Aircool Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 52 minutes ago, ABNuck said: You know what's really funny? You calling me unintelligent (when in fact you don't know me, so...there's that)...besides pointing out the fact that you don't seem to know the difference between statistics and analytics...now THAT is what I call unintelligent. The league has been compiling stats for more than a century, and as I stated in my post, THEY are the real and true indication of what happened on the ice (ie/ player A appears to play better with Player B as the stats prove that the two working together have better corsi, +/-, or whatever). Analytics is the breakdown of those stats as they are used to try and predict how a player might play in certain situations (ie/ 3rd period offensive draw on the right side while the opposing team has players X,Y,Z stacked on the net side with goaltender W in net after facing more than 30 shots on a night where he just played 48 hours earlier and faced 35 shots in that game blah blah blah blah). What analytics won't tell you is that while the STATS support throwing out player A and player B in that situation, there's no record of what happened between periods 2 and 3 when player A found out that player B slept with his wife a week ago...and his dog died...and he just sold his house...and his best friend from high school was in a car accident...blah blah blah blah. GET IT NOW??? So throwing Player A and B out there might get you the same result as throwing Player C and D out there...if the coach knows what the heck he's doing (actually played the game and understands players...something a number crunching geek-bag has no clue about). But just as a number crunching geek-bag doesn't expect a "dumb jock" to understand analytics, I don't expect a number crunching geek-bag to understand hockey. So I guess there's that too. I know the difference between analytics and statistics. So you can argue semantics in what I'm saying all you'd like... It just goes to show you have no argument of substance against what I'm saying. This is the best comeback you can come with. I'm offended, you called me unintelligent, you shouldn't judge a person's intelligence by their opinions, haha btw your argument is so bad you don't know the difference between X and Y but let me not argue against your argument. Okay... I think even less of you now. Statistics are DEFINITELY not interpretive and good analytics aren't either... All you have to do is observe how well your analytics perform in terms of predicting outcomes/production to evaluate their efficacy. If you are perfectly predicting player's point production and team's results in games, then your analytics are perfect. Otherwise you have a margin of error, the smaller you can make that, the better... Otherwise go back to the drawing board... The notion that they are completely interpretive suggests that they are complete opinion and cannot be objectively evaluated... This is obviously false. Just to argue semantics, because apparently this is how you win a debate (am I getting this right?)... Analytics isn't the breakdown of statistics.. You can't break a statistic down, statistics are almost exclusively countable values or ratios... Analytics is the combination of statistics/data, not the breaking down of statistics. Pssh noob. LOL the funny thing is, hockey is simple, math is hard. In terms of understanding anyways. Your argument for experience is a pathetic one again though... Experience is EXTREMELY useful, but the ridiculously narrow situations you paint are laughable. Any intelligent person will understand that analytics has value, to deny the value of analytics is to be stupid. There are no exceptions to this statement. You are incapable of basic reasoning to not understand this. An equally as stupid person would believe that analytics are at a point where we need no other form of observation and evaluation. We are nowhere near there in any sport, because sports are very complicated dynamic events. There is too much data to represent given our current computer and information gathering techniques/capabilities. Which automatically rules out the idea of perfect analytics, but that doesn't mean one can't start on a foundation of useful analytics (of which hockey admittedly has few)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 9 minutes ago, Aircool said: I know the difference between analytics and statistics. So you can argue semantics in what I'm saying all you'd like... It just goes to show you have no argument of substance against what I'm saying. This is the best comeback you can come with. I'm offended, you called me unintelligent, you shouldn't judge a person's intelligence by their opinions, haha btw your argument is so bad you don't know the difference between X and Y but let me not argue against your argument. Okay... I think even less of you now. Statistics are DEFINITELY not interpretive and good analytics aren't either... All you have to do is observe how well your analytics perform in terms of predicting outcomes/production to evaluate their efficacy. If you are perfectly predicting player's point production and team's results in games, then your analytics are perfect. Otherwise you have a margin of error, the smaller you can make that, the better... Otherwise go back to the drawing board... The notion that they are completely interpretive suggests that they are complete opinion and cannot be objectively evaluated... This is obviously false. Just to argue semantics, because apparently this is how you win a debate (am I getting this right?)... Analytics isn't the breakdown of statistics.. You can't break a statistic down, statistics are almost exclusively countable values or ratios... Analytics is the combination of statistics/data, not the breaking down of statistics. Pssh noob. LOL the funny thing is, hockey is simple, math is hard. In terms of understanding anyways. Your argument for experience is a pathetic one again though... Experience is EXTREMELY useful, but the ridiculously narrow situations you paint are laughable. Any intelligent person will understand that analytics has value, to deny the value of analytics is to be stupid. There are no exceptions to this statement. You are incapable of basic reasoning to not understand this. An equally as stupid person would believe that analytics are at a point where we need no other form of observation and evaluation. We are nowhere near there in any sport, because sports are very complicated dynamic events. There is too much data to represent given our current computer and information gathering techniques/capabilities. Which automatically rules out the idea of perfect analytics, but that doesn't mean one can't start on a foundation of useful analytics (of which hockey admittedly has few)... So we're into this are we? First off I'll state that I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain this to you. But to crap on someone with experience and say it is irrelevant to the argument is insulting in the highest order, so listen up Lord Aircool (or whatever your D&D screen name is)...you are one of the prime examples of why I can't stand the XBox generation. I'm betting the closest you've ever gotten to hockey is when your batteries were low and you had to revert to the old school plug in controller. Ever wonder what's it's like to be traded as a player? To play on a new team, new teammates, new coach, new system? To play half the season's games in a new arena? Live in a new city with a family that puts you up for the winter? To leave friends and family behind to play the game you love? I do...it's called experience...and there's no analytic for it. Ever experienced the joy of scoring 2 goals in game...as a 4th line plug? It's pure f'ing ecstacy mate...no drug like it. Ever experience the joy of hearing your name called repeatedly over the PA system...having the crowd cheer for you...7 times in ONE game (4 assists and 3 penalties). Ever been in a scrap with an opponent 6 inches taller than you? Ever dove in front of a slap shot and come up with your face covered in blood? Where's the analytic that cover grit and heart? Ever wonder what it's like to coach a team? To be ejected from games for being too emotional when your player gets hurt (yeah I'm a little bit Torts behind the bench)? Ever had a player play for you from a foreign land where you have difficulty explaining where the arena is, let alone what his line's breakout pattern is (I don't speak Finnish so it was helluva season long pain in my rear)? Ever made comments to the press and been called up by the Commissioner of the league and warned about tampering (I know how Benning felt in that situation)? Again...I have. There's no substitute for actual experience. Ever been a GM? Ever had to call a player and his parents and explain why you've traded their son? Ever had to negotiate arena playing time with City Council? Or gone with hat in hand looking for corporate sponsorship? Ever wonder it's like to actually own a team? I have (with 4 other Junior Alumni)...it hurts the pocket book...but there's tough decisions that have to be made. Ever have one of your players die in the middle of the season? There's no analytic that can predict how the team would play after that. I think you get my point. We can analyze stats til the sun comes up...but the game still has to be played...and as the saying goes in Football, it stands for all sports..."Any Given Sunday"...there's no analytic for that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircool Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 10 minutes ago, ABNuck said: So we're into this are we? First off I'll state that I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain this to you. But to crap on someone with experience and say it is irrelevant to the argument is insulting in the highest order, so listen up Lord Aircool (or whatever your D&D screen name is)...you are one of the prime examples of why I can't stand the XBox generation. I'm betting the closest you've ever gotten to hockey is when your batteries were low and you had to revert to the old school plug in controller. Ever wonder what's it's like to be traded as a player? To play on a new team, new teammates, new coach, new system? To play half the season's games in a new arena? Live in a new city with a family that puts you up for the winter? To leave friends and family behind to play the game you love? I do...it's called experience...and there's no analytic for it. Ever experienced the joy of scoring 2 goals in game...as a 4th line plug? It's pure f'ing ecstacy mate...no drug like it. Ever experience the joy of hearing your name called repeatedly over the PA system...having the crowd cheer for you...7 times in ONE game (4 assists and 3 penalties). Ever been in a scrap with an opponent 6 inches taller than you? Ever dove in front of a slap shot and come up with your face covered in blood? Where's the analytic that cover grit and heart? Ever wonder what it's like to coach a team? To be ejected from games for being too emotional when your player gets hurt (yeah I'm a little bit Torts behind the bench)? Ever had a player play for you from a foreign land where you have difficulty explaining where the arena is, let alone what his line's breakout pattern is (I don't speak Finnish so