Miscellaneous NHL Discussion LXXXV: Halfway to Christmas

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/
Status
Not open for further replies.

Beef Invictus

Revolutionary Positivity
Dec 21, 2009
129,480
169,140
Armored Train
The AHL stats merely demonstrate that MacEwen had shown some ability to score at lower levels, one thing you never know for sure is whether it will translate - watching MacEwen, he struggled to finish plays, but sometimes that's lack of skill, sometimes that's just lack of experience (young players rush scoring chances) - and often the only way to find out is to play the kid.

MacEwen put up those numbers at 21/22 years old, he's the same age as NAK.
NAK went 72g 18-28 46, and 39g 12-9 21 at the same age in the AHL.

Neither is a player I'd envision in a role other than a 4th line forechecking guy.
NAK has better offensive skills but he's still a stiff skater with limited vision. And a motor that runs hot and cold.
MacEnew is bigger and a tad more physical but not as good of a skater.
I'd take NAK over MacEwen, but wouldn't lose sleep over losing either of them.
Both are guys I'd be looking to upgrade each season.

But you used the stats wrong.

It's been explained to you countless ways that flat comparisons between two players on different teams with zero effort to control for a huge array of context is completely useless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmanrulez

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
50,049
21,907
But you used the stats wrong.

It's been explained to you countless ways that flat comparisons between two players on different teams with zero effort to control for a huge array of context is completely useless.
And you are being obtuse.

The point of those stats was simply to show that MacEwen was productive offensively in the AHL, at a similar level to NAK, so that it wasn't unreasonable to see if he could translate that to a 4th line role in the NHL.

Nor did they cut NAK, they simply waived him, had he not been claimed, he would have gotten another shot to show he belonged.
He had zero trade value, and limited future value as a pending RFA.

Now I would have sat MacEwen at some point to give Hodgson a longer cameo, to at least see if he could hold his own and was a viable candidate for an injury call-up role in the future.

But I consider all these kinds of players fungible.
 

Beef Invictus

Revolutionary Positivity
Dec 21, 2009
129,480
169,140
Armored Train
And you are being obtuse.

The point of those stats was simply to show that MacEwen was productive offensively in the AHL, at a similar level to NAK, so that it wasn't unreasonable to see if he could translate that to a 4th line role in the NHL.

Nor did they cut NAK, they simply waived him, had he not been claimed, he would have gotten another shot to show he belonged.
He had zero trade value, and limited future value as a pending RFA.

Now I would have sat MacEwen at some point to give Hodgson a longer cameo, to at least see if he could hold his own and was a viable candidate for an injury call-up role in the future.

But I consider all these kinds of players fungible.

I'm not being obtuse. Your stats doing say anything worthwhile for this kind of direct comparison. Context is everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BiggE

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
191,504
42,720
I don’t get why Farabee being out to start the season affects what they’d otherwise do with Lindblom but I hope that it did because I think he is a Torts kind of guy.
 

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
50,049
21,907
If they were gung-ho over MacEwen, they could have signed him weeks ago.
Right now it's Ratcliffe, Laughton/Lindblom, Allison and Laczynski on the 4th line. Ratcliffe has to clear waivers.

Brown, Willman, Hodgson and Sandin as injury call-ups. Adding MacEwen to this group is a ho hum move. He's a proven AHL scorer, so if they don't bring back a couple AHL veterans he'd fit right in on a two-way deal.
Though this would make LHV top heavy at RW.

Brink, Foerster, Wisdom, Desnoyers and Lycksell are headed to LHV right now, but that can change in TC.
I think they want these guys to push for a top 9 spot or play big minutes in the AHL, not play 8 minutes a night in the NHL.
The first four are 21, 20, 20, 20 and Lycksell is making the transition to NA hockey.
 

Deadpool8812

Registered User
Feb 10, 2018
12,935
16,542
Depends what they're doing with the proceeds.
It's MLSE, which is made up of Bell and Rogers, the same two billion dollar companies that took covid relief money from the government to make sure their big wigs got their money and then proceeded to lay off a bunch of workers
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernieParent

TB87

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
May 30, 2018
6,182
17,313
Why do “Hockey Men” think Deslauriers is good? I don’t get it. There’s nothing in his scoring profile, shot-based metrics profile, or GAR profile that indicates this a player who can be a useful bottom 6 FWD. Hits and face-punching?

***Per 32 Thoughts***
95EABD9A-CEC4-4AA2-BBCE-BA4032AEAB6C.jpeg



***EvolvingHockey Players Card from the last 3 seasons***
4745C188-65A6-4202-9163-121C0C3D275A.jpeg



***EvolvingHockey EV RAPM 2019-2022***
ADB6F9E6-38D7-45B5-880F-16AE901D3158.jpeg



***5v5 Scoring Rate Stats 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, and 2019-2022***
9130DABC-DBF0-4A98-B8CD-5A90391656A8.jpeg




Am I missing the magical intangibles he possesses or something? I’ve never watched a game of his and thought: “Gosh, I hope my team would have a guy (bad player) like this!”


I can’t go over how weird this quote is guys, “The markets hot for the tough forward.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad