Prospect Info: Robert Hagg [March 2014: AAV is $925k, 3-yr ELC, per Tim P.]

[Striiker]

You have repeatedly made the argument that Hagg has never shown offensive ability. Not just in the AHL, but ever. This is just absolutely wrong. That's all my argument was. Now you're trying to put words in my mouth (or in my post). I didn't make any of the arguments that you claim I made in your three points.

Those three points were one per person...

Deadhead was #1
Hank was #2
You were #3

And by the way, I was talking about his puck moving, not his offense. He wasn't good at either during the last three years, but I can live with the terrible scoring. I can't live with the horrible puck moving because, in the current NHL, every defensemen needs to be able to do it. I'm not asking for him to go end-to-end with the puck, like Ghost, Sanheim, or Provorov have. But he also cant have Plan A be having his partner save him and Plan B be banking it off the boards into the neutral zone and hoping your teammates can recover it.

 

[HankMardukis]

You guys are basically arguing for me at this point. These arguments are crazy weak because your position is so weak.

The @deadhead @HankMardukis and @JackStraw posts boil down to...

1) He's hasn't been good at puck moving all throughout his years at the AHL level but maybe he'll suddenly become good at it in the NHL, where it's much harder to do so.

Some guys can't hack it on the smaller ice where you he's less room and time.

2) An appeal to authority. Well damn, I guess no GMs ever **** up, right?

3) Wanting to ignore what we're seeing and instead listen to what scouts said years ago, some of which is from when he was playing 3 levels below where he is now. Obviously scouts never get it wrong either, justvlike how GMs are flawless.

Hey, could someone remind me how Yakupov is doing right now? Or any other player who the scouts were wrong about... there's been many. There's so much in those quotes that prove they were way off. You don't even have to take my work for it... just watch him play and it's obvious.

Not just GMs but apparently you as well in saying he was never a good skater, puck mover etc. When that’s far from the truth.

Hmm don’t think I ever mentioned that no GMs ever **** up, but nice try at putting words in my mouth there.

 

[Magua]

I’m just going to say that generic scouting reports from public services often mean bupkis. They’re always rosy and often misleading or inaccurate and cliche ridden. You can find ones calling Laberge a smart, 2-way player. You can find ones calling any player anything. Wouldn’t you know from reading them that every player is smart, skilled, skates well, and has few flaws. Every player sounds the same. Goes for players I like too.

We have people that have watched him for years and years and who know the intricacies of his game. Their scouting reports are far more valuable to me than cookie cutter ones from 5 years ago, which don’t seem to jibe with current reality and probably past reality.

 

[Jack Straw]

Those three points were one per person...

Deadhead was #1
Hank was #2
You were #3

And by the way, I was talking about his puck moving, not his offense. He wasn't good at either during the last three years, but I can live with the terrible scoring. I can't live with the horrible puck moving because, in the current NHL, every defensemen needs to be able to do it. I'm not asking for him to go end-to-end with the puck, like Ghost, Sanheim, or Provorov have. But he also cant have Plan A be having his partner save him and Plan B be banking it off the boards into the neutral zone and hoping your teammates can recover it.

So this is what you "credit" to me:

3) Wanting to ignore what we're seeing and instead listen to what scouts said years ago, some of which is from when he was playing 3 levels below where he is now. Obviously scouts never get it wrong either, justvlike how GMs are flawless

I never said we should ignore what we're seeing now. In fact I specifically said that I would tend to agree that since coming to North America he has not shown the "offense/puck moving/whatever you want to call it" that he displayed in Sweden. But again, you said that he never showed that ability, I say that he did. And those scouting reports mostly emphasized his ability as a puck mover, not his scoring. I also never said that scouts never get it wrong, but when virtually all the scouting reports describe a player in similar terms, and that description is supported by film that you can actually see (WJC and other highlights) then it certainly is not crazy to put some stock in those scouting reports. Central Scouting had him ranked #8 among European skaters. Bob McKenzie I believe had him as a late first round pick. Now if there was general concern amoung scouts that his defense at that time was questionable, but his puck moving skills were good, why was he rated that high? Obviously not for his defense.

If you want to hate on the guy, hate away. To each is own. He's doing fine as far as I'm concerned, even if he's not (yet) the player I was expecting him to be. And maybe he never will be that player. Like I said, if he turns out to be the worst defenseman on the Flyers roster we'll be in pretty good shape.

 

[Jack Straw]

I’m just going to say that generic scouting reports from public services often mean jack ****. They’re always rosy and often misleading or inaccurate and cliche ridden. You can find ones calling Laberge a smart, 2-way player. You can find ones calling any player anything. Wouldn’t you know from reading them that every player is smart, skilled, skates well, and has few flaws. Every player sounds the same.

We have people that have watched him for years and years and who know the intricacies of his game. Their scouting reports are far more valuable to me than cookie cutter ones from 5 years ago.

McKeen's is not a public service. Some of their stuff is available for free but most you have to pay for. They are generally considered to be among the best, although perhaps better on Canadians than Europeans.

Appleyard is one of those people on here that have watched him for a while. As I believe he already mentioned in this thread, he has been pretty high on Hagg. He and I have had some discussions in the past and we generally agreed.

The point here is, as a prospect Hagg was generally projected to be a solid-to-good puck moving two-way defenseman. Of course the scouts can miss on a player, but that was in fact what he was projected to be. No one projected him to be a shutdown Luke Schenn type defenseman. So to say that he never had any puck moving ability, and therefore can never develop any, makes no sense.

 

[Magua]

McKeen's is not a public service. Some of their stuff is available for free but most you have to pay for. They are generally considered to be among the best, although perhaps better on Canadians than Europeans.

Appleyard is one of those people on here that have watched him for a while. As I believe he already mentioned in this thread, he has been pretty high on Hagg. He and I have had some discussions in the past and we generally agreed.

The point here is, as a prospect Hagg was generally projected to be a solid-to-good puck moving two-way defenseman. Of course the scouts can miss on a player, but that was in fact what he was projected to be. No one projected him to be a shutdown Luke Schenn type defenseman. So to say that he never had any puck moving ability, and therefore can never develop any, makes no sense.

Many of us are not McKeen's fans here, but point taken.

With Hagg, he's always been someone for whom opinions were all over the place about. Just look at those same reports you posted. Exactly what he is has befuddled people for a long time. I don't know if in his blandness and with his tools people let their imaginations fill the gaps. I'll also add that puck moving on big ice is so much different with the space granted. Hagg's issue is he cannot move a puck under any sort of pressure or make smart short passes, which is what the NHL is about. Less time demands more mental acuity. His first reads are 1) partner or 2) ice it. He'll often, when given the chance, pass into covered players or outright miss. I just don't see an instinctual puck mover: mentally or skill-wise. And I'll still repeat that you can find a scouting report that says any player is good at anything, even when it's a significant flaw that flies in the face of reality. And sometimes they seem right and end up wrong. But arguing about 5 year old scouting reports to talk about the present seems rather pointless to me, even if his past puck moving abilities are as you say. He obviously scored in juniors long ago, but we know that's not always indicative of something translating. So, let's talk about now, or recent history.

I can just say that in my watching of Hagg in NA, I have never seen anything that would make me confident he'd be a plus puck mover. We're in year 5 post-draft. He's been one of the worst in the entire league this season, and his time in the AHL does not encourage me either. There's simply no reason on my end to assume he "develops" puck moving ability. You don't wake up one day and acquire skill and puck poise and instincts. If you want to say he'll "improve," I'd agree because he can't get worse. But there's a giant gap between improving and being good, even competent, at something. Skills are not something developed at that age. You either have them or don't, although you can also have them and not yet showcase them to your best abilities when going up a level. You seem to believe he has them and has simply not showcased them, to which I can only respectfully disagree and would point to years of AHL time much the same.

 

[BritainStix]

Skills are not something developed at that age. You either have them or don't, although you can also have them and not yet showcase them to your best abilities when going up a level. You seem to believe he has them and has simply not showcased them, to which I can only respectfully disagree and would point to years of AHL time much the same.

This simply isn't true. There is a reason that most defenseman take until they hit 26/27 years of age before they really hit their groove in the NHL. I'm not saying that Hagg is going to develop his skills to become a plus player in those regards, but many defenseman struggle with exactly the same things he does right now. As you have previously alluded to, it's all about pressure. When he's under pressure he struggles to make the pass. Eventually the game will slow down enough in his own head so that he can at least be competent and not a liability with the puck. I saw quite a few AHL games last year and to listen to people state he has no ability and no skill is pitiful.

