This is a flagrant strawman. No one is arguing that a player is perfectly, 100% responsible for their on ice results.

I'm merely arguing that an individual has a legitimate influence over those numbers, and that influence trumps the impact of teammates, zone starts, etc over a large enough sample size.

Andrew MacDonald is not 100% responsible for every scoring chance against with him on the ice. But he is no absolved of the blame for his poor on ice results simply because you falsely believe that only his teammates bare all an inordinate amount of the blame.

When you control for the strength of the team around him, and his quality of teammate, you are still left with a player that drastically under performs relative to his ice time and contract.

Also..with regards to the Simpsons picture to which you've seized on as a tremendous affront to good debate.

Your opening salvo in this argument was to dismiss my credibility entirely. The mental gymnastics required for you to make yourself out as some sort of victim here are staggering.
- AndrewD

You're wasting your time, he's always right. Always.

Feel free to join our club which is solely dedicated to ignoring him. Oh, and we also drink a lot too!

I totally forgot he said that. In hindsight, it makes the deal even worse. "Drop everything! Lecavalier is available!"
- PhillySportsGuy

Screw you Howson! I don't need Ryan Johansen for Luke Schenn, I got me some Vinny

I totally forgot he said that. In hindsight, it makes the deal even worse. "Drop everything! Lecavalier is available!"
- PhillySportsGuy

Surprised he didn't just sign Eddie Shore. Hell, he was available, you just need a shovel.

Statements like he's one of the single worst defenseman in the NHL refutes itself. And disqualifies the source as being credible. Gap is a team function, not an individual player function.



Those stats aren't individual stats, they are team stats that are falsely attributed to a single player. Unless you think that a player on the ice is responsible for every single scoring chance against or for, when that player is on the ice. Whether you want to use scoring chances or shot differential, they are team numbers. And subject to a large percentage of false data when applied to individual players. Hockey is a team game.
- MJL

The stats are great examples for directional trends over a period of time.clearly there are different individuals on the ice with a particular player at certain times.but 20+ games should give an indication of where players are and those statistics should give those trends. The two players that would be least likely to be appropriately represented here are cc and Nick Schultz due to insufficient ice time.

Screw you Howson! I don't need Ryan Johansen for Luke Schenn, I got me some Vinny
- Jsaquella

Well I am one up on you.. I got me some Umberger!!!

Screw you Howson! I don't need Ryan Johansen for Luke Schenn, I got me some Vinny
- Jsaquella

I would love to know what kinds of deals GMs have turned down in the past

Surprised he didn't just sign Eddie Shore. Hell, he was available, you just need a shovel.
- BiggE

Used to be good means will be good now

This is a flagrant strawman. No one is arguing that a player is perfectly, 100% responsible for their on ice results.

I'm merely arguing that an individual has a legitimate influence over those numbers, and that influence trumps the impact of teammates, zone starts, etc over a large enough sample size.

Andrew MacDonald is not 100% responsible for every scoring chance against with him on the ice. But he is no absolved of the blame for his poor on ice results simply because you falsely believe that only his teammates bare all an inordinate amount of the blame.

When you control for the strength of the team around him, and his quality of teammate, you are still left with a player that drastically under performs relative to his ice time and contract.


- AndrewD

It isn't a strawman argument. Ignoring the false data is the strawman.
Of course he isn't absolved from blame. But what Corsi can't tell you, and you don't know, is how much he is to blame for it. But you want to use it to label how good a player he is, and place blame on him and call him the worst defenseman in the NHL based on those statistics. The last article you linked has some good points in it. I wish some of the Corsi believers such as yourself would follow those points. Although the author wants to pretend that Corsi isn't used to critique players. He should spend some more time in the "Corsi world"

Also..with regards to the Simpsons picture to which you've seized on as a tremendous affront to good debate.

Your opening salvo in this argument was to dismiss my credibility entirely. The mental gymnastics required for you to make yourself out as some sort of victim here are staggering.
- AndrewD

You posted the Simpson picture. The only one that used it as an affront to good debate was you. How was that relevant in any way?

When a statement is made that MacDonald is the worst defenseman in the NHL, questioning the credibility of the source of that statement is warranted.

You're wasting your time, he's always right. Always.

Feel free to join our club which is solely dedicated to ignoring him. Oh, and we also drink a lot too!
- BiggE

Lol

The stats are great examples for directional trends over a period of time.clearly there are different individuals on the ice with a particular player at certain times.but 20+ games should give an indication of where players are and those statistics should give those trends. The two players that would be least likely to be appropriately represented here are cc and Nick Schultz due to insufficient ice time.
- section32

They can show trends of team play, and show what happens on the ice. They can't tell you why those results happen. That requires context and analysis. And then you get into issues such as confirmation bias. The problem that comes in is that you can use those stats to point out whatever you want them too. They are that poorly definitive.

The top line is trying to lead by example, but no one else is taking the hint.

In the middle of a poopshow like this, it's easy for guys to try too hard - gripping the stick too tight, forcing passes, etc - and it takes the fun out of the game. They need to find a way to put a modicum of fun back into it and loosen up a bit. Maybe on the road trip in Cali they can find a way.
- tangent_man

Is it cliche Sunday in New Jersey?

There has to be an available AHL player out there who will give us more for (frank)s sake
- JoeRussomanno

There is. You just have to pull the trigger on it.

That's how bad they've been -- they're below replacement-value. You can almost find ANYONE who can accomplish what Umberger and Lecavalier have, as a whole.

Coburn should get them a first rounder at the TDL.

I don't think a majority here would object, tbh.
- Marc D

I have no particular issues trading anyone to make the team better. Some players I like more than others, but it's about the team

There is. You just have to pull the trigger on it.

That's how bad they've been -- they're below replacement-value. You can almost find ANYONE who can accomplish what Umberger and Lecavalier have, as a whole.
- AllInForFlyers

I'm 49 and have a bad back but I'll gladly take the league minimum to stand around and do nothing. That is Umberger's role on this team, isn't it?

I'm 49 and have a bad back but I'll gladly take the league minimum to stand around and do nothing. That is Umberger's role on this team, isn't it?
- BiggE

I've missed so much today but having read this page and the column I pretty much know what's back there.

I'm 49 and have a bad back but I'll gladly take the league minimum to stand around and do nothing. That is Umberger's role on this team, isn't it?
- BiggE

He does glide the odd time when he is not having a nap.

I've missed so much today but having read this page and the column I pretty much know what's back there.
- mayorofangrytown

This is a flagrant strawman. No one is arguing that a player is perfectly, 100% responsible for their on ice results.

I'm merely arguing that an individual has a legitimate influence over those numbers, and that influence trumps the impact of teammates, zone starts, etc over a large enough sample size.

Andrew MacDonald is not 100% responsible for every scoring chance against with him on the ice. But he is no absolved of the blame for his poor on ice results simply because you falsely believe that only his teammates bare all an inordinate amount of the blame.

When you control for the strength of the team around him, and his quality of teammate, you are still left with a player that drastically under performs relative to his ice time and contract.

Also..with regards to the Simpsons picture to which you've seized on as a tremendous affront to good debate.

Your opening salvo in this argument was to dismiss my credibility entirely. The mental gymnastics required for you to make yourself out as some sort of victim here are staggering.
- AndrewD

I think I like you.

There is. You just have to pull the trigger on it.

That's how bad they've been -- they're below replacement-value. You can almost find ANYONE who can accomplish what Umberger and Lecavalier have, as a whole.
- AllInForFlyers

Are there AHL players out there that are better choices then the Flyers AHL players? And keep in mind, that were talking about a specific type of AHL player that would be available. And not top young players that are developing in the AHL.

I think I like you.
- Tomahawk

But what Corsi can't tell you, and you don't know, is how much he is to blame for it. But you want to use it to label how good a player he is is.

Are you just going to gloss over the points I made about individual influence winning out over competing contextual factors over a large enough sample size?

Your position is that these things are somehow unknowable. My position is that they are knowable, their impact is quantifiable, and when you control for those usage factors, MacDonald still drastically under performs.

When a statement is made that MacDonald is the worst defenseman in the NHL, questioning the credibility of the source of that statement is warranted.

Not "the worst". But one of the worst regular starters in the league for sure.

With this large of a sample size, there isn't this magical false data muddying the water. MacDonald has been awful.

His benching was 100% warranted.

Are you just going to gloss over the points I made about individual influence winning out over competing contextual factors over a large enough sample size?

Your position is that these things are somehow unknowable. My position is that they are knowable, their impact is quantifiable, and when you control for those usage factors, MacDonald still drastically under performs.



Not "the worst". But one of the worst regular starters in the league for sure.

With this large of a sample size, there isn't this magical false data muddying the water. MacDonald has been awful.

His benching was 100% warranted.
- AndrewD

I like this guy, he's determined!

The state is failure.
- LJF

This is a flagrant strawman. No one is arguing that a player is perfectly, 100% responsible for their on ice results.

I'm merely arguing that an individual has a legitimate influence over those numbers, and that influence trumps the impact of teammates, zone starts, etc over a large enough sample size.

Andrew MacDonald is not 100% responsible for every scoring chance against with him on the ice. But he is no absolved of the blame for his poor on ice results simply because you falsely believe that only his teammates bare all an inordinate amount of the blame.

When you control for the strength of the team around him, and his quality of teammate, you are still left with a player that drastically under performs relative to his ice time and contract.

Also..with regards to the Simpsons picture to which you've seized on as a tremendous affront to good debate.

Your opening salvo in this argument was to dismiss my credibility entirely. The mental gymnastics required for you to make yourself out as some sort of victim here are staggering.
- AndrewD

what is most staggering in the 7 yrs this hemmorhagic fever of a poster has been here, is that one of the frequent bans incurred hasn't been permanent.

You're wasting your time, he's always right. Always.

Feel free to join our club which is solely dedicated to ignoring him. Oh, and we also drink a lot too!
- BiggE

What about the reported bourbon shortage coming ? Or are you a scotch guy if my memory is correct ?

Can anyone do a pic of a whataburger with Z corpses face on it ?