More spin. McDavid and Draisatl often play together. The difference is 23 seconds per game. Hardly equal to the O'Reilly/ Schenn situation.

This is another instance where a PT21 fact is used. You state that it's a rare exception without offering any evidence to support it. You're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. Coaches splitting up top lines to get scoring depth through a lineup is certainly not rare. Your comments here continue to be illogical.
- MJL

Schenn and O'Reilly also played together throughout that playoffs. Schenn played RW on ROR line

Do the hard work yourself to refute it. Look up the NHL stats page. I did when we had the same discussion some months back.

The reason why so much seems "babble/noise/overthinking/semantics/spin" to you is because of the earlier equation I mentioned.

Good night

Sure. But I don't think calling Schenn a 1C on that team is a travesty at all. It may not be the only definition, because ROR has a monster playoffs, but it is a valid one.

Which is all I need to say that Schenn has lived up to historic expectations for his draft position.
- PT21

eh. i still think the first hill is a bit of a stretch. ROR was the closest thing that team had to a number one center, but then again the blues werent built in a traditional 1C approach anyway.

historically, sure he did. hes still playing. at a certain point, historical data relative to the entire draft history can only take you so far for reliable analysis moving forward.

Only if you equate: 1st line player in a position as best player in that position.

Last year, Rutta was listed as 1D pairing opposite Hedman. Yet the guys behind him: Cernak and Savard, were easily better players. It was just a question of spreading the wealth. Because Hedman was so good, he could carry Rutta better than McDonagh and Sergachev. Thus, Rutta became 1st pairing ahead of Cernak and Savard not because he was better but because of positional synergies.
- PT21

Last year in the playoffs, Rutta was 6th on the team in EV ice time. Clearly he was not a 1D. No PP time and .47 per game SH

The Eagles Fans had 58 years of futility to instruct them of the risks in jumping to conclusions. So, come back in 11 years and maybe everyone will be ready.
- iamscore2day

I understand what you are saying, but its a different vibe.

Part of it is of course is that college players in football have much more publicity (in nature and in playing years) than NHL prospects, so volatility of opinion is much less.

Last year in the playoffs, Rutta was 6th on the team in EV ice time. Clearly he was not a 1D. No PP time and .47 per game SH
- MJL

yep. just a testament to the greatness of hedman.

Schenn and O'Reilly also played together throughout that playoffs. Schenn played RW on ROR line

Do the hard work yourself to refute it. Look up the NHL stats page. I did when we had the same discussion some months back.

The reason why so much seems "babble/noise/overthinking/semantics/spin" to you is because of the earlier equation I mentioned.

Good night
- PT21

All the factual evidence, which has been provided to you clearly refutes your premise that Schenn was 1C. Clearly you are uninformed.

Strange that the teams 1C was moved to wing to play with O'Reilly.

speaking of players how's haag doing

eh. i still think the first hill is a bit of a stretch. ROR was the closest thing that team had to a number one center, but then again the blues werent built in a traditional 1C approach anyway.

historically, sure he did. hes still playing. at a certain point, historical data relative to the entire draft history can only take you so far for reliable analysis moving forward.
- stayinthefnnet

You are again equating No 1 center = best center. Ofc, ROR was that.

I am calling the 1C the center at top of depth chart/ who plays with 1st line wingers in line combos (whi I assume are uncontroversial for the Blues)

All the factual evidence, which has been provided to you clearly refutes your premise that Schenn was 1C. Clearly you are uninformed.

Strange that the teams 1C was moved to wing to play with O'Reilly.
- MJL

Your logic is as magnificently compelling as usual, even without the "absolutely" as proof of reasoning.

No stranger than the fact that our own 1LW by your definition (Roo) sometimes has played 3C.

You are again equating No 1 center = best center. Ofc, ROR was that.

I am calling the 1C the center at top of depth chart/ who plays with 1st line wingers in line combos (whi I assume are uncontroversial for the Blues)
- PT21

No he's not equating that. We know what you are calling the #1 center. That's simply wrong. The 1C is the center who plays the most. Especially in all situations. When a team like Edmonton has two #1 centers, ice time can be similar

Your logic is as magnificently compelling as usual, even without the "absolutely" as proof of reasoning.

No stranger than the fact that our own 1LW by your definition (Roo) sometimes has played 3C.
- PT21

Again, you're confusing a coach looking for chemistry or depth through the lineup with a players designation. You can play McDavid on the 4th line at center. Doesn't make him a 4C. I bet if we looked at a game that you claim that Giroux played 3C that his ice time doesn't reflect that.

I understand what you are saying, but its a different vibe.

Part of it is of course is that college players in football have much more publicity (in nature and in playing years) than NHL prospects, so volatility of opinion is much less.
- PT21

TBH, I think this is true of the fans of every city that I have ever lived in. Boston fans firmly believed that their Red Sox stars were the best at their positions in the league. Talk to a skins fan when they are winning and their view that their players were the best was enough to make you gag. As for NY teams ...

No he's not equating that. We know what you are calling the #1 center. That's simply wrong. The 1C is the center who plays the most. Especially in all situations. When a team like Edmonton has two #1 centers, ice time can be similar
- MJL

Well argued indeed. But didn't you mean: absolutely wrong?

Your definition of 1c is based on quality. It is the top center. Mine is positional: it is the center on the first line. Usually the two coincide. In this case it doesn't.

On to the topic at hand. Schenn was a good prospect. However, he did not make a LA team starved of centers out of camp. He did not make it next year either.

Based on this, I do not believe there is any empirical evidence to suggest he did not live up to his promise, and even less that we stunted his growth if I even call him a top 2 C on a cup team.

And by evidence, I don't mean of the "we absolutely stunted his growth" kind.

TBH, I think this is true of the fans of every city that I have ever lived in. Boston fans firmly believed that their Red Sox stars were the best at their positions in the league. Talk to a skins fan when they are winning and their view that their players were the best was enough to make you gag. As for NY teams ...
- iamscore2day

I agree. Thats exactly where an expert analysis, or draft position, comes in handly. A detached/global/dispassionate perspective.

Well argued indeed. But didn't you mean: absolutely wrong?

Your definition of 1c is based on quality. It is the top center. Mine is positional: it is the center on the first line. Usually the two coincide. In this case it doesn't.

On to the topic at hand. Schenn was a good prospect. However, he did not make a LA team starved of centers out of camp. He did not make it next year either.

Based on this, I do not believe there is any empirical evidence to suggest he did not live up to his promise, and even less that we stunted his growth if I even call him a top 2 C on a cup team.

And by evidence, I don't mean of the "we absolutely stunted his growth" kind.

- PT21

Tell me why the first line is designated by the wingers and not the center?

Your point about LA being starved for centers is false. They had Kopitar, Stoll and Handzus.

You seem to be missing the nuance that it's not about Schenn's entire career but what he did and how he was handled as a Flyer. The Flyers continually moved him around the lineup. From center to wing. From line to line. That didn't do him any favors as a young player.

Your continued attempts at insults won't change that the facts are not on your side.

Tell me why the first line is designated by the wingers and not the center?

Your point about LA being starved for centers is false. They had Kopitar, Stoll and Handzus.

You seem to be missing the nuance that it's not about Schenn's entire career but what he did and how he was handled as a Flyer. The Flyers continually moved him around the lineup. From center to wing. From line to line. That didn't do him any favors as a young player.

Your continued attempts at insults won't change that the facts are not on your side.
- MJL

ill say this though. at least with the moving of schenn around, it could be argued that it was done to potentially ice the best team at the time to try to win games.

right now, the development of frost and others should outweigh winning games. put the kid in a position to succeed and staple him there until the end of the year.

Tell me why the first line is designated by the wingers and not the center?

Your point about LA being starved for centers is false. They had Kopitar, Stoll and Handzus.

You seem to be missing the nuance that it's not about Schenn's entire career but what he did and how he was handled as a Flyer. The Flyers continually moved him around the lineup. From center to wing. From line to line. That didn't do him any favors as a young player.

Your continued attempts at insults won't change that the facts are not on your side.
- MJL

That is a very good question, honestly. It's probably based on both. I do not know what comprises the designation, frankly. Last year, the Hedman-Rutta line was universally listed as the first pairing in all line combos such as daily faceoff. That is what I am using as my definition.