The flyers have been renowned in the past for being terrible at developing defenseman. A good deal of that reputation has come from having absolutely no patience with younger guys going through the pains. Right now, Sanheim is having terrible trouble with sealing off forwards against the boards. He's one year younger than Hagg. Does this mean he's never going to develop that skill? No, but it takes time. The trouble is, Sanheim made the NHL sooner than Hagg, and people can't get past the +5 draft season.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I barely saw any of Hagg pre-draft, so I won't speak to that.

This simply isn't true. There is a reason that most defenseman take until they hit 26/27 years of age before they really hit their groove in the NHL.

This also simply isn't true. Among others, Appleyard has done the work and shown this not to be the case at all. In fact, it's the exception to the rule.

I'm not saying that Hagg is going to develop his skills to become a plus player in those regards, but many defenseman struggle with exactly the same things he does right now. As you have previously alluded to, it's all about pressure. When he's under pressure he struggles to make the pass. Eventually the game will slow down enough in his own head so that he can at least be competent and not a liability with the puck. I saw quite a few AHL games last year and to listen to people state he has no ability and no skill is pitiful.

The flyers have been renowned in the past for being terrible at developing defenseman. A good deal of that reputation has come from having absolutely no patience with younger guys going through the pains. Right now, Sanheim is having terrible trouble with sealing off forwards against the boards. He's one year younger than Hagg. Does this mean he's never going to develop that skill? No, but it takes time. The trouble is, Sanheim made the NHL sooner than Hagg, and people can't get past the +5 draft season.

This is not personal to you and I won't speak for anyone else, but I am thoroughly tired of being told what I think of him and why I think it. My opinion of Hagg's play has been roughly the same since he came over and I've been saying it the whole time. I came to it by watching him. It doesn't have to do with Sam Morin, Travis Sanheim, The Cow That Jumped Over the Moon, or anyone else. So please, just disagree with me instead of telling me why I think what I do.

Developing even average Offensive instincts from where he is now in Year 4.5 of North American Pro hockey is the longshot of longshots. Could it come? Absolutely. Am I willing to bet on it? Not a chance.

I'll quote myself since I know stuff gets lost at the end of pages:

At what point can I say the offensive light isn’t going to go on then? I’ll throw out the 10 Games at the end of 2013-14 as an adjustment period. That still leaves us at ~225 Games in North America over 4 Years.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

You generally have a good feel for what you got in a defensemen at ages 22-23. Even Chara who’s an exception didn’t take as long as people would tell you as he took a year or two longer than that to pop.

 

[Striiker]

Not just GMs but apparently you as well in saying he was never a good skater, puck mover etc. When that’s far from the truth.

Hmm don’t think I ever mentioned that no GMs ever **** up, but nice try at putting words in my mouth there.

Where did I said he was never a good skater?

Crying about someone putting words in your mouth (which I didn't do, I said "I guess no GMs ever f*** up"), but then you do exactly that.

 

[Striiker]

So this is what you "credit" to me:

3) Wanting to ignore what we're seeing and instead listen to what scouts said years ago, some of which is from when he was playing 3 levels below where he is now. Obviously scouts never get it wrong either, justvlike how GMs are flawless

I never said we should ignore what we're seeing now. In fact I specifically said that I would tend to agree that since coming to North America he has not shown the "offense/puck moving/whatever you want to call it" that he displayed in Sweden. But again, you said that he never showed that ability, I say that he did. And those scouting reports mostly emphasized his ability as a puck mover, not his scoring. I also never said that scouts never get it wrong, but when virtually all the scouting reports describe a player in similar terms, and that description is supported by film that you can actually see (WJC and other highlights) then it certainly is not crazy to put some stock in those scouting reports. Central Scouting had him ranked #8 among European skaters. Bob McKenzie I believe had him as a late first round pick. Now if there was general concern amoung scouts that his defense at that time was questionable, but his puck moving skills were good, why was he rated that high? Obviously not for his defense.

