1. Impossible, both are opinions.


- NC Flyers Fan

Exactly, so we can dispense with that nonsense.

2. Toss up. It’s a personal preference, but I think expanding the tool box first has value. They may continue development by maximizing his skill set. He is just a rookie.

Our opinions and preferences disagree; that is why it is good to have a discussion. I feel like I have expressed the reasons for my position, and I understand yours so all is well.
- NC Flyers Fan

It is good to have a discussion. I think maximizing a young players development in the correct role and position far outweighs gaining the versatility of a young player playing more than one position. For example, in that way, he may be decent in both positions but if he is used correctly, he could be really good in the position he is best suited for.

Exactly, so we can dispense with that nonsense.
- MJL

good now go take a lap

Stating that despite whatever happened in the past, the player is now doing fine is not an intelligent argument. It ignores the possibility that the player could be doing better and could be further advanced had that not happened earlier in his development.
- MJL

Okay, your point “ignores” the fact that you cannot know that said player would be “better and further advanced” if another development path had been taken, or might (gasp) actually be worse. I offer opinion that counters opinion, that is all.

What if Cates was worse off in the hypothetical season at wing because the team’s void at center created a downward spiral of defensive nightmares?

I didn't back read cause I frankly don't have the time or energy, but I have to wonder what Torts is up to with Frost. Does he just not like the guy or is it that he sees lots of untapped potential and is going the tough love route? Or did Frost kick one of Tort's dogs? It was funny last night as the media kept going back to Frost and Torts was getting annoyed. I dunno...

I didn't back read cause I frankly don't have the time or energy, but I have to wonder what Torts is up to with Frost. Does he just not like the guy or is it that he sees lots of untapped potential and is going the tough love route? Or did Frost kick one of Tort's dogs? It was funny last night as the media kept going back to Frost and Torts was getting annoyed. I dunno...
- Phillywhiteout

Untapped potential…tough love…in my opinion of course.

Okay, your point “ignores” the fact that you cannot know that said player would be “better and further advanced” if another development path had been taken, or might (gasp) actually be worse. I offer opinion that counters opinion, that is all.

What if Cates was worse off in the hypothetical season at wing because the team’s void at center created a downward spiral of defensive nightmares?

- NC Flyers Fan

Which is why I offer my opinion up as an opinion and not fact. I also don't enter into the conversation that something is impossible to know, as I know that it is all opinion. I also don't offer up the completely asinine stance of none of us are there at practice, in the room, etc. That's true of all of us so why are we here? How do we decide who gets infallibility? Which coach or which player? If we apply that standard to one, it's applied to all of us. Np reason to have a discussion board then.

My opinion is based off of facts that are known and my observations of the player. So to answer your question. Why would Cates be worse off? We have a sample of games from last year where he played on the wing on a worse team than this year . He was not in a downward spiral. In fact he played really well. There wouldn't be a void at center. They have Hayes, Laughton and Frost to play center in the top 9. As far as the team's defensive play. I'd be happy to look at the numbers with you and show you that they are in a so called defensive spiral and have been all season. Maybe they lose a few more games and they get a better draft pick. Meanwhile, under my premise, Cates is further along in development and is a better overall player by being used properly

I didn't back read cause I frankly don't have the time or energy, but I have to wonder what Torts is up to with Frost. Does he just not like the guy or is it that he sees lots of untapped potential and is going the tough love route? Or did Frost kick one of Tort's dogs? It was funny last night as the media kept going back to Frost and Torts was getting annoyed. I dunno...
- Phillywhiteout

In my opinion, it's just Tortorella's misguided and schizophrenic idea of trying to push and motivate a player for the most part. It's also a lot of Frost is not the kind of player he really likes.