A big ha ha ha about Stoll and Handzus btw. The former was a checking line center. The latter was rapidly becoming even slower than he was with us.

Show me clear data based projections of where Schenn was expected to be at the start of his career, and where he was before he left the Flyers, and the gap if any. I have already provided at least one such measure (historical draft record). By that measure, whether you accept it or ot, he did not just live up to expectations, he surpassed them.

The reason he falls short in your estimation is because you raised them irrationally high. The reason why you believe it is a "fact" is because you cannot distinguish your own assessments from data based empirical ones, and as such, don't really understand what the origin of the word "facts" means (and its role in western life from the time of the empiricists of ancient Greece.)

I understand what you are saying, but its a different vibe.

Part of it is of course is that college players in football have much more publicity (in nature and in playing years) than NHL prospects, so volatility of opinion is much less.
- PT21

Not wrong there. College Football is the 2nd largest sports entertainment producer after the NFL in the U.S.

Some people are fully invested in these guys before they play a professional down. It was just a few months ago I was telling my friends who happen to be Cowboys fans that they hit the lottery on Parsons, and should stop their kvetching they didn’t get the corner they wanted. I already knew he was a stud, hands down. Many college fans can pick exceptional players out and tell you all about them, and many of those players can’t even legally order a Jack ‘n Coke yet.

In hockey, we’re often going off of stat sheets, “insider” information, and YouTube highlights.

Very few of us actually know who/what is going on come draft day.

We suck it up with a straw to the brain nonetheless.

Not wrong there. College Football is the 2nd largest sports entertainment producer after the NFL in the U.S.

Some people are fully invested in these guys before they play a professional down. It was just a few months ago I was telling my friends who happen to be Cowboys fans that they hit the lottery on Parsons, and should stop their kvetching they didn’t get the corner they wanted. I already knew he was a stud, hands down. Many college fans can pick exceptional players out and tell you all about them, and many of those players can’t even legally order a Jack ‘n Coke yet.

In hockey, we’re often going off of stat sheets, “insider” information, and YouTube highlights.

Very few of us actually know who/what come draft day.

We suck it up with a straw to the brain nonetheless.
- Hesh_

definitely this.

definitely this.
- stayinthefnnet

Cin cin.

Ha! How's player development working out with Chris Stewart?
- PLindbergh31

😆 all the Fletch friends stinks! I think Dave Stewart from the Eurythmics would done a better job

Good morning

It is so disheartening watching so few people just destroy this website on a daily basis with their Richard swinging BS.

Just stop.

I used to just like to read the convos, most of the time I didn't even glance to see who made the post.

Now, and I am sure I am not the only one, I glance and see who is writing what, and I just skip it altogether because I know its going to be some Richard swinging, "I'm smarter or more snarky clever than you" post.

Most of the good posters have left. And now we are left with the contaminated detritus poisoning it for those who are left.

The mods don't do poop, and they allow people who do get banned to OPENLY break forum rules by creating alternate accounts so they can continue to spread their bile.

Its why I canceled my season ticket renewal and I encourage all others to do the same. Maybe hitting Eklund in his wallet will finally get someone in here to clean this poop pile up once and for all.

It is so disheartening watching so few people just destroy this website on a daily basis with their Richard swinging BS.

Just stop.

I used to just like to read the convos, most of the time I didn't even glance to see who made the post.

Now, and I am sure I am not the only one, I glance and see who is writing what, and I just skip it altogether because I know its going to be some Richard swinging, "I'm smarter or more snarky clever than you" post.

Most of the good posters have left. And now we are left with the contaminated detritus poisoning it for those who are left.

The mods don't do poop, and they allow people who do get banned to OPENLY break forum rules by creating alternate accounts so they can continue to spread their bile.

Its why I canceled my season ticket renewal and I encourage all others to do the same. Maybe hitting Eklund in his wallet will finally get someone in here to clean this poop pile up once and for all.
- MBFlyerfan

Yeah. On occasion it gets ridiculous. Just keep it to hockey conversations IMO. the part I can’t stand is that if someone disagrees with you, here comes the personal attack or insult. Instead of understanding that it’s an opinion. You are allowed to disagree and just leave it at that.

It’s not a zero sum game.

Good morning to all. Hope everyone slept well.