If you want to hate on the guy, hate away. To each is own. He's doing fine as far as I'm concerned, even if he's not (yet) the player I was expecting him to be. And maybe he never will be that player. Like I said, if he turns out to be the worst defenseman on the Flyers roster we'll be in pretty good shape.

Oh shit, you caught me! When I criticize his puck moving I literally mean that he has never in his life been capable of passing the puck. Back when he was 8 years old I scouted him and discovered he was a bad puck mover and have watched every game since. I've never once seen him complete a pass and every attempt to move the puck has resulted in a goal against.

And you're right, I'm just hating on the guy. I have a personal grudge against him and hate his guts. I'm not pointing out obvious and specific flaws in his game that are causing a problem and will continue to cause more problems.

Better to be blindly optimistic and hope he suddenly figures out how to do something he's done at a below-average level for mutiple years now. That's realistic. I'll just lower my standards for the baseline if NHL defensemen ability and say "he's doing fine, as far as I'm concerned".

Doesn't matter that he doesn't do a single thing at a high level and is basically a younger version of MacDonald, who I guess you would consider fine too? Maybe not, don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. I'll let you guys contradict yourselves on your own.

At least he hits and gets hit by pucks.

 

[FLYguy3911]

It is a fascinating case study that we have 2 rookie defensemen, one with horrible metrics and great results and one with great metrics and horrible results.

Wouldn’t you know from reading them that every player is smart, skilled, skates well, and has few flaws. Every player sounds the same. Goes for players I like too.

Every defensemen has a good first pass. It's a wonder any team gets zone time.

 

[Striiker]

Many of us are not McKeen's fans here, but point taken.

With Hagg, he's always been someone for whom opinions were all over the place about. Just look at those same reports you posted. Exactly what he is has befuddled people for a long time. I don't know if in his blandness and with his tools people let their imaginations fill the gaps. I'll also add that puck moving on big ice is so much different with the space granted. Hagg's issue is he cannot move a puck under any sort of pressure or make smart short passes, which is what the NHL is about. Less time demands more mental acuity. His first reads are 1) partner or 2) ice it. He'll often, when given the chance, pass into covered players or outright miss. I just don't see an instinctual puck mover: mentally or skill-wise. And I'll still repeat that you can find a scouting report that says any player is good at anything, even when it's a significant flaw that flies in the face of reality. And sometimes they seem right and end up wrong. But arguing about 5 year old scouting reports to talk about the present seems rather pointless to me, even if his past puck moving abilities are as you say. He obviously scored in juniors long ago, but we know that's not always indicative of something translating. So, let's talk about now, or recent history.

I can just say that in my watching of Hagg in NA, I have never seen anything that would make me confident he'd be a plus puck mover. We're in year 5 post-draft. He's been one of the worst in the entire league this season, and his time in the AHL does not encourage me either. There's simply no reason on my end to assume he "develops" puck moving ability. You don't wake up one day and acquire skill and puck poise and instincts. If you want to say he'll "improve," I'd agree because he can't get worse. But there's a giant gap between improving and being good, even competent, at something. Skills are not something developed at that age. You either have them or don't, although you can also have them and not yet showcase them to your best abilities when going up a level. You seem to believe he has them and has simply not showcased them, to which I can only respectfully disagree and would point to years of AHL time much the same.

Hmmmmmmm...

Let's see how people react to basically the same points, but wrapped up in a nice and polite package.

 

[Jack Straw]

Many of us are not McKeen's fans here, but point taken.

With Hagg, he's always been someone for whom opinions were all over the place about. Just look at those same reports you posted. Exactly what he is has befuddled people for a long time. I don't know if in his blandness and with his tools people let their imaginations fill the gaps. I'll also add that puck moving on big ice is so much different with the space granted. Hagg's issue is he cannot move a puck under any sort of pressure or make smart short passes, which is what the NHL is about. Less time demands more mental acuity. His first reads are 1) partner or 2) ice it. He'll often, when given the chance, pass into covered players or outright miss. I just don't see an instinctual puck mover: mentally or skill-wise. And I'll still repeat that you can find a scouting report that says any player is good at anything, even when it's a significant flaw that flies in the face of reality. And sometimes they seem right and end up wrong. But arguing about 5 year old scouting reports to talk about the present seems rather pointless to me, even if his past puck moving abilities are as you say. He obviously scored in juniors long ago, but we know that's not always indicative of something translating. So, let's talk about now, or recent history.