it was helluva season long pain in my rear)? Ever made comments to the press and been called up by the Commissioner of the league and warned about tampering (I know how Benning felt in that situation)? Again...I have. There's no substitute for actual experience. Ever been a GM? Ever had to call a player and his parents and explain why you've traded their son? Ever had to negotiate arena playing time with City Council? Or gone with hat in hand looking for corporate sponsorship? Ever wonder it's like to actually own a team? I have (with 4 other Junior Alumni)...it hurts the pocket book...but there's tough decisions that have to be made. Ever have one of your players die in the middle of the season? There's no analytic that can predict how the team would play after that. I think you get my point. We can analyze stats til the sun comes up...but the game still has to be played...and as the saying goes in Football, it stands for all sports..."Any Given Sunday"...there's no analytic for that... So you admit you are wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 27 minutes ago, Aircool said: So you admit you are wrong? I admit that although stats are a good tool, the analysis of those stats is subjective. If all things analyzed could be predicted then there would be no point to life, let alone sports. You simply CANNOT predict what will happen in a high speed collision sport based solely upon what has happened in the past. You sir are wrong. And "Analytics" will pass by as surely as the Glow Puck idea...once it is shown up to have such little relevance to the actual playing of the sport. This Florida experiment will be the 2nd nail in the coffin (Coyotes is the first with their analytics guy running the show...see how well it's working down there)? You can analyze crap all you want, but when the game still has to be played, and your team as whole is just not up for the win that night, well maybe even "puck-luck" can't save you (PS/ is there an analytic for "puck-luck")? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircool Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 11 minutes ago, ABNuck said: I admit that although stats are a good tool, the analysis of those stats is subjective. If all things analyzed could be predicted then there would be no point to life, let alone sports. You simply CANNOT predict what will happen in a high speed collision sport based solely upon what has happened in the past. You sir are wrong. And "Analytics" will pass by as surely as the Glow Puck idea...once it is shown up to have such little relevance to the actual playing of the sport. This Florida experiment will be the 2nd nail in the coffin (Coyotes is the first with their analytics guy running the show...see how well it's working down there)? You can analyze crap all you want, but when the game still has to be played, and your team as whole is just not up for the win that night, well maybe even "puck-luck" can't save you (PS/ is there an analytic for "puck-luck")? Do you know the definition of the word subjective? I think the word you are looking for is inaccurate. Nobody is claiming that analytics can perfectly predict anything... Who here was claiming that? I'd like a quotation if you don't mind. It's not about being perfect, it's about gleaming as much information as possible, because there is no such thing as having too much (accurate) information. Analytics won't pass, they still live in baseball, they will continue to expand. This is obvious to anyone with half a brain... I can't believe you said that analytics would pass LOL..... Just wow.... So out of touch with reality.... LOL I love how your examples of failures of organizations that use analytics are two teams whose GMs have been on the job like 5 months? LOL... With young teams that are still developing no less... God you are dumb. Some things are not predictable, and nobody here is claiming they are.... There is no such thing as puck-luck, but if there were, it certainly would not be predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strombone Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 20 hours ago, Aircool said: LOL Legit Top-4 Dman.... k. Gudbranson is easily a Top 4 D. His impact physically has given our team a chance every night. Also consider the ripple effect in which the rest of the team have played more physical. Practice with Gudbranson, learn some Gudbranson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 17 minutes ago, Aircool said: Do you know the definition of the word subjective? I think the word you are looking for is inaccurate. Nobody is claiming that analytics can perfectly predict anything... Who here was claiming that? I'd like a quotation if you don't mind. It's not about being perfect, it's about gleaming as much information as possible, because there is no such thing as having too much (accurate) information. Analytics won't pass, they still live in baseball, they will continue to expand. This is obvious to anyone with half a brain... I can't believe you said that analytics would pass LOL..... Just wow.... So out of touch with reality.... LOL I love how your examples of failures of organizations that use analytics are two teams whose GMs have been on the job like 5 months? LOL... With young teams that are still developing no less... God you are dumb. Some things are not predictable, and nobody here is claiming they are.... There is no such thing as puck-luck, but if there were, it certainly would not be predictable. I actually have to apologize here. This whole time I assumed I was discussing this with someone who had actual experience with analytics (similar to myself on the other side of the argument as someone with experience in the real world). So you've read some blogs on the subject and you feel as though you're an expert on the subject. And yes I do know the meaning of the word subjective, and analytics is subjective. It is at the mercy of the individual who is providing the data to his superiors. Do you know what a "spin doctor" is? It's a guy who subjectifies data and spins into whatever he wants that data to appear as. For example, a Police Chief can claim that crime is down because the relative percentage of crimes committed per capita has actually lowered over the past year. But his political opponent states that in fact crime is up because the actual number of crimes has increased, it's just that the actual population has increased at a greater rate. So which is true? Both and neither. Subjective. Same is true in sports. Did you know that there are actually players who have poor stats lines on teams that go on to win the cup? So of what use were those stats in analyzing whether or not that team might win the cup? And again, to call someone half brained and dumb, when you don't know the difference between gleaming and gleaning...well...either you are too dumb to know the difference, or too dumb to proof read...so maybe we should just stop with the name calling...it kinda detracts from the component of our argument where we are both claiming to be the more intelligent one in the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 29 minutes ago, Aircool said: Do you know the definition of the word subjective? I think the word you are looking for is inaccurate. Nobody is claiming that analytics can perfectly predict anything... Who here was claiming that? I'd like a quotation if you don't mind. It's not about being perfect, it's about gleaming as much information as possible, because there is no such thing as having too much (accurate) information. Analytics won't pass, they still live in baseball, they will continue to expand. This is obvious to anyone with half a brain... I can't believe you said that analytics would pass LOL..... Just wow.... So out of touch with reality.... LOL I love how your examples of failures of organizations that use analytics are two teams whose GMs have been on the job like 5 months? LOL... With young teams that are still developing no less... God you are dumb. Some things are not predictable, and nobody here is claiming they are.... There is no such thing as puck-luck, but if there were, it certainly would not be predictable. And on another note...I think you have proved yourself the uselessness of Analytics. As you stated "analytics can't predict anything perfectly" and in the same argument you call it "accurate" information...a slight contradiction. So in that contradiction lies my point. You're a coach or GM who is looking to his analytics guy to help make decisions...but the data is inaccurate by nature. What do you do? And how often do you do it before you begin to doubt the validity of said data when the results are not as predicted? Just a matter of time my friend, just a matter of time. And never use Analaytics in baseball as an example. Baseball is 1/ a sport that is ALL about stats and analytics and 2/ it is NOT a high speed contact sport...therefore the predictability of what might happen is more accurate. It's the same as saying a pool full of water is relevant to swimming therefore it's relevant in Badminton...cause hey, don't the players need to hydrate to be at their best? Yes water is important, just not to the same level or degree as it is in the other example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircool Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 51 minutes ago, ABNuck said: I actually have to apologize here. This whole time I assumed I was discussing this with someone who had actual experience with analytics (similar to myself on the other side of the argument as someone with experience in the real world). So you've read some blogs on the subject and you feel as though you're an expert on the subject. And yes I do know the meaning of the word subjective, and analytics is subjective. It is at the mercy of the individual who is providing the data to his superiors. Do you know what a "spin doctor" is? It's a guy who subjectifies data and spins into whatever he wants that data to appear as. For example, a Police Chief can claim that crime is down because the relative percentage of crimes committed per capita has actually lowered over the past year. But his political opponent states that in fact crime is up because the actual number of crimes has increased, it's just that the actual population has increased at a greater rate. So which is true? Both and neither. Subjective. Same is true in sports. Did you know that there are actually players who have poor stats lines on teams that go on to win the cup? So of what use were those stats in analyzing whether or not that team might win the cup? And again, to call someone half brained and dumb, when you don't know the difference between gleaming and gleaning...well...either you are too dumb to know the difference, or too dumb to proof read...so maybe we should just stop with the name calling...it kinda detracts from the component of our argument where we are both claiming to be the more intelligent one in the discussion. LOL.... I never claimed to be an expert on hockey analytics. That doesn't automatically make me ignorant of the principals behind statistics as a mathematical field. (Which really this is just an application of statistics.) Of course people can place a spin on information if they want to, but that's as you demonstrated more so a case of (most often intentionally) obfuscating what you are talking about... If you define your terms very clearly, your argument is made without spin, and can therefore be disputed/contradicted if it is in fact wrong... That is the scientific process in practice... Claims are often made with supporting evidence, and then these claims are investigated by peers... Of course people can put spin on information pertaining to sports as well, but those arguments can be disputed as well.... Of course bad players win the cup... Is the worst player on the Penguins currently the 23rd best player in the NHL? It's statements like this that lead me to believe you are beyond hopeless.... What is the point of this statement? Are you trying to say that the 23rd player on the cup winning team is better than his stat line because he won the cup? Or am I giving you too much credit, because that's about the most intelligent opinion you could have with a statement like that... If that is in fact your opinion, I've said multiple times analytics are not close to perfect, if it shows a player to have less value than he really does, then the analytics still need work... The Penguins have been a pretty underwhelming team in the playoffs in recent years, then Sidney Crosby has a huge playoffs along with another line that is firing in Pittsburgh, and wow they win a cup... We should totally base the likelihood of a team winning the cup based on the performance of the 20th or 23rd man on the roster, not the best players right? I mean they don't have that much impact, it's the 4th liners that win you cups I guess..... I guess you've never heard of typos... N does happen to be next to M on a keyboard, I wouldn't waste my time proof-reading any post in a discussion with you... Why the hell would I bother proof-reading the pathetic arguments of someone who always hops on to new topics when he gets utterly dismantled... You haven't attempted to refute any of my statements, you just keep on walking the line onto new points... Nit-picking typos and semantics because your argument has no substance, and your pride is too large... I mean what kind of idiot evaluates a GM based on 6 months on the job... Who knows, but I know what kind of idiot evaluates 2 GMs based on 6 months on the job... 41 minutes ago, ABNuck said: And on another note...I think you have proved yourself the uselessness of Analytics. As you stated "analytics can't predict anything perfectly" and in the same argument you call it "accurate" information...a slight contradiction. So in that contradiction lies my point. You're a coach or GM who is looking to his analytics guy to help make decisions...but the data is inaccurate by nature. What do you do? And how often do you do it before you begin to doubt the validity of said data when the results are not as predicted? Just a matter of time my friend, just a matter of time. And never use Analaytics in baseball as an example. Baseball is 1/ a sport that is ALL about stats and analytics and 2/ it is NOT a high speed contact sport...therefore the predictability of what might happen is more accurate. It's the same as saying a pool full of water is relevant to swimming therefore it's relevant in Badminton...cause hey, don't the players need to hydrate to be at their best? Yes water is important, just not to the same level or degree as it is in the other example. That's not a contradiction at all.... You clearly don't know the definition of accurate.... And just because something isn't perfect, doesn't mean it isn't useful... As far as I'm aware there are no perfect hockey players in the NHL, but there are bunch of useful ones... I love how you jump on me for a typo but you are too stupid to know the definition of accurate. You are so full of crap... It's just sad how pathetic you are. Baseball isn't a high speed contact sport? Last I checked nothing in hockey travels as fast as a baseball does ON AVERAGE.... Pretty sure it's a game all about making contact with a ball.... High speed? Check. Contact? Check.. Sport? I think so... Debateable... Maybe you're right... God your analogies are hilarious... They are just so incoherent, it's truly hilarious. (although admittedly not in a way you'd find flattering) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 10 minutes ago, Aircool said: LOL.... I never claimed to be an expert on hockey analytics. That doesn't automatically make me ignorant of the principals behind statistics as a mathematical field. (Which really this is just an application of statistics.) Of course people can place a spin on information if they want to, but that's as you demonstrated more so a case of (most often intentionally) obfuscating what you are talking about... If you define your terms very clearly, your argument is made without spin, and can therefore be disputed/contradicted if it is in fact wrong... That is the scientific process in practice... Claims are often made with supporting evidence, and then these claims are investigated by peers... Of course people can put spin on information pertaining to sports as well, but those arguments can be disputed as well.... Of course bad players win the cup... Is the worst player on the Penguins currently the 23rd best player in the NHL? It's statements like this that lead me to believe you are beyond hopeless.... What is the point of this statement? Are you trying to say that the 23rd player on the cup winning team is better than his stat line because he won the cup? Or am I giving you too much credit, because that's about the most intelligent opinion you could have with a statement like that... If that is in fact your opinion, I've said multiple times analytics are not close to