You almost described every top5 D on every team.
- Garnie

So what you're saying is, he is a top pairing guy then eh?

So what you're saying is, he is a top pairing guy then eh?
- j.boyd919

Sure, so am I paired with a Stud #1

Let me guess we're using stats from a guy who's never played on a top
pair and comparing him to guys who do?

I think you can say Gostobehere is at least a top 60 guy. IF not, he's a crazy good second pairing guy.
- james_tanner1

I wouldn't put him there. He has elite offensive skill and is capable of making an impact on the game but last year his defensive play completely broke down. You can't be that poor in your own zone and be considered a top 60 guy.

I wouldn't put him there. He has elite offensive skill and is capable of making an impact on the game but last year his defensive play completely broke down. You can't be that poor in your own zone and be considered a top 60 guy.
- MJL

But but but the stats say he is.

Who cares if he was on the ice every time the other team scored.

Sure, so am I paired with a Stud #1

Let me guess we're using stats from a guy who's never played on a top
pair and comparing him to guys who do?
- Garnie

Just because a player hasn't played in a top pair doesn't mean he isn't a fit for a top pair. There are plenty of guys who aren't ideal for the top pair.. but get it. Coaches make questionable decisions all the time. Hainsey should have never been on the top pair in Pittsburgh, even after Letang got hurt. They got so god damn lucky, every time he was on the ice their tendies got peppered with shots.

with a real defense, a solid goalie and a guy who can play in the 1C hole, it's not stretch for them to start winning.
- Tumbleweed

Statement can be made for every team in league. Thats alot of holes that need filled

Statement can be made for every team in league. Thats alot of holes that need filled
- 1993_Cup_Champs

uhhhh...where have you been?

they filled them all...

Just because a player hasn't played in a top pair doesn't mean he isn't a fit for a top pair. There are plenty of guys who aren't ideal for the top pair.. but get it. Coaches make questionable decisions all the time. Hainsey should have never been on the top pair in Pittsburgh, even after Letang got hurt. They got so god damn lucky, every time he was on the ice their tendies got peppered with shots.
- j.boyd919

You're completely wasting your time talking to that guy.

Just because a player hasn't played in a top pair doesn't mean he isn't a fit for a top pair. There are plenty of guys who aren't ideal for the top pair.. but get it. Coaches make questionable decisions all the time. Hainsey should have never been on the top pair in Pittsburgh, even after Letang got hurt. They got so god damn lucky, every time he was on the ice their tendies got peppered with shots.
- j.boyd919

I didn't say "he couldn't" but I love when guys talk in absolutes when it's anything but that.

You're completely wasting your time talking to that guy.
- James_Tanner

Just because you jump head first into a waterless pool doesn't mean the rest of us are that (frank)ing stupid.

I didn't say "he couldn't" but I love when guys talk in absolutes when it's anything but that.
- Garnie

I was not speaking in absolutes.

I was not speaking in absolutes.
- j.boyd919

Demers is better then Larsson is an absolute and it's absolutely wrong

Demers is better then Larsson is an absolute and it's absolutely wrong
- Garnie

Says who? The stats suggest Demers is better. Your entire argument is based on just saying that Larson is better. And, when asked to defend it, you say (and I'm paraphrasing) that anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot.

That's not an argument. You 'just know' but since you don't believe in stats, how can you know ? You certainly don't watch enough of either player to be an authority, so how did you come to your conclusion?

Says who? The stats suggest Demers is better. Your entire argument is based on just saying that Larson is better. And, when asked to defend it, you say (and I'm paraphrasing) that anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot.

That's not an argument. You 'just know' but since you don't believe in stats, how can you know ? You certainly don't watch enough of either player to be an authority, so how did you come to your conclusion?
- James_Tanner

Which stats are they? How does Larson and Demers compare in terms of deployment and usage?

[quote=James_Tanner]

Says who? The stats suggest Demers is better. Your entire argument is based on just saying that Larson is better. And, when asked to defend it, you say (and I'm paraphrasing) that anyone who doesn't agree with you is an idiot.