Which is why I offer my opinion up as an opinion and not fact. I also don't enter into the conversation that something is impossible to know, as I know that it is all opinion. I also don't offer up the completely asinine stance of none of us are there at practice, in the room, etc. That's true of all of us so why are we here? How do we decide who gets infallibility? Which coach or which player? If we apply that standard to one, it's applied to all of us. Np reason to have a discussion board then.

My opinion is based off of facts that are known and my observations of the player. So to answer your question. Why would Cates be worse off? We have a sample of games from last year where he played on the wing on a worse team than this year . He was not in a downward spiral. In fact he played really well. There wouldn't be a void at center. They have Hayes, Laughton and Frost to play center in the top 9. As far as the team's defensive play. I'd be happy to look at the numbers with you and show you that they are in a so called defensive spiral and have been all season. Maybe they lose a few more games and they get a better draft pick. Meanwhile, under my premise, Cates is further along in development and is a better overall player by being used properly
- MJL

you've never, in the history of this board, have ever passed off your opinions as anything BUT fact and have been dismissive and disrespectful to anyone who disagrees with your opinions. like a child.

so maybe pull your head out of your @$$

facts? like Cates' selke votes? Or 'facts' such as "what if he played LW all year"?

you've never, in the history of this board, have ever passed off your opinions as anything BUT fact and have been dismissive and disrespectful to anyone who disagrees with your opinions. like a child.

so maybe pull your head out of your @$$

facts? like Cates' selke votes? Or 'facts' such as "what if he played LW all year"?


- black_francis

you've never, in the history of this board, have ever passed off your opinions as anything BUT fact and have been dismissive and disrespectful to anyone who disagrees with your opinions. like a child.

so maybe pull your head out of your @$$

facts? like Cates' selke votes? Or 'facts' such as "what if he played LW all year"?




- black_francis

you've never, in the history of this board, have ever passed off your opinions as anything BUT fact and have been dismissive and disrespectful to anyone who disagrees with your opinions. like a child.

so maybe pull your head out of your @$$

facts? like Cates' selke votes? Or 'facts' such as "what if he played LW all year"?


- black_francis

Frankly I haven’t and don’t understand how some think Cates has some how been stunted in his growth by being given more responsibility. It’s pretty simple. To play C against the other teams best C is a far tougher role than playing wing and shows a greater confidence by the coaching staff that a rookie can be asked to change positions like they have asked him do. I could see if he struggled but I don’t see that at all. Add in he has also produced a decent amount offensively for a rookie and I think this can be viewed as a success story for Torts.
What Cates has accomplished as a rookie can’t be understated.

Which is why I offer my opinion up as an opinion and not fact. I also don't enter into the conversation that something is impossible to know, as I know that it is all opinion. I also don't offer up the completely asinine stance of none of us are there at practice, in the room, etc. That's true of all of us so why are we here? How do we decide who gets infallibility? Which coach or which player? If we apply that standard to one, it's applied to all of us. Np reason to have a discussion board then.

My opinion is based off of facts that are known and my observations of the player. So to answer your question. Why would Cates be worse off? We have a sample of games from last year where he played on the wing on a worse team than this year . He was not in a downward spiral. In fact he played really well. There wouldn't be a void at center. They have Hayes, Laughton and Frost to play center in the top 9. As far as the team's defensive play. I'd be happy to look at the numbers with you and show you that they are in a so called defensive spiral and have been all season. Maybe they lose a few more games and they get a better draft pick. Meanwhile, under my premise, Cates is further along in development and is a better overall player by being used properly
- MJL

I’ve reviewed my comments and I think you are out of line. I started with “I understand and can see the point of wanting to play Cates with Frost and Tippett. It’s completely valid and a real possibility next season.”

I VERY CLEARLY wasn’t saying your opinion doesn’t have merit. I just pointed to another viewpoint that also has merit. Throughout the discussion, I used words like believe, think, hypothetically and IMO (which stands for “in my opinion”). It was very clear that I was presenting opinions and rightfully pointed out that you are also presenting opinion when you asininely made remarks that implied I somehow, while stating IMO, didn’t understand that it was opinion. That is what was really the nonsense.