I can just say that in my watching of Hagg in NA, I have never seen anything that would make me confident he'd be a plus puck mover. We're in year 5 post-draft. He's been one of the worst in the entire league this season, and his time in the AHL does not encourage me either. There's simply no reason on my end to assume he "develops" puck moving ability. You don't wake up one day and acquire skill and puck poise and instincts. If you want to say he'll "improve," I'd agree because he can't get worse. But there's a giant gap between improving and being good, even competent, at something. Skills are not something developed at that age. You either have them or don't, although you can also have them and not yet showcase them to your best abilities when going up a level. You seem to believe he has them and has simply not showcased them, to which I can only respectfully disagree and would point to years of AHL time much the same.

A few points-

Agree that Hagg has been, shall we say, "enigmatic" in his hockey career. Generally highly regarded as a prospect but with no particularly outstanding trait. Also agree that the transition to smaller ice in NA could be a very significant factor.

As for scouting reports, I didn't cherry-pick the ones I posted. Do a search and that's what you'll find. Those are the same scouting reports I saw when he was drafted. Of course the scouts can miss. But that's what he was as a prospect. Scouting reports obviously are no guarantee of anything.

As for the acquisition of skills and poise, have to disagree there. In any sport, as you gain experience skill and poise are in fact the the things that you acquire. There may be a semantic issue here, so just to be clear, in my way of thinking skills are things you learn, talent is something you're born with. Anyone can learn a skill at any age, it just takes work. Doesn't mean you'll be great at it of course, but you can get better, at least to a point. This probably even more true of "poise". The more experience you get the more things slow down for you. That's true in any sport. But as with skill, there are limits.

Do I think Hagg has NHL level PMD abilities that he hasn't showcased? I don't know. As I said in my initial post, maybe he left that part of his game in Sweden. Maybe coaching ruined him (having watched a lot of Phantoms games in recent years I can't say that I ever saw anything from that organization that impressed me, except the new building). Or maybe he's being told by Flyers coaching (of whom I am also not a fan) to keep it simple. Time will tell.

 

[Striiker]

By that definition, he has learned the "skill" of puck moving, but he just sucks at it and is incapable of doing it at an acceptable level, at least on NA ice.

 

[BritainStix]

Doesn't matter that he doesn't do a single thing at a high level and is basically a younger version of MacDonald, who I guess you would consider fine too? Maybe not, don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. I'll let you guys contradict yourselves on your own.

At least he hits and gets hit by pucks.

It's not really surprising that people take exception to the manner in which you post. You seem surprised each time you get an infraction, yet your posts are always riddled with heavy amounts of sarcasm, insults and a negative tone. Lighten the posts a little and you may find people more receptive to your opinions.

Hagg clearly is an effective one on one defenseman when defending the rush. You don't see him get dangled or beaten to the outside. Quite often he forces the player to the outside and forces a bad angle shot. That's a skill. He's also very effective at board battles. He dominates larger forwards one on one when the puck is stapled to the boards. That's another skill in which he performs at a high level. For a guy that isn't blessed with great footspeed, he seems particularly effective at nullifying odd man rushes. For a guy that doesn't do a single thing at a high level, he has somehow been a positive player results wise while playing at a far higher level than he should.

If we want to talk about results, he currently leads the team in plus minus while averaging nearly 20 minutes a game. We are 30 games into the season. This hasn't happened by accident. Plus minus is a terrible statistic in isolation just as Corsi, Fenwick and every other measure is. He has had bad games this season, but cut the guy a break. He's a 22 year old rookie. Just because he's had 4 years in the AHL means absolutely nothing, he's still a rookie.

Hagg's outlet pass is all over the place at the moment. He panics with the puck on his stick and his offensive ability we saw in juniors hasn't translated. Just to clarify he was a particularly effective puck mover at the junior level and had high offensive instincts. There is still hope that he will at least become a competent first pass guy. He's also too passive in the neutral zone. With his physicality he would be better suited to playing more like Gudas and meeting the rushing attacking sooner. This is something that he can develop. He has flaws in his game, like every player. Why he gets so much hate I will never understand. I'm just glad to see him and not Mandog out there.