That's not an argument. You 'just know' but since you don't believe in stats, how can you know ? You certainly don't watch enough of either player to be an authority, so how did you come to your conclusion?
- James_Tanner

I guess only the guy i was talking to noticed the winky.

Who asked me to defend it? Who called anyone an idiot?

Did you fall down a long set of stairs and just never recover?

Id defend it in a heartbeat if all my fav stat sites didnt shut down.....( not for your clown ass, but for anyone else )
🖕🏻

I guess only the guy i was talking to noticed the winky.

Who asked me to defend it? Who called anyone an idiot?

Did you fall down a long set of stairs and just never recover?

Id defend it in a heartbeat if all my fav stat sites didnt shut down.....( not for your clown ass, but for anyone else )
🖕🏻
- annoyed

I don't think I was even talking to you.

But also, I ignore all emoticons because I am an adult.

Finally, if you need a stats site, naturatlhattrick.com is a good one.

I don't think I was even talking to you.

But also, I ignore all emoticons because I am an adult.

Finally, if you need a stats site, naturatlhattrick.com is a good one.
- James_Tanner

You dont act like one, i couldnt give 2 (frank)s if you dont like emoticons...makes you petty to (frank)ing cry everytime someone lol's - what the (frank)s wrong with you?

Devils with Larrson 28.6 shots against/gm 2.57 gaa/gm

Without 31.4 / 2.94 gaa theres some stats for ya...23 yrs old and hard to score when hes on the ice.

Being able to play D is important something you just dont seem to grasp...

You dont act like one, i couldnt give 2 (frank)s if you dont like emoticons...makes you petty to (frank)ing cry everytime someone lol's - what the (frank)s wrong with you?

Devils with Larrson 28.6 shots against/gm 2.57 gaa/gm

Without 31.4 / 2.94 gaa theres some stats for ya...23 yrs old and hard to score when hes on the ice.

Being able to play D is important something you just dont seem to grasp...
- annoyed

You're completely wasting your time talking to that guy.

He has done as very good job as a GM in rebuilding the Yotes. I wouldn't be surprised if his next move wasn't getting Jagr. A good fit for a young team on the rise.

As for the defence. Yes, a good lineup led by Ek, but in addition to those teams mentioned I would add that the Jets also now have a a very solid defensive core with Buff, Trouba, Morrissey, Enstrom, Myers, and Kulikov.
- jetsnation

There is no place for Jagr (unless you take away ice time from the youngsters).

Domi - Stepan - Keller
Duclair - Dvorak - Fischer
Perlini - Strome - Rieder
Martinook - Cousins - Richardson
Crouse

So in the past 3 years Demers has scored roughly 20 more points on teams that were more offensively driven and Larsson is roughly +33 on him in that time despite being 5 years younger and still entering his prime years while Demers is towards the back 9 of his prime years. Demers has a little more "fantasy value" but Larsson likely provides more on ice for his team. Don't cherry pick stats and base the value off of 3 years of which aren't relevant as neither player played for their current team for majority of those. Compare stats at comparable ages and take adjustable figures into account too. Will ARZ be a defense first type tram limiting Demers' opportunities? Or do they project to be more like EDM and push the pace offering more offensive opportunity? Larsson is 24 and just entering his prime and well respected as a 2 way dman with potential to grow his offensive game in the hockey community, Demers is regaurded as a good offensive dman that has a decent d game at the end of most defensemans primes. He could be a gem, or he could sizzle out. Either way with contracts taken into account... Larsson is likely taken 97 times out of 100. Try evaluating without the Phoenix tinted glasses james.

Is Demers really regarded as a good offensive/bad defensive d-man? Since when is a 5goal 20-30 point D man regarded "good offence"?

I always seen him as a good complementary top4 who can hold his own and excells with a good partner. Better at shot suppression and getting the puck out of his own zone rather then racking up assists and following up on the attack.

4 years at 4.5M could sting for any team, but for the Yotes its not a problem. If he heavily declines, put him on the 3rd pair. Will sting in the owners pockets but its not like they are close to spending what they should anyway.

