[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Gee, I didn't realize that it was my job to do the research for people who claim my stance to be "ridiculous" without presenting any facts.

It's always your responsibility to bring the facts to back up your argument, especially when the basis to your argument is about those stats.

Behind the net has some insight on his CORSI ratings, which has Smid as being ranked below his line mates in puck possession last season, on a soft Oilers team. That doesn't speak volumes to me that he is an essential part of a defense core.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...4+45+46+63+67#

These stats don't really tell us anything we don't know about Smid. Played a somewhat sheltered role, used primarily in a defensive role and killing penalties.

Further, puckprospectus ranked Smid as being a replacement level defensemen last season, and an average third pairing defensemen the season before. He was projected around that level this season despite his poor ranking in 2013.

I have no idea what this means, or it's relevance to the discussion. (Not meant as an attack on the information, it's just not a terminology/site I'm familiar with).

This opinion I did not realize to be so controversial. There's a reason that the Oilers had little issue parting with Smid to a division rival for a paltry return. He has a myriad of holes in his game. He's got uses, but if not used correctly, he can certainly be overexposed.

In my humble opinion, I feel that he often gets overrated from the scouts watching him, as he often doesn't have the toughest assignments. He can often be seen playing mistake free hockey against less offensively talented players, but I think a more watchful eye would notice the lack of ability to funnel offense simultaneously, and his participating against non elite forwards. I think he's worth his contract, and being used appropriately by the Flames. I have no problem with the trade. But at the same time, I think it's appropriate not to ignore some pretty clear flaws in his game that some of the advanced stats highlight pretty clearly.

Here's where your argument starts to fall apart. By your own words you think of "an awesome bottom pairing guy as someone who when used on a bottom pairing would provide a distinct advantage to the team on the ice and be a mismatch for bottom line forwards." By your own words this is exactly what Smid does. I think your focused too much on his lack of offense in this scenario. Most bottom-pair guys are going to have holes in their game. Smid is not a good skater, and certainly isn't a great puck mover. He's a role player. He blocks shots, kills penalties, throws the occasional hit and clears the front of the net. Having a player that can fill a defined role and excel out of it is usually what your hoping for in a good 5/6 defenseman.

Again, he's on a relatively cheap contract, and was acquired from a division rival for some medicore prospects. If he's as valuable as you guys are claiming, teams around the NHL would have been lining up for his services. Almost every team is looking to add another quality defensemen, it just doesn't appear to me that Smid had the qualities that teams are looking for (puck moving ability, and ability to play a strong two way game against top 6 forwards).

I really think we're just discussing differences in how we define a bottom-pairing defenseman. Most teams wouldn't be acquiring a 5/6 d-man with the idea of playing them against top-6 forwards. That's the job of the top-4 guys. Bottom pairing is where you find guys that are good shutdown players against bottom-6 forwards, but maybe lack puck-moving abilities. Or conversely you find guys that are good skaters/puck movers but struggle in their own end.