Agreed.

Can we talk about the word "super" now?
- Scoob

Definitely a star. Elite playmaker. Somewhere in the middle of the pack of superstars.

wow, youd rather have umberger, and not only that you say amen? guy hasnt had a goal in a year. has played in 12 more games as gagner and has 1 more point. u guys seem to forget that we have been outscored by every team in the league minus the ducks. thats pathetic. imagine if we were middle of the pack in scoring, we would surely be in a playoff spot. im not saying that would single-handedly be gagner, but it would help a little. umberger is done. hes slow, he has no offensive anymore. he drags everyone down and even the advanced stats prove it. gagner can skate somewhat, hes a right handed stick which means on the 2nd unit pp he can kinda play the giroux role on the far half boards, and he may gain some confidence being placed as a center again instead of on the wing. u guys can say hes done nothing to show u anything all u want, but i dont believe hes had the chance. if he played every game so far and still had these numbers i wouldnt be saying anything. give the guy a chance, build some kind of sample size, then grade him.
- sjk540

I didnt say that I want Umberger in the lineup. I am very open with how I want both Umberger and Gagner out of the lineup. However, if I am forced to dress one or the other, I choose Umberger every day.

Gagner is an offensive forward, who no longer is productive. Sure, he could probably score a goal or two every once and a while, and he also has some good vision, but his defensive is not even NHL level. He struggles mightily in his own end of the ice, and is not suited for a bottom 6 role.

Umberger is older, injury prone, and not very productive at all offensively. But, he is able to used in a 4th line role, and still do somethings well. He is responsible enough defensively, has a big body, is strong at cycling the puck. That is a benefit for the team.

Ultimately, neither of the players make sense moving forward, but its the hand we were dealt, so if I were to make the decision, it would be the guy who might not help me but isnt going to directly hurt me that will play.


If I had my choice, I would have Weal in the lineup and my lines would look like this...

Raffl-G-Simmonds
Voracek-Couts-Schenn
Weal-Laughton-Read
Vdv-White-PEB

I think your grossly underrating him. and although the stats agree with you, i still dont want to give up on a guy who may have potential somewhere in there and we got for basically nothing. the fact that hak plays umberger every night and not gagner, instantly takes the argument out that hakstol obv sees something about gagner's game he doesnt like. he cant see umbergers flaws so what makes us think he has a sense of gagners. because umbergers cap hit is more? bull

i would be more than happy to fully agree with you that he's grossly overrated, given that he actually gets a shot. we are 47 games in, hes played 20 games and has 5 points. prorated over a full season thats 21 ish points. thats after being shuffled all over the lineup, given zero power play time, with horrid linemates.

youre telling me you couldnt see him capable of maybe 30-40 points as a third line center, given decent 2nd unit pp time, with linemates who have a little offensive skill to them? if you can say no which im sure u will thats fine, but as someone who has played, watched, and worked in hockey, i can tell you chemistry is a huge thing for players (not that this isnt obvious, but it is true in this scenario), especially players who came into this league with such huge expectations and never living up to them. its a lot of pressure and i am all for giving him a solid chance, playing him every game till the end of the year and see what we have. if hes as bad as u think he is, then we let him walk. are we really winning the cup this year? does it hurt to play him and see what we have over guys like umberger(who is absolutely done) and laughton(who actually does have a future here it just doesnt seem it is right now)?
- sjk540

As a 3rd line center, no I don't see him putting up 30-40 points. He would need more icetime, and would need to play with better players to do that.
Your read on Hakstol and what he sees in each player, especially Umberger is off base in my opinion. Here is the difference. Gagner, offers zero value to a team, if he is not scoring. He is not good away from the puck, he does not drive play. He only has one way to contribute, and that's scoring goals, and setting up scoring plays. He has done neither well as a Flyer. That's why he has not been a regular in the lineup. Umberger, despite his offensive game completely disappearing, is still a competent player without the puck, who in most games, checks well, plays well defensively, and doesn't make many mistakes. The truth is that the Flyers need to move on from both players, but with the makeup of the lineup, I'll still take Umberger over Gagner.
Someone who has played, watched, and worked in hockey, should be able to see what Gagner is. A one way offensive player, who isn't that good offensively.

