A good bottom pairing D should be able to handle top-4 minutes occasionally (injuries / road match-ups) but he's a bottom pairing guy overall.
- JohnFergusonJr

I think based on the limited amount of data that we have at our disposal on Justin Holl (including the "eye test" data, obviously), this is the logical place to have him. That said, he has played more than occasional top-4 minutes, and he has done an adequate job as a second pairing guy.

Holl is -4 since the Rielly injury has pressed him into a larger role - frequently as a top pairing guy; he's played 16 seconds less than Tyson Barrie at 5v5 since Rielly was injured for second most on the team at 5v5.

Prior to this, he was +1 under Keefe in 23 games.

Separating that, Holl was +6 under Babcock as a bottom pairing guy, so obviously he was having his greatest success there, but he was holding his own in a 3/4 role when given the opportunity.

cool, did you win anything? what are the cheques like?
- ghetto puck

You get to choose. Trophy or next season half the cost. Winning is great.

imo holl is a 7th defenseman.
- ghetto puck

So we're arguing whether he's a 3rd pairing (5-6) rather than a 7th guy?
Seriously?

I'm going to find something more productive to do...

Colby Armstrong looks like he's wearing a Colby Armstrong mask.
- gravyface

Questionable taste in masks!

So we're arguing whether he's a 3rd pairing (5-6) rather than a 7th guy?
Seriously?

I'm going to find something more productive to do...
- Thecakeisalie

For example, staring at the wall for hours.

So we're arguing whether he's a 3rd pairing (5-6) rather than a 7th guy?
Seriously?

I'm going to find something more productive to do...
- Thecakeisalie

about time.

I propose we set up an experiment with two hockey teams. One team will win the stanley cup, the other team won't, and then we observe to see which players are cup winners.
- TheMussel

you guys and your advanced statistical models

there's a reason why he hasn't played in the nhl until he was 27-28 years old. are we done now or does everyone still want to continue to try and change my opinion to match theirs?
- ghetto puck

You should never look up Tim Thomas. It might make your head explode.

We haven't come across the secret top pairing missing defenseman. But we have found a guy who can play 3/4 minutes when we need him to, and most comfortably slots in a 5/6 role very well. Having Justin Holl on your team isn't the liability you're making it out to be.

when has justin holl played regular minutes on a serious cup contender then?
- ghetto puck

I guess Ekblad is also garbage, since Florida has never been a cup contender. Same with every defender on Carolina. Same with the majority of young (and many older) defenseman around the league. All of them are just #7 d by your moronic definition.

For example, staring at the wall for hours.
- Zezel

this is all you're good @ pouring gas on the flame, you and the gull.

you guys and your advanced statistical models



- BorjeFan4Ever

You should never look up Tim Thomas. It might make your head explode.

We haven't come across the secret top pairing missing defenseman. But we have found a guy who can play 3/4 minutes when we need him to, and most comfortably slots in a 5/6 role very well. Having Justin Holl on your team isn't the liability you're making it out to be.
- Monkeypunk

enjoy not winning the cup for the next 4 years then

I think based on the limited amount of data that we have at our disposal on Justin Holl (including the "eye test" data, obviously), this is the logical place to have him. That said, he has played more than occasional top-4 minutes, and he has done an adequate job as a second pairing guy.

Holl is -4 since the Rielly injury has pressed him into a larger role - frequently as a top pairing guy; he's played 16 seconds less than Tyson Barrie at 5v5 since Rielly was injured for second most on the team at 5v5.

Prior to this, he was +1 under Keefe in 23 games.

Separating that, Holl was +6 under Babcock as a bottom pairing guy, so obviously he was having his greatest success there, but he was holding his own in a 3/4 role when given the opportunity.
- Monkeypunk

As you said, for some periods of time he can handle it, but 82 games plus playoffs, I doubt very much that he'd maintain it.

But as we said, solid bottom pairing RHD who can occasionally do more.

You should never look up Tim Thomas. It might make your head explode.

We haven't come across the secret top pairing missing defenseman. But we have found a guy who can play 3/4 minutes when we need him to, and most comfortably slots in a 5/6 role very well. Having Justin Holl on your team isn't the liability you're making it out to be.
- Monkeypunk

I was trying to figure out how to make that point, so thank you

I guess Ekblad is also garbage, since Florida has never been a cup contender. Same with every defender on Carolina. Same with the majority of young (and many older) defenseman around the league. All of them are just #7 d by your moronic definition.
- Thecakeisalie

you just compared holl to ekblad, i think we're done here.

I think based on the limited amount of data that we have at our disposal on Justin Holl (including the "eye test" data, obviously), this is the logical place to have him. That said, he has played more than occasional top-4 minutes, and he has done an adequate job as a second pairing guy.

Holl is -4 since the Rielly injury has pressed him into a larger role - frequently as a top pairing guy; he's played 16 seconds less than Tyson Barrie at 5v5 since Rielly was injured for second most on the team at 5v5.

Prior to this, he was +1 under Keefe in 23 games.

Separating that, Holl was +6 under Babcock as a bottom pairing guy, so obviously he was having his greatest success there, but he was holding his own in a 3/4 role when given the opportunity.
- Monkeypunk

exactamundo

you just compared holl to ekblad, i think we're done here.
- ghetto puck

that wasn’t his point and you damn well know it

2-1 Florida

you just compared holl to ekblad, i think we're done here.
- ghetto puck

Yes, merely to point out how ridiculous your argument is, not to say they're the same player. The fact that this is the conclusion you reached shows either a lack of intelligence, or someone deliberately misinterpreting just for the sake of continuing their idiot argument.

you just compared holl to ekblad, i think we're done here.
- ghetto puck

no... actually you did... by making a moronic argument that anyone, who hasn't been a "cup contender" is basically - and I'll summarize - crap.

therefore you are saying that Holl and Ekblad are both unproven - never having won the cup or come close.

since its relatively late in the evening for an olde man such as myself... I'll leave it at that...

you are being argumentative for absolutely no reason.... promise me you'll stay and argue with yourself or your alts after we're all gone this evening

Yes, merely to point out how ridiculous your argument is, not to say they're the same player. The fact that this is the conclusion you reached shows either a lack of intelligence, or someone deliberately misinterpreting just for the sake of continuing their idiot argument.
- Thecakeisalie

Guy is quickly becoming a more wordy version of max, which is basically UG but less intelligent.

Yiiiiiikes.

Guy is quickly becoming a more wordy version of max, which is basically UG but less intelligent.

Yiiiiiikes.
- joel878

This is what happens when you don’t have refs in here.

this is all you're good @ pouring gas on the flame, you and the gull.
- ghetto puck

This diaper fire doesn't need my help.

no... actually you did... by making a moronic argument that anyone, who hasn't been a "cup contender" is basically - and I'll summarize - crap.

therefore you are saying that Holl and Ekblad are both unproven - never having won the cup or come close.

since its relatively late in the evening for an olde man such as myself... I'll leave it at that...

you are being argumentative for absolutely no reason.... promise me you'll stay and argue with yourself or your alts after we're all gone this evening


- BorjeFan4Ever

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he means that Holl has likely reached his potential and that in order for the team to be competitive, the defense should be composed of a combination of younger highly ranked d-men with upside and veterans with years of experience playing hockey at the highest level, and that Holl, while a capable defenseman, doesn't fit either of those criteria. That while he is capable of playing in the NHL, he's not ideally suited to being relied upon to take this team through 3 rounds of playoff hockey.

This is what happens when you don’t have refs in here.
- Dongull_Trump

Yeah because a referee would be best friends with a guy who has multiple accounts and tells people to kill themselves.