It’s your prerogative to disagree and say no point of view but yours is correct, but you cross a line when you talk as if the other person is unintelligent or doesn’t know what they said. When I say what I mean, that’s what I mean.

No, I am not a moderator, but this type of thing is why some would choose not to converse on here anymore. I personally appreciate discussion and variety in viewpoints. This thread demonstrates how that sometimes goes wrong in conversations with you.

Some of your other first paragraph comments are not to me because I never said those things. As for the second paragraph, I fully understand your opinion, and I have no further comments about the hypothetical wing theory.

Frankly I haven’t and don’t understand how some think Cates has some how been stunted in his growth by being given more responsibility. It’s pretty simple. To play C against the other teams best C is a far tougher role than playing wing and shows a greater confidence by the coaching staff that a rookie can be asked to change positions like they have asked him do. I could see if he struggled but I don’t see that at all. Add in he has also produced a decent amount offensively for a rookie and I think this can be viewed as a success story for Torts.
What Cates has accomplished as a rookie can’t be understated.
- landros 2

agree 100

I’ve reviewed my comments and I think you are out of line. I started with “I understand and can see the point of wanting to play Cates with Frost and Tippett. It’s completely valid and a real possibility next season.”

I VERY CLEARLY wasn’t saying your opinion doesn’t have merit. I just pointed to another viewpoint that also has merit. Throughout the discussion, I used words like believe, think, hypothetically and IMO (which stands for “in my opinion”). It was very clear that I was presenting opinions and rightfully pointed out that you are also presenting opinion when you asininely made remarks that implied I somehow, while stating IMO, didn’t understand that it was opinion. That is what was really the nonsense.


- NC Flyers Fan

What am I out of line with? I think what you actually need to review are my posts. I didn't say or imply in any way that you said that my opinion doesn't have merit.

It’s your prerogative to disagree and say no point of view but yours is correct, but you cross a line when you talk as if the other person is unintelligent or doesn’t know what they said. When I say what I mean, that’s what I mean.


No I, am not a moderator, but this type of thing is why some would choose not to converse on here anymore. I personally appreciate discussion and variety in viewpoints. This thread demonstrates how that sometimes goes wrong in conversations with you.

Some of your other first paragraph comments are not to me because I never said those things. As for the second paragraph, I fully understand your opinion, and I have no further comments about the hypothetical wing theory.
- NC Flyers Fan

You weren't the person who tried to use that none of us are present in the locker room or on the ice, so therefore we can't comment. That was another poster. Perhaps you didn't read that or weren't following closely. That is what I labeled as unintelligent, because it is. I can understand if you thought that I was referring to you there but I wasn't. I should've been more clear. That was my mistake

There is a lot wrong with this thread but it's not me. It's the trolling and obvious personal attacks that are the issue. Why don't you object to that?

None of the below is referring to you.

I have a strong opinion based on facts and informed observation. Some can't handle that. I'm not referring to you. This is also not referring to you but others can't grasp a simple concept such as scoring rate no matter how many times that is explained. Want to compare Couturier scoring 39 points as a 3C with little to no PP time to a player scoring totals while playing with the top offensive players on the team with PP time and top icetime. Can't grasp that the criticism is not of Cates as a player but of his usage and deployment by the coaching staff and playing Cates out of position.

What am I out of line with? I think what you actually need to review are my posts. I didn't say or imply in any way that you said that my opinion doesn't have merit.



You weren't the person who tried to use that none of us are present in the locker room or on the ice, so therefore we can't comment. That was another poster. Perhaps you didn't read that or weren't following closely. That is what I labeled as unintelligent, because it is. I can understand if you thought that I was referring to you there but I wasn't. I should've been more clear. That was my mistake

There is a lot wrong with this thread but it's not me. It's the trolling and obvious personal attacks that are the issue. Why don't you object to that?