Agree that the Panthers are in some kind of personal disaster. Its never a good sign that you trade a guy who you signed to a 5 year deal the summer before. Also, loosing Masschesault for nothing (as a lightning fan, maybe i should not be throwing stones here but..).

For Chayka, he has done great. As usual, Tanner takes out the biggest brush and exaggerates a bit. Great moves with Chychyrun, Hjalmarsson, Crouse. As it looks now, Stepan trade looks good for a team in his position but its to early to say he fleeced them. Not long ago you ripped on Yzerman for giving up on D'Angelo who would be a great NHLer, but now he is a decent prospect. The Lias Andersson pick that Rags did was great to, he projects to be a really good player.

So long term it might be a win-win for both, since Yotes dont really need or have room for more young players. But a fleece would be if Rantaa ended up being a true #1 goalie and that Lias Andersson/D'Angelo dont pan out. What Stepan is we probably already know.

Demers is better then Larsson is an absolute and it's absolutely wrong
- Garnie

Oh, you're referring to that? Yeah, it's actually not wrong. Can you provide evidence that Larsson is better than Demers?

So in the past 3 years Demers has scored roughly 20 more points on teams that were more offensively driven and Larsson is roughly +33 on him in that time despite being 5 years younger and still entering his prime years while Demers is towards the back 9 of his prime years. Demers has a little more "fantasy value" but Larsson likely provides more on ice for his team. Don't cherry pick stats and base the value off of 3 years of which aren't relevant as neither player played for their current team for majority of those. Compare stats at comparable ages and take adjustable figures into account too. Will ARZ be a defense first type tram limiting Demers' opportunities? Or do they project to be more like EDM and push the pace offering more offensive opportunity? Larsson is 24 and just entering his prime and well respected as a 2 way dman with potential to grow his offensive game in the hockey community, Demers is regaurded as a good offensive dman that has a decent d game at the end of most defensemans primes. He could be a gem, or he could sizzle out. Either way with contracts taken into account... Larsson is likely taken 97 times out of 100. Try evaluating without the Phoenix tinted glasses james.
- wreckage

You should really learn how to break your paragraphs up.

Aside from that, why are we comparing stats at comparable ages when the matter at question is who is better NOW. That seems foolish.

Contracts taken into account, I'm not taking Larsson at 4mil when he struggles to put up 20 points a season over a guy who has put up 25-30 points before. Over the course of Demers career, he has been better in pretty much every category (save for maybe last season at 5v5 where half of FLA was injured). And then you throw in the fact that he can play the PP, that makes him more dynamic. (Oh and Demer's PK numbers were better too.) And this was on an injury riddled FLA team.

Is Demers really regarded as a good offensive/bad defensive d-man? Since when is a 5goal 20-30 point D man regarded "good offence"?

I always seen him as a good complementary top4 who can hold his own and excells with a good partner. Better at shot suppression and getting the puck out of his own zone rather then racking up assists and following up on the attack.

4 years at 4.5M could sting for any team, but for the Yotes its not a problem. If he heavily declines, put him on the 3rd pair. Will sting in the owners pockets but its not like they are close to spending what they should anyway.

Agree that the Panthers are in some kind of personal disaster. Its never a good sign that you trade a guy who you signed to a 5 year deal the summer before. Also, loosing Masschesault for nothing (as a lightning fan, maybe i should not be throwing stones here but..).

For Chayka, he has done great. As usual, Tanner takes out the biggest brush and exaggerates a bit. Great moves with Chychyrun, Hjalmarsson, Crouse. As it looks now, Stepan trade looks good for a team in his position but its to early to say he fleeced them. Not long ago you ripped on Yzerman for giving up on D'Angelo who would be a great NHLer, but now he is a decent prospect. The Lias Andersson pick that Rags did was great to, he projects to be a really good player.

So long term it might be a win-win for both, since Yotes dont really need or have room for more young players. But a fleece would be if Rantaa ended up being a true #1 goalie and that Lias Andersson/D'Angelo dont pan out. What Stepan is we probably already know.
- Cloud

Not sure why people think 4 years at 4.5m for a ~30 point Dman stings.. thats better value than the Dumoulin, Larsson contracts where you don't even get 20 points and you're over 4mil.