMac is Matt Carle w/o the offensive gifts, and likely not as good at D to boot.

Buff is a legit #1 dman by any metric or eyeball measure.

Of course he's not infallible... but neither is AMac.
- Tomahawk

True #1 defenseman are not suspect defensively. It's dumbfounding calling Byfuglien a #1 defenseman. If he is your teams' #1, you're in big trouble.

Absolutely he is. MacDonald's a 4/5th defenseman. He generally gets killed in terms of possession, and provides limited offensive ability. He's a good shot blocker and he's adept at making simple, smart plays.

That's not worth $5mm to me, because that can be had from other guys, who won't cost as much.
- Jsaquella

I agree with you. I think he was the solution to improving this current team enough to make the playoffs, but I don't see him as an integral part of our future blue line. In fact, the only guy I see as an integral part is Coburn. I'm starting to really sour on Luke. I've given the guy a long leash. He needs to find some consistency. This up and down bullpoop should begin to dissipate at some point.

It's dumbfounding that anybody would even try to make that case.

AMac is Matt Carle w/o the offensive gifts, and likely not as good at D to boot.

Buff is a legit #1 dman by any metric or eyeball measure.

Of course he's not infallible... but neither is AMac.
- Tomahawk

If you're saying he's one of the best 30 dmen in hockey, that might be accurate, but I don't want him anchoring our D. He's just too unpredictable in his own end.

A #1 dman shouldn't need to be sheltered and I believe Buff would need to be sheltered a bit.

Who knows though? He may look great with a guy like Coburn. I don't think he's ever had a partner as good defensively as Coburn.

Absolutely he is. MacDonald's a 4/5th defenseman. He generally gets killed in terms of possession, and provides limited offensive ability. He's a good shot blocker and he's adept at making simple, smart plays.

That's not worth $5mm to me, because that can be had from other guys, who won't cost as much.
- Jsaquella

Byfuglien's CF% at 5 on 5 is 50.4% and CF% REL is +.9%

MacDonalds CF% at 5 on 5 is 49.6% and CF% REL is -4.1%

Not much of a difference.

True #1 defenseman are not suspect defensively. It's dumbfounding calling Byfuglien a #1 defenseman. If he is your teams' #1, you're in big trouble.
- MJL

If we're talking "top pair" then yes, he's a #1 (as in a player who can be a legit top defenseman). However, if we're talking "elite" then no, he's not a #1.

And for the record, Tomahawk, I will dismiss all players out of hand just because they aren't complete Pronger clones.

I agree with you. I think he was the solution to improving this current team enough to make the playoffs, but I don't see him as an integral part of our future blue line. In fact, the only guy I see as an integral part is Coburn. I'm starting to really sour on Luke. I've given the guy a long leash. He needs to find some consistency. This up and down bullpoop should begin to dissipate at some point.
- PhillySportsGuy

I have concerns or doubts about all of them, even Coburn. Even in a weak UFA class, there's guys that can do what MacDonald can do and they will likely cost less. Look at a guy like Anton Stralman. He's been very solid for the Rangers.

I'd rather pay him $3.5-$4mm a year for 3 or 4 years than MacDonald $5mm for 4 years

I agree with you. I think he was the solution to improving this current team enough to make the playoffs, but I don't see him as an integral part of our future blue line. In fact, the only guy I see as an integral part is Coburn. I'm starting to really sour on Luke. I've given the guy a long leash. He needs to find some consistency. This up and down bullpoop should begin to dissipate at some point.
- PhillySportsGuy

100%

Unleash the Lauridsen!

It's dumbfounding that anybody would even try to make that case.

AMac is Matt Carle w/o the offensive gifts, and likely not as good at D to boot.

Buff is a legit #1 dman by any metric or eyeball measure.

Of course he's not infallible... but neither is AMac.
- Tomahawk

What are you basing Buff being a #1 dman on? What metrics?

A #1 dman shouldn't need to be sheltered and I believe Buff would need to be sheltered a bit.
- PhillySportsGuy

He's not sheltered though... he's consistently facing the top forwards and top defense that the other team has to offer. And unlike AMac, who crumbled in that role, Buff manages to be well above water.

His +/- isn't good, but the SV%'s behind him are especially terrible.

Yes, he gambles. Yes, he lacks discipline. But he brings a poop ton of other stuff to the table that is hard to ignore.

way to limp into the playoffs. how shocking.

Poop, look what I started in here...

I promise never to mention the Buff again.

PhillySportsGuy, a present for your from the Pens thread:

Just for S-G's would you trade malkin and Neal for Ovechkin?
- SchennBros

He's not sheltered though... he's consistently facing the top forwards and top defense that the other team has to offer. And unlike AMac, who crumbled in that role, Buff manages to be well above water.

His +/- isn't good, but the SV%'s behind him are especially terrible.

Yes, he gambles. Yes, he lacks discipline. But he brings a poop ton of other stuff to the table that is hard to ignore.
- Tomahawk

His name doesn't rhyme with Shea Weber or Chris Pronger, and he is therefore awful.

Byfuglien's CF% at 5 on 5 is 50.4% and CF% REL is +.9%

MacDonalds CF% at 5 on 5 is 49.6% and CF% REL is -4.1%

Not much of a difference.
- MJL

So, you can use stats but dismiss them when others do? How hypocritical can one be?

You spent weeks shredding stats and their biases and now use them to make an argument?

Actually, MacDonald's CF% at 5 on 5 for the entire season is at 43.6% and his CF REL for the entire season is -7.9%

That's a much more significant difference. Comparing 15 games vs 79 games is apples and oranges

He's not sheltered though... he's consistently facing the top forwards and top defense that the other team has to offer. And unlike AMac, who crumbled in that role, Buff manages to be well above water.

His +/- isn't good, but the SV%'s behind him are especially terrible.

Yes, he gambles. Yes, he lacks discipline. But he brings a poop ton of other stuff to the table that is hard to ignore.
- Tomahawk

The Jets aren't the gold standard of the NHL, but I'm concerned by them moving him to wing. If he's such a good defenseman, why would they move him to wing? No team would ever move a top pairing defenseman to wing unless they're complete morons.

I also have concerns over the obvious things. The guy comes off as a narcissist.

If the price is right, then I would take him. I'm not going to pay a lot for him though. I won't pay #1 defenseman assets for him.

If we're talking "top pair" then yes, he's a #1 (as in a player who can be a legit top defenseman). However, if we're talking "elite" then no, he's not a #1.

And for the record, Tomahawk, I will dismiss all players out of hand just because they aren't complete Pronger clones.
- jmatchett383

I disagree that Byfuglien is a #1 defenseman. He's an offensive defenseman that is suspect defensively. By my definition, that is not a #1 defenseman. A defenseman who I wouldn't trust in key situations against top lines in big games, is not a player I would label a #1 defenseman.

PhillySportsGuy, a present for your from the Pens thread:
- jmatchett383

Thats where he's been banished?