i think with more consistent playing Medvedev works out more and more kinks in his game. what we should be doing is giving hiom the time this year to iron out his problems so come next year he can be a solid contributor. guy has played his whole 32 years on a different continent, with a different style of hockey, on different ice. hes played in what, 30ish games in North America in his whole life? i dont understand why Hak doesnt give him the benefit of the doubt to allow him to work out his issues. unless we dont have any interest in keeping him next year, which i feel is a gross misuse of talent that we have under team control, especially the back end. the guy wont be playing the next 10 years, hes here for another 2/3, perfect timing for when our young guns on the blue line come up.
- sjk540

How is he under team control? After this year he's a UFA coming off of a year making $3M.

i think with more consistent playing Medvedev works out more and more kinks in his game. what we should be doing is giving hiom the time this year to iron out his problems so come next year he can be a solid contributor. guy has played his whole 32 years on a different continent, with a different style of hockey, on different ice. hes played in what, 30ish games in North America in his whole life? i dont understand why Hak doesnt give him the benefit of the doubt to allow him to work out his issues. unless we dont have any interest in keeping him next year, which i feel is a gross misuse of talent that we have under team control, especially the back end. the guy wont be playing the next 10 years, hes here for another 2/3, perfect timing for when our young guns on the blue line come up.
- sjk540

Medvedev has shown that he responds well to sitting out a few games. His game goes south, he sits for a few, and comes back and plays well, for whatever reason. Hakstol knows what he's doing.

Every player has cold streaks. You could fixate on a small sample, or you could look at his career and see that he's been producing at a league-average 2nd-line level for a long time now.

Your way of looking at Gagner is the reverse of those people who are crying Vinny-mismanagement over a few early goals scored w/ the Kings.

Last 3-seasons > handful of games.
- Tomahawk

You clearly don't understand my way of looking at Gagner. My read on Gagner as a player is based on the players entire career. While he's on his cold streak, he is not creating or getting scoring chances, and having bad puck luck. He is not contributing in any other way. He got top 6 minutes at ES and on the PP in Arizona, and they got rid of him. Edmonton got rid of him. It's obvious why, he's not that good.

wow, youd rather have umberger, and not only that you say amen? guy hasnt had a goal in a year. has played in 12 more games as gagner and has 1 more point. u guys seem to forget that we have been outscored by every team in the league minus the ducks. thats pathetic. imagine if we were middle of the pack in scoring, we would surely be in a playoff spot. im not saying that would single-handedly be gagner, but it would help a little. umberger is done. hes slow, he has no offensive anymore. he drags everyone down and even the advanced stats prove it. gagner can skate somewhat, hes a right handed stick which means on the 2nd unit pp he can kinda play the giroux role on the far half boards, and he may gain some confidence being placed as a center again instead of on the wing. u guys can say hes done nothing to show u anything all u want, but i dont believe hes had the chance. if he played every game so far and still had these numbers i wouldnt be saying anything. give the guy a chance, build some kind of sample size, then grade him.
- sjk540

Haven't forgotten anything, just don't think Gagner is going to change the Flyers offense. Gagner is not a better skater and is not good away from the puck. Neither player is scoring, so who do you take? The better player away from the puck.
Reminds of Akeson and how he didn't get a chance. Gagner is just another persecuted player who hasn't been given a chance.

He got top 6 minutes at ES and on the PP in Arizona, and they got rid of him. Edmonton got rid of him. It's obvious why, he's not that good.
- MJL

You said something similar about MDZ, iirc.

You said something similar about MDZ, iirc.
- Tomahawk

Feel free to provide a link. The discussion is about Gagner.

As a 3rd line center, no I don't see him putting up 30-40 points. He would need more icetime, and would need to play with better players to do that.
Your read on Hakstol and what he sees in each player, especially Umberger is off base in my opinion. Here is the difference. Gagner, offers zero value to a team, if he is not scoring. He is not good away from the puck, he does not drive play. He only has one way to contribute, and that's scoring goals, and setting up scoring plays. He has done neither well as a Flyer. That's why he has not been a regular in the lineup. Umberger, despite his offensive game completely disappearing, is still a competent player without the puck, who in most games, checks well, plays well defensively, and doesn't make many mistakes. The truth is that the Flyers need to move on from both players, but with the makeup of the lineup, I'll still take Umberger over Gagner.
Someone who has played, watched, and worked in hockey, should be able to see what Gagner is. A one way offensive player, who isn't that good offensively.
- MJL

OK well thats your opinion, you dont see him putting up 30-40 points, i do. exactly for the reasons u said he isnt doing that. he needs ice time, he needs solid wingers. who else after our top 6 has the potential that gagner once had or maybe even still has? hes an unknown and you will never know until u get him that ice time. this year is a write off. if we make the playoffs great, we probably wont, but i know what is hurting our team, its offense. umberger cannot supply it, gagner may be able to. your sample size of 20 games is really what your going on. the guy, before this year, has 336 points in 562 games. thats not bad at all. not bad for a 26 year old. and really who is so deserving of taking the third line center spot so far? no one has stepped up, no one has claimed it. laughton cant do it obviously, PEB is a solid fourth liner, but has little offensive skill, raffl is much better suited to wing although its nice he can play center. so really, who is making a huge contribution in that spot. no one. guy had 41 points in 81 games last year with trash wingers on the worst offensive team in the league, really, you dont think he can score 30-40 with say, wingers like raffl/read/laughton/weal?? i really think you have some kind of bias vs him from somewhere else, because a sample size of 20 games in a new system with new teammates in an entirely new conference, is not enough. so what he isnt great in his own zone, there are players in the league who are not good in their own zone but bring a certain skill to a team that negates it. 5 points in 20 games under his circumstances i think are enough to warrant more of a look. if we already have our top two lines set, give him a set of wingers he can grow with. you would want those circumstances for any player, whoever fits into our 3C, why not him. at least this year, i mean, what are we missing out on this year, what are we losing by playing him?

i mean under team control, like hes on our team, not contract wise. hes under contract this year, if he is an asset but we just dont know, its such a waste, especially since we practically got him for free. he cant command the same dollars his current contract is just due to the fact theres no way over half a season he can go on that big of a hot streak. but if he does show you something towards the end of the year great, if not, let him walk.

my read on hakstol is actually pretty astute in my opinion, in ur opinion thats ok, but his moves are questionable and im not the only one wondering/questioning them.

player A 20 games, 5 points
player B 32 games, 6 points

saying that Gagner brings zero value, what are u saying umberger brings then. gagner is a better skater no question. not as big or tough, doesnt use the body as much, but is a better skater. and yes umberger is better without the puck, but thats great, add in more players who bring nothing offensively and lets continue to be 29th in the league in scoring. thats really helping us. our goalies really love to only let in 2 goals and win as much as they lose. a goalie who lets in 2 goals a night should win more often than not. and even if you dont agree with that, they should lose much, much less than our current tandem does.

if u watch every game like i have, u should be able to see that gagner does bring SOME value, much more than umberger, and he should be given a shot. but guess well agree to disagree

Medvedev has shown that he responds well to sitting out a few games. His game goes south, he sits for a few, and comes back and plays well, for whatever reason. Hakstol knows what he's doing.
- MJL

so thats what u think is knowing what theyre doing, so for his whole career, medvedev will be tasked with knowing once he messes up hes gonna sit for a few games, then be brought back in for a couple games, before he turns south and has to sit a few games? yea, for a guy who has never played in north america and has to acclimate himself to not only the language, but the ice dimensions, the play and style, etc etc, really?? thats what knowing what ur doing looks like?

what it looks to me is hes killing confidence and not letting him get into a groove. whats the best way to learn? learning from mistakes. like ive said over and over this year is a wash, we are obviously not a playoff team. playing in games is the only way to get better. is schultz apart of this future? no. is manning? maybe, but i would think he takes a back seat to every prospect we have in the minors on defense. what is the harm playing him and letting him learn through his mistakes?

honestly, its not the way to bring the best out of your players, its not a pattern that can continue if u want to make medvedev a successful player. if you honestly think thats is hakstol knowing what hes doing, u havent watched hockey long enough

OK well thats your opinion, you dont see him putting up 30-40 points, i do. exactly for the reasons u said he isnt doing that. he needs ice time, he needs solid wingers. who else after our top 6 has the potential that gagner once had or maybe even still has? hes an unknown and you will never know until u get him that ice time. this year is a write off. if we make the playoffs great, we probably wont, but i know what is hurting our team, its offense. umberger cannot supply it, gagner may be able to. your sample size of 20 games is really what your going on. the guy, before this year, has 336 points in 562 games. thats not bad at all. not bad for a 26 year old. and really who is so deserving of taking the third line center spot so far? no one has stepped up, no one has claimed it. laughton cant do it obviously, PEB is a solid fourth liner, but has little offensive skill, raffl is much better suited to wing although its nice he can play center. so really, who is making a huge contribution in that spot. no one. guy had 41 points in 81 games last year with trash wingers on the worst offensive team in the league, really, you dont think he can score 30-40 with say, wingers like raffl/read/laughton/weal?? i really think you have some kind of bias vs him from somewhere else, because a sample size of 20 games in a new system with new teammates in an entirely new conference, is not enough. so what he isnt great in his own zone, there are players in the league who are not good in their own zone but bring a certain skill to a team that negates it. 5 points in 20 games under his circumstances i think are enough to warrant more of a look. if we already have our top two lines set, give him a set of wingers he can grow with. you would want those circumstances for any player, whoever fits into our 3C, why not him. at least this year, i mean, what are we missing out on this year, what are we losing by playing him?

i mean under team control, like hes on our team, not contract wise. hes under contract this year, if he is an asset but we just dont know, its such a waste, especially since we practically got him for free. he cant command the same dollars his current contract is just due to the fact theres no way over half a season he can go on that big of a hot streak. but if he does show you something towards the end of the year great, if not, let him walk.

my read on hakstol is actually pretty astute in my opinion, in ur opinion thats ok, but his moves are questionable and im not the only one wondering/questioning them.

player A 20 games, 5 points
player B 32 games, 6 points

saying that Gagner brings zero value, what are u saying umberger brings then. gagner is a better skater no question. not as big or tough, doesnt use the body as much, but is a better skater. and yes umberger is better without the puck, but thats great, add in more players who bring nothing offensively and lets continue to be 29th in the league in scoring. thats really helping us. our goalies really love to only let in 2 goals and win as much as they lose. a goalie who lets in 2 goals a night should win more often than not. and even if you dont agree with that, they should lose much, much less than our current tandem does.

if u watch every game like i have, u should be able to see that gagner does bring SOME value, much more than umberger, and he should be given a shot. but guess well agree to disagree
- sjk540

The difference is that my opinion actually has some basis behind it. You made the statement that Gagner could put up 30-40 points as a 3rd line center. I don't think he can, and here is why. In the last 3 seasons before the current season, Gagner has gotten top 6 icetime at ES and top 6 PP time, and he only put up points in the 30-40 point range. What basis do you have to show that he can score at that level production as a 3rd line center?
You're incorrect that I have a bias concerning him. I can easily say the same to you.

I don't think you had the right read on why Hakstol has been scratching Medvedev, so I would say your observations aren't astute.
Gagner, if he is not producing points, has zero value to a team. I outlined in previous posts what value Umberger brings to a team. If neither are producing points, Umberger is the better player.
Also as I stated previously, neither player should be a part of the Flyers future. Umberger's contract status is different from Gagner's. The best thing the Flyers can do with Gagner, is trade him for whatever future asset they can get.

so thats what u think is knowing what theyre doing, so for his whole career, medvedev will be tasked with knowing once he messes up hes gonna sit for a few games, then be brought back in for a couple games, before he turns south and has to sit a few games? yea, for a guy who has never played in north america and has to acclimate himself to not only the language, but the ice dimensions, the play and style, etc etc, really?? thats what knowing what ur doing looks like?

what it looks to me is hes killing confidence and not letting him get into a groove. whats the best way to learn? learning from mistakes. like ive said over and over this year is a wash, we are obviously not a playoff team. playing in games is the only way to get better. is schultz apart of this future? no. is manning? maybe, but i would think he takes a back seat to every prospect we have in the minors on defense. what is the harm playing him and letting him learn through his mistakes?

honestly, its not the way to bring the best out of your players, its not a pattern that can continue if u want to make medvedev a successful player. if you honestly think thats is hakstol knowing what hes doing, u havent watched hockey long enough
- sjk540

I think it's pretty obvious why. Medvedev is not a young rookie. He is 32 years old. If he is that fragile mentally, then he isn't that good anyway. Luke Schenn is much younger and he had frequent stretches of not playing, he is now playing well in LA. Didn't kill his confidence by sitting. Just excuses being offered. Medvedev gets lackadaisical in his play, and his attention to detail, and his play away from the puck wanes. It's not issues with playing in NA.That's why Hakstol sits him. He comes back and plays well for a while. It's pretty obvious.
I love Medvedev's skill level, and when he's playing well, he makes the Flyers better. Unfortunately, that player doesn't always show up.

The difference is that my opinion actually has some basis behind it. You made the statement that Gagner could put up 30-40 points as a 3rd line center. I don't think he can, and here is why. In the last 3 seasons before the current season, Gagner has gotten top 6 icetime at ES and top 6 PP time, and he only put up points in the 30-40 point range. What basis do you have to show that he can score at that level production as a 3rd line center?
You're incorrect that I have a bias concerning him. I can easily say the same to you.

I don't think you had the right read on why Hakstol has been scratching Medvedev, so I would say your observations aren't astute.
Gagner, if he is not producing points, has zero value to a team. I outlined in previous posts what value Umberger brings to a team. If neither are producing points, Umberger is the better player.
Also as I stated previously, neither player should be a part of the Flyers future. Umberger's contract status is different from Gagner's. The best thing the Flyers can do with Gagner, is trade him for whatever future asset they can get.
- MJL

Believe me i get why you say you'd rather have umberger in the lineup over gagner, whole-heartedly disagree, but i understand. the thought here is that in order for one to score, they must get ice time. your judgment that him having only 5 points in 20 games is enough to dismiss him as having zero value because, in essence, his numbers havent stacked up. my argument is to give him that ice time, and allow him to either show you or not what he has left. being a former top 10 pick, there was a reason he was drafted there, because he showed he had a lot of skill prior to being drafted in the Canadian Hockey Leagues. Your arguments about why you would want umberger out over gagner due to if they are not scoring you'd rather have the lumbering, no offensive skill whatsoever player because he's good without the puck, take a read at the below, directly from pattisonave.com about his advanced stats:

And for all the heat he takes defensively, Domenic Galamini’s wonderful evaluation tools at http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/ show that Gagner’s CF/60 was 5.5 higher than his teammates’ and his CA/60 was 2.6 lower–meaning he made Arizona better both offensively and defensively when he was on the ice. His CorsiRel was a very robust 12.6. These numbers were sheltered by the favorable deployment in terms of zone starts he got, but they illustrate that he’s still capable of being an NHL-caliber player, despite what Don Maloney says.

So basically this shows me as a third line center, with offensive capabilities, if you shelter his minutes, you make him useful and therefore, may not be so big of a defensive liability, especially if you put him on a line that i suggested, with reputable 200 feet players like matt read and raffl. here's another interesting piece of info from pattisonave.com:

For all the talk about his inconsistency, Sam Gagner’s actually been pretty consistent in his overall production throughout the years. His goals per game has hovered between 0.15 and 0.29, his assists per game has fluctuated between 0.32 and 0.5, and he’s clocked in between 0.51 and 0.79 PPG, with his career year a 14-24-38 line in the 48 game lockout-shortened season. For his career, he’s a 0.21 GPG, 0.39 APG, and 0.60 PPG player. For comparison, Brayden Schenn (who is 2 years younger) is a 0.21 GPG, 0.28 APG, and 0.49 PPG player in his NHL career.