perfect, if it shows a player to have less value than he really does, then the analytics still need work... The Penguins have been a pretty underwhelming team in the playoffs in recent years, then Sidney Crosby has a huge playoffs along with another line that is firing in Pittsburgh, and wow they win a cup... We should totally base the likelihood of a team winning the cup based on the performance of the 20th or 23rd man on the roster, not the best players right? I mean they don't have that much impact, it's the 4th liners that win you cups I guess..... I guess you've never heard of typos... N does happen to be next to M on a keyboard, I wouldn't waste my time proof-reading any post in a discussion with you... Why the hell would I bother proof-reading the pathetic arguments of someone who always hops on to new topics when he gets utterly dismantled... You haven't attempted to refute any of my statements, you just keep on walking the line onto new points... Nit-picking typos and semantics because your argument has no substance, and your pride is too large... I mean what kind of idiot evaluates a GM based on 6 months on the job... Who knows, but I know what kind of idiot evaluates 2 GMs based on 6 months on the job... That's not a contradiction at all.... You clearly don't know the definition of accurate.... And just because something isn't perfect, doesn't mean it isn't useful... As far as I'm aware there are no perfect hockey players in the NHL, but there are bunch of useful ones... I love how you jump on me for a typo but you are too stupid to know the definition of accurate, especially given that you claim to have experience working with statistics... Nice lie... You'd not make such a rookie mistake if you really did have such experience. Not like you could actually be worth anything as a statistician while not believing in the value of statistics LOL... You are so full of crap... It's just sad how pathetic you are. Baseball isn't a high speed contact sport? Last I checked nothing in hockey travels as fast as a baseball does ON AVERAGE.... Pretty sure it's a game all about making contact with a ball.... High speed? Check. Contact? Check.. Sport? I think so... Debateable... Maybe you're right... God your analogies are hilarious... They are just so incoherent, it's truly hilarious. (although admittedly not in a way you'd find flattering) I have proved all of your points wrong, the fact is that you are just too dumb to realize it. And THAT sir is the real truth here, you are too arrogant to realize that experience in the subject matter (in this case hockey) trumps all the books you can read. I love how you have yet to answer the most basic points of this discussion: 1/ Have you ever played the game? 2/ Have you ever been in an influential position on a sports team where analytics might be used to affect decisions? I can answer yes to both of those questions. As a coach do you think we just throw jerseys in the air and hope some good lines come out of the pile on the floor? As a GM and team owner do you think we just ignore the stats (ie/ sales figures, game attendance etc.) and make decisions by playing spin the bottle? So the real issue here is that I make statements based on actual experience, whereas you just seem to resort to name-calling and talking down to me to make your point. I mean hey, the loudest mouth in the room is right huh? So again, I appeal to your "claimed" intelligence and ask you to refrain from the name-calling in attempting to make your point. But then again, based on the answers to the 2 questions above, your opinion in this argument might actually be baseless as you REALLy don't actually know what you're talking about...you're simply spewing and parroting some bloggers published opinion (again, one that I doubt is based on any real world experience). So I ask you sir, do you have any experience in the field of which you are defending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 This thread is a battlefield of words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuktravella Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 tanev for a sniper would help this team as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuktravella Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 you dont trade 24 yr yr old top 3-4 dmen that have played 330 games for anything other than massive overpayments panthers were crazy to trade this guy and guess what florida isnt doing well are they had to fire their coach maybe they should have fired their analytics gm whos clueless how many points does mccann have 2? soo ya guddys value is pretty high benning would nt trade him unless we got 2 firsts and a prospect coming back hes our future captain or assistant c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 1 hour ago, canuktravella said: you dont trade 24 yr yr old top 3-4 dmen that have played 330 games for anything other than massive overpayments panthers were crazy to trade this guy and guess what florida isnt doing well are they had to fire their coach maybe they should have fired their analytics gm whos clueless how many points does mccann have 2? soo ya guddys value is pretty high benning would nt trade him unless we got 2 firsts and a prospect coming back hes our future captain or assistant c He looked better on a 100+ point team being 4 or 5 depth dman, he only moved up due to Mitchell's injury, if not for that he would still be 4 or 5th on their depth chart. And the salary cap thing coming up. Maybe Florida did the same thing as the Canucks did and played him in particular situations so they could inflate his value, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.