None of the below is referring to you.

I have a strong opinion based on facts and informed observation. Some can't handle that. I'm not referring to you. This is also not referring to you but others can't grasp a simple concept such as scoring rate no matter how many times that is explained. Want to compare Couturier scoring 39 points as a 3C with little to no PP time to a player scoring totals while playing with the top offensive players on the team with PP time and top icetime. Can't grasp that the criticism is not of Cates as a player but of his usage and deployment by the coaching staff and playing Cates out of position.
- MJL

proof that cates is progressing just fine. we can discuss other stats as well, you know the facts.

comparison is frost. they are different players, but similar age.
https://www.naturalstattr...&td=&tgp=410&lines=single

What am I out of line with? I think what you actually need to review are my posts. I didn't say or imply in any way that you said that my opinion doesn't have merit.



You weren't the person who tried to use that none of us are present in the locker room or on the ice, so therefore we can't comment. That was another poster. Perhaps you didn't read that or weren't following closely. That is what I labeled as unintelligent, because it is. I can understand if you thought that I was referring to you there but I wasn't. I should've been more clear. That was my mistake

There is a lot wrong with this thread but it's not me. It's the trolling and obvious personal attacks that are the issue. Why don't you object to that?

None of the below is referring to you.

I have a strong opinion based on facts and informed observation. Some can't handle that. I'm not referring to you. This is also not referring to you but others can't grasp a simple concept such as scoring rate no matter how many times that is explained. Want to compare Couturier scoring 39 points as a 3C with little to no PP time to a player scoring totals while playing with the top offensive players on the team with PP time and top icetime. Can't grasp that the criticism is not of Cates as a player but of his usage and deployment by the coaching staff and playing Cates out of position.
- MJL

insinuating someone 'can't grasp' your poor takes is a 'you' problem

insinuating someone 'can't grasp' your poor takes is a 'you' problem
- black_francis

So have a good drown, as you go down, all alone, dragged down by the stone

proof that cates is progressing just fine. we can discuss other stats as well, you know the facts.

comparison is frost. they are different players, but similar age.
https://www.naturalstattr...&td=&tgp=410&lines=single
- Peter Richards

I'll suspend for just this once to relay to you some simple points. One, nobody including myself has stated that Cates is not progressing fine. Only offering the opinion that Cates would be a better player and has a higher upside as a winger than as a center. It's a pretty simple concept that has been explained umpteen times.

This is only about the 5th time you have posted a stats comparison between Cates and Frost that did not include scoring rate. Posting a comparison in counts instead of rates and ignoring the ice time differential. Which has been explained countless times. Proof indeed of not being able to grasp the concept.

Now back to the status quo.

I'll suspend for just this once to relay to you some simple points. One, nobody including myself has stated that Cates is not progressing fine. Only offering the opinion that Cates would be a better player and has a higher upside as a winger than as a center. It's a pretty simple concept that has been explained umpteen times.

This is only about the 5th time you have posted a stats comparison between Cates and Frost that did not include scoring rate. Posting a comparison in counts instead of rates and ignoring the ice time differential. Which has been explained countless times. Proof indeed of not being able to grasp the concept.

Now back to the status quo.
- MJL

never said cates had a higher offensive ceiling than cates. offensive vs defensive zone starts. frost should.
proof only in candyland man.

~Why can't we be friends~
~Why can't we be friends~ x2
~I've seen you 'round for a long long time~
~I remember you when you drank my wine~

never said cates had a higher offensive ceiling than cates. offensive vs defensive zone starts. frost should.
proof only in candyland man.
- Peter Richards

The above is incoherent.

Like Phillywhiteout, I don't have time to back read. I like Cates and Frost. Last season, I had my doubts about Frost and didn't notice him much, but he definitely has been more noticeable and involved in the play more the 2nd half of this season (yes, better linemates does help). I still don't see either as top 6 on a contender, but both are fine as 3rd liners who can be moved up in the lineup when necessary. This point of the season is tough to judge, as the games are meaningless so we really don't know how these guys would fare on the road to the playoffs.