Now yes, this was all before the year has started back in June when the trade initially happened, but whats changed since. 20 games is the only thing, and of course 32 games having to watch umberger flail around out there. the guy is so inept at scoring, that if you just replace umberger and put gagner in that same spot, i believe we have more goals overall, as umberger continues to look like he never had an offensive game whatsoever.

if u really feel like umberger is a better option thats fine, our goals per game and our record certainly disagree with you. i cant however prove that gagner would make both of those points better, but i can argue that it would be hard to be worse than umberger's contributions. besides the fact umberger bring no special team skill whatsoever, our PP could sure use a one dimensional offensive guy, and thats gagner's pedigree. so maybe gagner would bring more than zero value, as you so eloquently put it

I think it's pretty obvious why. Medvedev is not a young rookie. He is 32 years old. If he is that fragile mentally, then he isn't that good anyway. Luke Schenn is much younger and he had frequent stretches of not playing, he is now playing well in LA. Didn't kill his confidence by sitting. Just excuses being offered. Medvedev gets lackadaisical in his play, and his attention to detail, and his play away from the puck wanes. It's not issues with playing in NA.That's why Hakstol sits him. He comes back and plays well for a while. It's pretty obvious.
I love Medvedev's skill level, and when he's playing well, he makes the Flyers better. Unfortunately, that player doesn't always show up.
- MJL

didnt say anything about mental fragility, i said about him acclimating to north american play. yea hes 32 years old, 31 and a half in which he spent time in another country. leaving him in the press box deters his learning curve from every coming to fruition in fully learning to play on N.A. ice. i love his skill set, you obviously do too, playing manning over him doesnt make sense to me whatsoever, it is limiting medvedev. if u can get the player medvedev is on those good nights, more often than not, its a boon to the defensive corps as a whole, and the only thing preventing it from being a possibility is hakstol sitting him in clumps of games. disagree all you want, but it makes zero sense to me.

Believe me i get why you say you'd rather have umberger in the lineup over gagner, whole-heartedly disagree, but i understand. the thought here is that in order for one to score, they must get ice time. your judgment that him having only 5 points in 20 games is enough to dismiss him as having zero value because, in essence, his numbers havent stacked up. my argument is to give him that ice time, and allow him to either show you or not what he has left. being a former top 10 pick, there was a reason he was drafted there, because he showed he had a lot of skill prior to being drafted in the Canadian Hockey Leagues. Your arguments about why you would want umberger out over gagner due to if they are not scoring you'd rather have the lumbering, no offensive skill whatsoever player because he's good without the puck, take a read at the below, directly from pattisonave.com about his advanced stats:


- sjk540

I'm familiar with the advanced stats of both players, I don't need to read anything on them. Your take on how I formed my opinion on Gagner is incorrect. My opinion is formed on watching him play. Which is how I came to the opinion that Gagner is a one dimensional offensive player, who other than offense, brings nothing else to the ice as a player. His scoring totals this season are just indicative of how he has produced offensively this season. Where he was drafted, and what his talent level was is irrelevant. All that matters is what kind of player he is today. In my opinion, he is not a very good all around player, and is a mediocre offensive player. Umberger has been getting more scoring chances than he has lately, and is more noticeable.
I'll again state that, and this is the important part. If neither player is scoring, Umberger is the better player.
I think your attempting to state and make an excuse for Gagner, that he hasn't scored, because he hasn't gotten ice time. I don't agree. He's had plenty of opportunity to make an impression. If he was placed on a scoring line, and played with good players, I think he can put up decent offensive numbers. Same as he has the last 3 previous seasons. In my opinion, I don't want him in my top 6.

And for all the heat he takes defensively, Domenic Galamini’s wonderful evaluation tools at http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/ show that Gagner’s CF/60 was 5.5 higher than his teammates’ and his CA/60 was 2.6 lower–meaning he made Arizona better both offensively and defensively when he was on the ice. His CorsiRel was a very robust 12.6. These numbers were sheltered by the favorable deployment in terms of zone starts he got, but they illustrate that he’s still capable of being an NHL-caliber player, despite what Don Maloney says.


- sjk540

All team numbers, not individual numbers. When did Don Maloney state that Gagner is not an NHL caliber player? I think he's an NHL caliber player, just not a good enough player, to be part of the future of this team. Nor is he the type of player I want in the bottom 6.

So basically this shows me as a third line center, with offensive capabilities, if you shelter his minutes, you make him useful and therefore, may not be so big of a defensive liability, especially if you put him on a line that i suggested, with reputable 200 feet players like matt read and raffl. here's another interesting piece of info from pattisonave.com:


- sjk540

He will be a defensive liability. He has no game defensively, he is not good away from the puck. He is not effective in board battles. I want a more complete two way player in that 3rd line spot.

For all the talk about his inconsistency, Sam Gagner’s actually been pretty consistent in his overall production throughout the years. His goals per game has hovered between 0.15 and 0.29, his assists per game has fluctuated between 0.32 and 0.5, and he’s clocked in between 0.51 and 0.79 PPG, with his career year a 14-24-38 line in the 48 game lockout-shortened season. For his career, he’s a 0.21 GPG, 0.39 APG, and 0.60 PPG player. For comparison, Brayden Schenn (who is 2 years younger) is a 0.21 GPG, 0.28 APG, and 0.49 PPG player in his NHL career.


- sjk540

All of that is with top 6 ice time and PP time. Not 3rd line ice time, with 3rd line players.

Now yes, this was all before the year has started back in June when the trade initially happened, but whats changed since. 20 games is the only thing, and of course 32 games having to watch umberger flail around out there. the guy is so inept at scoring, that if you just replace umberger and put gagner in that same spot, i believe we have more goals overall, as umberger continues to look like he never had an offensive game whatsoever.


- sjk540

The Flyers may score more goals, but so will the other team. Flyers are a good team defensively at 5 on 5.

if u really feel like umberger is a better option thats fine, our goals per game and our record certainly disagree with you. i cant however prove that gagner would make both of those points better, but i can argue that it would be hard to be worse than umberger's contributions. besides the fact umberger bring no special team skill whatsoever, our PP could sure use a one dimensional offensive guy, and thats gagner's pedigree. so maybe gagner would bring more than zero value, as you so eloquently put it
- sjk540

Yes, if neither player is scoring, Umberger is the better player, and the better option.
Gagner has gotten plenty of PP time on the 2nd unit when he's been in the lineup. He has 1 PP point on the season. He has not shown that he can the PP QB or that the play can be funneled through him, to the point where he can make a difference.

Since you like advances stats so much, here's one for you.

Umberger is 2nd among forwards on the team in GF/60 at 2.30. Gagner is 10th with 1.55.

http://stats.hockeyanalys...als&sort=F60&sortdir=DESC

didnt say anything about mental fragility, i said about him acclimating to north american play. yea hes 32 years old, 31 and a half in which he spent time in another country. leaving him in the press box deters his learning curve from every coming to fruition in fully learning to play on N.A. ice. i love his skill set, you obviously do too, playing manning over him doesnt make sense to me whatsoever, it is limiting medvedev. if u can get the player medvedev is on those good nights, more often than not, its a boon to the defensive corps as a whole, and the only thing preventing it from being a possibility is hakstol sitting him in clumps of games. disagree all you want, but it makes zero sense to me.
- sjk540

Sure you did, you clearly talked about killing confidence. That relates to the mental side of the game. Sitting out doesn't automatically deter a players learning curve, in fact at times it can enhance it. Medvedev plays better after sitting out! Video and practice time can be big aid for player.
Hakstol knows what he's doing.