If Myers, Morin and Friedman pan out, then there will be no room for him on the roster and he becomes a valuable trade asset. If they don't, then we still have a young defenseman just about holding his head above water at the moment. Long may it continue.

/deadhead style rant.

 

[1865]

Getting a bit wound up over a first year aren't we? He'll be fine, not everyone is Ghost.

It's Christmas, love.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

For a guy that doesn't do a single thing at a high level, he has somehow been a positive player results wise while playing at a far higher level than he should.

Except he hasn’t been a “positive player results wise” by any of the measures we know are reasonably repeatable. Forgive me for being blunt, but there’s no argument to be made to the contrary here unless he’s an all-time outlier in the history of sport. And no, I’m not exaggerating.

If we want to talk about results, he currently leads the team in plus minus while averaging nearly 20 minutes a game. We are 30 games into the season. This hasn't happened by accident. Plus minus is a terrible statistic in isolation just as Corsi, Fenwick and every other measure is.

Every statistic is not equally terrible in isolation. +/- is amongst the worst of these. By your statement, you know at least some of the flaws of +/-, yet you’re making the same argument some did last year in regard to PEB/VdV being defensible lineup decisions.

Or if you prefer, this is literally, “The things Colorado does well results in a 106.7 PDO, in my opinion.” Hagg’s is even higher than that, by the way, at 107.3. That’s off the second scale you get to when you go off the first one rooted in reality.

He's a 22 year old rookie. Just because he's had 4 years in the AHL means absolutely nothing, he's still a rookie.

.....

So what was the excuse for his play in LHV the second year? Or the third? Still adjusting?

Hagg's outlet pass is all over the place at the moment. He panics with the puck on his stick and his offensive ability we saw in juniors hasn't translated. Just to clarify he was a particularly effective puck mover at the junior level and had high offensive instincts. There is still hope that he will at least become a competent first pass guy. He's With his physicality he would be better suited to playing more like Gudas and meeting the rushing attacking sooner. This is something that he can develop.

You’re speaking as if you’re thoroughly versed in what Hagg was in Juniors. It’s reasonable for me to assume you saw him play in SuperElit?

Every player can develop skills they previously never showed or have not in many years. The point is that those people are the outliers. Every argument for Hagg showing these abilities in North America come from the idea that he’s one of them. If you want to bet on that, fair enough. What I will continue to object to is the idea that it’s people being impatient. That’s patently false.

 

[deadhead]

Funny how the same advanced stats that show Hagg isn't a player aren't sufficient to show that Manning IS a player.

 

[Appleyard]

Here is my opinion:

I was a Hagg fan from the age he was 16. He played for my favourite Swedish team.

In his draft year I thought he had ~Braydon Coburn level upside. I.E. a solid #2 or good #3 in his prime.

I actually had him ranked ahead of Morin personally and while I was iffy on the Morin pick (I wanted Wennberg or Morrissey) I was amazed Hagg was still there.

He had IMO a good draft +1 year (I think I watched ~40/50 of his SHL games and ~6-7 of his AHL games).

His draft +2 was pretty decent too, and he was having a great WJC until 'that' play in the final.

But since then I have just increasing reduced my opinion of him as a hockey player.

Partially because he has not improved in some areas he needed to.

His big flaw was always his passivity. And that has not really ever changed. As he has got to a higher level his biggest offensive weapon (his accurate, quick shot) has been completely negated, as he will never see PP time and he maybe got it off 10 times a year in the AHL with less space and time. His offensive game was built more around his mobility and shot than anything else (he had 'ok' but not great passing, his offensive IQ was built around getting shots through, not finding lanes etc).

Now to be fair to him he has actually improved in some areas. He has got 'safer'. He used to make such crazy errors in the NZ and DZ and would go from looking completely in control defensively to screwed in a second. The last two years on the Phantoms he has became a pretty damn good player in his own zone. I mean, he is good there, in isolation I feel that is close to undeniable. Along the walls, near the net. He ties up men very well, is rarely out-muscled and generally gets to the right spots deep in the DZ.

But once his team has the puck he is just not an effective player.

Now do I think he can play in the NHL? Yes. I imagine he could have a ~400 game career and be deserving of that.

But those games should be played as a bottom pairing defenseman vs middling competition if he is to be a solid player long-term. In theory that would give him more time to not be as, well, reactive, with the puck. He can also PK and I would rather have him blocking shots than Sanheim or Myers in the future. I just heavily doubt going off all I know that he will ever be an effective top 4 defenseman.


I would 100% though contend that Morin is a better player in virtually every regard right now. he was the last two seasons in the AHL too.

Morin played vs tougher competition the last two seasons in the AHL and looked better doing it. Morin is just as good a PKer, and is a faster skater and has a better outlet pass. He is also very good at denying zone entries. Plus he is just... well... a bit unique. Maybe Morin's upside is only a middle pairing defenseman, maybe he only reaches #5 level. But I would bet that if both Hagg and Morin ended up as objectively #5 Dmen Morin would be the more 'valuable' in such a role.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Funny how the same advanced stats that show Hagg isn't a player aren't sufficient to show that Manning IS a player.

Are you talking to me here? I've consistently said that I think Manning is a perfectly acceptable (even ideal) 7D.

He has absolutely no business being paired with Gostisbehere. That's been my biggest complaint.

 

[Appleyard]

Funny how the same advanced stats that show Hagg isn't a player aren't sufficient to show that Manning IS a player.

See, objectively I think the stats over Manning's career show he is a bizarre player. Probably a ~#6-7 level Dman but a strange one. This has been easily the best season of his career so far as well, and he has probably still only played at bottom pairing level given his QoC and that he has 'dragged' down his partners.

All three of his main partners this season (Ghost, Sanheim, Gudas) do better away from him than with him...

He has always had fine shot rates but bleeds chances and expected goals due to his ridiculous pinches and leaving partners out to dry. It is actually rare for a player to allow not that much in terms of CA... but be so poor at denying SA and EXGA.

At times he seems like a crappier version of Matt Carle in that regard.

48.63% EXGF over his career playing vs bottom sixes with 53% zone starts.

He moves a puck ok, is a decent skater and has a good shot. But his hockey IQ is lacking and means massive breakdowns without all that much upside.


Now as for Hagg... we dont have as vast an array of previous NHL data to objectively, accurately say exactly WHAT he is yet, how he would fare vs lesser opponents with less TOI. Though going off what he has done in the AHL and NHL so far there are a lot of indications of what he is not and what he cannot do.

He has more upside than Manning because he maybe has ~2-3 years of realistic development left, and is more suited to a bottom pairing role because he is solid in his own zone, not so prone to breakdowns and is a better PKer. But right now they are probably similar level players really.

 

[HankMardukis]

Where did I said he was never a good skater?

Crying about someone putting words in your mouth (which I didn't do, I said "I guess no GMs ever **** up"), but then you do exactly that.

Ha! Man, someone getting pretty defensive over there.. I’m beginning to think Hagg slapped your dog or something for all the countless hours and thousands of posts that you make, trying to show everyone how you’re right and they and the Flyers management are wrong about him.

Indeed.com/FlyersHeadScout+PlayerEvaluator. Has your name all over it

 

[deadhead]

I don't think anyone has actually contended that Hagg is more than a third pair D-man, or that in the long-run Morin is likely to be the better player.
Right now, Flyers really need Hagg's physical play in the D-zone, Provorov is great at positioning and leverage, but he's not huge, MacDonald, Ghost are wimps, Sanheim needs to add strength to be effective along the boards, Gudas is better at the blue line and hitting than in scrums (again, he's tough but not big). Manning, "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak."

Hagg brings size and tenacity along the boards, the corners and the crease. Something we desperately need THIS season.

Hopefully, Morin will also bring that next year with better skating and puck handling.
And Myers as well, though I don't want him on the PK blocking shots given his injury history.
Sanheim should bulk up the next few years (21 to 24) and be more effective along the boards.

Hagg's future is probably Manning's current role as the 6th/7th D-man. Nothing wrong with that.
He plays a lot right now b/c of the current balance of D-men.
Especially the first half of this season, we played a lot of big, physical West Coast teams that liked to pound us in our D-zone.

 

[Jack Straw]

Are you talking to me here? I've consistently said that I think Manning is a perfectly acceptable (even ideal) 7D.

He has absolutely no business being paired with Gostisbehere. That's been my biggest complaint.

You are dead to me.