The above is incoherent.
- MJL

proof that you don't grasp the concept.

What am I out of line with? I think what you actually need to review are my posts.
- MJL

I think you are capable of reviewing your own posts but here is where you went off.

The real disagreement is whether or not it actually harms Cates development. It’s impossible to prove.…
- NC Flyers Fan

Whether….or…..not. So very clearly I say that either way cannot be proven and you ask me as if I am mistaken.

Why don't we hold each other's opinions to the same standard. You feel that Cates learning center in a year in which the Flyers are very clearly not a playoff team was fine. Is that possible to prove or impossible? What is more important. Having a player expand his tool box by playing multiple positions. Or doing what is best to maximize the development of a player by playing him in the best position and role for his skill set?
- MJL

Then this…

Stating that despite whatever happened in the past, the player is now doing fine is not an intelligent argument. It ignores the possibility that the player could be doing better and could be further advanced had that not happened earlier in his development.
- MJL

Saying something is fine when it currently appears fine is definitely intelligent, dare I say factual. It doesn’t ignore other alternate reality theories that could be better OR worse. It is simply pointing out that the present is “fine.” No need to read into that. If you think Cates play doesn’t appear “fine” to you, just state why and what you see as the problems with his play.

I left off the part about Bergeron. That sounded rude because the context of the conversation was about Cates defensive impact due to his current or hypothetical position on the Flyers. I wasn’t making comparisons to Bergeron or Couturier or anyone in particular. I would also think that my view would be clear to all that I don’t see Cates ceiling that high right now. Could it change after years? sure, but I have consistently talked about his center venture as a potential 3C. And I know I haven’t ever labeled those centers you mentioned as 3C level. It’s insulting a bit to make the jump that I would.

You said he had Selke level stats. So doesn't it then make it a fair comparison to compare stats to the 5 time Selke award winner and the pre-emptive favorite to win the award again this year?
- MJL

Saying something is fine when it currently appears fine is definitely intelligent, dare I say factual. It doesn’t ignore other alternate reality theories that could be better OR worse. It is simply pointing out that the present is “fine.” No need to read into that. If you think Cates play doesn’t appear “fine” to you, just state why and what you see as the problems with his play.


- NC Flyers Fan

It's not intelligent because as I stated, it ignores that the player could be a stronger player if he was used differently. As if "fine" is the apex of his development scale at this point in his career. Saying that he is doing fine is not an effective counter argument to the premise that Cates could be a better player with a higher upside playing on the wing rather than center. It also ignores that he was doing "finer" last season playing on the wing. We have that information. I have stated umpteen times that the issue is not with Cates. The issue is playing him out of position and he is less effective offensively. The data and the eye test tells us that. I don't know if you have missed it or what but I have very clearly laid out my position on Cates numerous times.

I left off the part about Bergeron. That sounded rude because the context of the conversation was about Cates defensive impact due to his current or hypothetical position on the Flyers. I wasn’t making comparisons to Bergeron or Couturier or anyone in particular. I would also think that my view would be clear to all that I don’t see Cates ceiling that high right now. Could it change after years? sure, but I have consistently talked about his center venture as a potential 3C. And I know I haven’t ever labeled those centers you mentioned as 3C level. It’s insulting a bit to make the jump that I would.
- NC Flyers Fan

It wasn't at all rude. It was on point. When you make a statement that Cates has Selke level stats. Then that brings in actual Selke level stats in comparison. Which is why I used Bergeron and Couturier. Which showed that he doesn't have Selke level stats. That is a very reasonable approach. It was an error on your part to make that statement in my opinion. Having the highest defensive impact on the Flyers as a forward, on a bad team. Does not give a player Selke level stats. It's that simple.