I do not have the movie committed to memory
- ob18

And you call yourself a hockey fan.

And you call yourself a hockey fan.

- MBFlyerfan

Yup.

I can only go by the evidence at hand. And from that and all the forecasts are that the cap is going to continue to go up. And as we see every year, player salaries are going to follow. So deals signed previously are going to be cheaper relative to new deals signed. We see that already when looking at Groux's deal when compared to the new deals that Toews and Kane just signed.
- MJL

To this moment I agree, but the past does not dictate the future and therefore one cannot depend on this staying true. Most likely the cap will go up year to year, but will it maintain this economic boom the NHL is going through? If one wants to look at larger historical trends there's evidence to suggest it won't (meaning larger context economic booms and recessions) . That doesn't make what I say true, but to count on inflated contracts looking better in the future may get teams in trouble

To this moment I agree, but the past does not dictate the future and therefore one cannot depend on this staying true. Most likely the cap will go up year to year, but will it maintain this economic boom the NHL is going through? If one wants to look at larger historical trends there's evidence to suggest it won't (meaning larger context economic booms and recessions) . That doesn't make what I say true, but to count on inflated contracts looking better in the future may get teams in trouble
- mmcclatchy

I don't see how there is evidence to suggest it won't, when it has year after year, after year. And there definitely is a risk involved, and it's not impossible for the NHL economy to collapse and the cap with it. But NHL team's especially the have's are going to take that risk, and continue to spend on players.

I do not have the movie committed to memory
- ob18

Ill let Crims deal with you

Yes, and the hockey people I've talked to who think MacDonald is a solid two-way NHL defenseman include a couple pro scouts who played more than a combined 2,000 NHL games as defensemen and have roughly 25 years of combined NHL scouting experience after their playing careers. Bill Clement also feels the same (and he will give you a straight opinion if he doesn't think someone is very good). He was only a 2-time NHL All-Star as a defensive forward and has more than a quarter century of hockey broadcasting experience, including a lengthy stint on the national level.

But, hey, what would people like that know about who can and can't play in this league, especially on D? Clearly they need to start focusing exclusively on Corsi/Fenwick charts to know the real story.
- bmeltzer

Love it.

Yes, and the hockey people I've talked to who think MacDonald is a solid two-way NHL defenseman include a couple pro scouts who played more than a combined 2,000 NHL games as defensemen and have roughly 25 years of combined NHL scouting experience after their playing careers. Bill Clement also feels the same (and he will give you a straight opinion if he doesn't think someone is very good). He was only a 2-time NHL All-Star as a defensive forward and has more than a quarter century of hockey broadcasting experience, including a lengthy stint on the national level.

But, hey, what would people like that know about who can and can't play in this league, especially on D? Clearly they need to start focusing exclusively on Corsi/Fenwick charts to know the real story.
- bmeltzer

Most serious stats advocates readily admit that stats are not the end all be all, and that simply focusing on the numbers is not enough. Most of them watch plenty of games as well.

There have been many good hockey men, with years of experience and Stanley Cups as managers who made the wrong call on players. Me, I watch players and look at the numbers. I'd simply rather not ignore an available tool when making an evaluation.

As far as MacDonald goes, I hope that he plays like Mark Howe, because that makes the Flyers better. I'm just not going to head into the season expecting it. If he can anchor the second pair, it's a good thing. I, like many others, have concerns. Expressing those concerns by utilizing advanced stats shouldn't be dismissed by calling the data flawed or some other asinine reason because it doesn't conform to one's opinion.

The saddest thing is something mentioned earlier. The bigger debates on MacDonald come over whether he's a 3/4 or a 4/5 defenseman. It's pretty ridiculous that one slot can cause such heated debates.

The saddest thing is something mentioned earlier. The bigger debates on MacDonald come over whether he's a 3/4 or a 4/5 defenseman. It's pretty ridiculous that one slot can cause such heated debates.
- Jsaquella

Yes

Most serious stats advocates readily admit that stats are not the end all be all, and that simply focusing on the numbers is not enough. Most of them watch plenty of games as well.

There have been many good hockey men, with years of experience and Stanley Cups as managers who made the wrong call on players. Me, I watch players and look at the numbers. I'd simply rather not ignore an available tool when making an evaluation.

As far as MacDonald goes, I hope that he plays like Mark Howe, because that makes the Flyers better. I'm just not going to head into the season expecting it. If he can anchor the second pair, it's a good thing. I, like many others, have concerns. Expressing those concerns by utilizing advanced stats shouldn't be dismissed by calling the data flawed or some other asinine reason because it doesn't conform to one's opinion.

The saddest thing is something mentioned earlier. The bigger debates on MacDonald come over whether he's a 3/4 or a 4/5 defenseman. It's pretty ridiculous that one slot can cause such heated debates.
- Jsaquella

I'm not in love with MacDonald. I don't hate MacDonald. I'm in the middle. He's a steady defenseman. I don't think he's worthy of PP time just because he saw some time with the Islanders. This is a different team now. Coburn was a pretty effective second unit PP quarterback like six years ago until we brought in Carle, Pronger and Meszaros. Things change. Here in my opinion MacDonald shouldn't be on the Power Play.

Ill let Crims deal with you
- KINGKENZO

he has been banned. 3 months.

he has been banned. 3 months.
- Crimsoninja

rip

he has been banned. 3 months.
- Crimsoninja

Back for the season.

I hope whoever he shanked is ok.

- Giroux_Is_God

- tangent_man

Tom Petty is underrated, imo

I'm not in love with MacDonald. I don't hate MacDonald. I'm in the middle. He's a steady defenseman. I don't think he's worthy of PP time just because he saw some time with the Islanders. This is a different team now. Coburn was a pretty effective second unit PP quarterback like six years ago until we brought in Carle, Pronger and Meszaros. Things change. Here in my opinion MacDonald shouldn't be on the Power Play.
- SuperSchennBros

The biggest issue that a lot of people have with MacDonald is his contract. I think he's a solid defenseman. IMO, he's an adequate 4th defenseman or a really good 5th guy. Others feel he's better than that. That's fine, but few if any see him as a top pair guy who is irreplaceable.

I'm not a fan of signing him to a big money, long term deal. I'd rather they utilize longer terms and bigger money on the core guys, like Giroux, Voracek, Couturier and Simmonds-especially the longer terms.

Most serious stats advocates readily admit that stats are not the end all be all, and that simply focusing on the numbers is not enough. Most of them watch plenty of games as well.

There have been many good hockey men, with years of experience and Stanley Cups as managers who made the wrong call on players. Me, I watch players and look at the numbers. I'd simply rather not ignore an available tool when making an evaluation.

As far as MacDonald goes, I hope that he plays like Mark Howe, because that makes the Flyers better. I'm just not going to head into the season expecting it. If he can anchor the second pair, it's a good thing. I, like many others, have concerns. Expressing those concerns by utilizing advanced stats shouldn't be dismissed by calling the data flawed or some other asinine reason because it doesn't conform to one's opinion. Dismissing those flaws that are obviously there and rating a player based on a number that is a team number, and not an individual number, is what's asinine.

The saddest thing is something mentioned earlier. The bigger debates on MacDonald come over whether he's a 3/4 or a 4/5 defenseman. It's pretty ridiculous that one slot can cause such heated debates.
- Jsaquella

Well like I have with others, there is an opportunity here to refute the issue of flawed data involving Corsi. But that's not done, and it's tap danced around. Instead bringing up the flaws of Corsi and why it shouldn't be used as a reliable way of rating individual players, is just called asinine. If it's so asinine, it shouldn't be difficult to refute the premise of false data. Not to mention other issues such as context and confirmation bias.

And in my view, there is a huge difference between a 3/4 defenseman, and a 4/5 defenseman. And I personally think labeling MacDonald a 3rd pair defenseman in any way, is poor analysis.

For example, MacDonald is a 3/4 defenseman. Grossmann is a 4/5 defenseman. Are you telling me there's not a big difference there between the two players?

The biggest issue that a lot of people have with MacDonald is his contract. I think he's a solid defenseman. IMO, he's an adequate 4th defenseman or a really good 5th guy. Others feel he's better than that. That's fine, but few if any see him as a top pair guy who is irreplaceable.

I'm not a fan of signing him to a big money, long term deal. I'd rather they utilize longer terms and bigger money on the core guys, like Giroux, Voracek, Couturier and Simmonds-especially the longer terms.
- Jsaquella

Well his contract is overblown by many. 5M a year is not really big money, and it that will be even more true in the next few years. And really a solid top 4 all around defenseman who is 27 years old, can be a core player on a team. Especially when he upgrades the skill and mobility of the defense. And improves the team.

Well like I have with others, there is an opportunity here to refute the issue of flawed data involving Corsi. But that's not done, and it's tap danced around. Instead bringing up the flaws of Corsi and why it shouldn't be used as a reliable way of rating individual players, is just called asinine. If it's so asinine, it shouldn't be difficult to refute the premise of false data. Not to mention other issues such as context and confirmation bias.

And in my view, there is a huge difference between a 3/4 defenseman, and a 4/5 defenseman. And I personally think labeling MacDonald a 3rd pair defenseman in any way, is poor analysis.

For example, MacDonald is a 3/4 defenseman. Grossmann is a 4/5 defenseman. Are you telling me there's not a big difference there between the two players?
- MJL

Using supposedly flawed data beats the poop out of a blowhard that only gives his opinions without providing any kind of tangible evidence to back them up.

You only deal in opinions. The ones you agree with are treated as Gospel, the ones you don't are dismissed. You are a joke and it's why I usually ignore your nonsense.

Using supposedly flawed data beats the poop out of a blowhard that only gives his opinions without providing any kind of tangible evidence to back them up.

You only deal in opinions. The ones you agree with are treated as Gospel, the ones you don't are dismissed. You are a joke and it's why I usually ignore your nonsense.
- Jsaquella

It is incorrect to state that I have not given any kind of tangible evidence to back up my opinion. I have provided game examples along with reference materials from other credible sources that corroborate my opinion.