This makes zero sense. Mangiapane is better than Fiala

In what regard?

If Fiala had more term and better performance than Mangiapane, maybe this would make sense. Unfortunately neither condition doesn't apply here.

That could certainly be argued. Over the last 3 seasons, Fiala has 123 pts in 152 games. Mangi has 86 pts in 161 games. And if we want to compare linemates during that stretch, your case will not get any more compelling.

Definitely defensive game by quite a margin

You've got to be kidding, right? I agree that might be an overpay for Fiala but how is Mangiapane better?

They both have the same term, same age, and Fiala has been a better play offensively which the Flames should be looking for, underlying numbers are sneaky similar. He's a bigger body than Mangiapane, doesn't play as heavy a game I don't think but Mangiapane also plays more in the D zone which could skew people to think that he's a more physical player.

I think the above images are more than proof. Points are not everything

Who on earth is bringing Kevin Fiala in for his defensive game?! That's such a horrible argument. Fiala's zone starts at 72% O zone this year, no one is asking him to have a staunch defensive game. Other than the D zone which no one is acquiring Fiala for, he's a better player than Mangiapane.

Defensively Mangiapane is better, but as wingers, it's not what they are paid for. At least it's not for Fiala. If we're looking at the value each player brings to their respective teams, I'd take Fiala 100 times out of a 100.

Didn't you know if he posts a picture of advanced stats he's automatically right? Doesn't matter what the players role is on the team or that the "finishing" stat in his graphic just means Mangiapane has an unsustainable shooting%

Ok so why would you swap the guy who's better at both offense and significantly better at defense at 5v5 for the one who is not?

If anything, the team sending the more cost efficient piece (Magiapane) would be compensated more than the team sending the bigger contractual uncertainty (Fiala).

But wouldn't that suggest that they
a) play different roles, Mangiapane's just more defensive player while Fiala is more offensive so they're not easily comparable
b) are pretty much equal in value, their strengths are what brings their value, which are relatively different

They might have similar term but Fiala is twice as expensive. Also to the whole Mantha Vrana point - both of them are of the same age and contract wise in the same situation, 25 years old RFAs with contracts expiring. Both of these are key things which very much differ from the Mantha-Vrana scenario.

Which part of his offensive game is better? Is it the points? Is it the last three years? The only offensive stat that Mangiapane is drastically better in is his Shooting% which really doesn't bode well for your argument.. Not to mention Fiala has nearly a hundred more shots with only a minute and a half more ice time per night, Flames are a high volume shot team, seems to make sense. Oh shoot, nevermind Mangiapane has a higher faceoff% this year too!

Bar go blue, player is good. Bar go red, player is bad. Simple, right?

In reality, advanced stats are a good farmhand, but a bad master. People should also learn how to read them. Like you pointed out, Mangiapane likely has an unsustainable shooting%, plus the playing styles are different. One is a defensive expert and the other plays mainly offence. No wonder the other is better defensively...

Ok so let me get this straight. Over the last 3 years Mangipane has 23 EV goals and and 67 EV points. Fiala has 27 EV goals and 73 EV points. So you are telling me that 6 points is worth that much more than the night and day difference in defensive play? You are clearly being biased here

Also arguing "that isn't what they are paid for" makes no sense. They are paid to play hockey and effect the game

I am biased. I am a fan. But so are you. You are clearly cherry-picking stats here. Why use only EV points, when you could use all points, power-play included? Is it because Fiala scores on the power-play too much to fit in your narrative? Fiala is an offensive dynamo, Mangiapane is not.

Using random and strictly limited stats is like telling Fiala is better because his expected showering/after games is two minutes faster, therefore he is more eco-friendly than Mangiapane.

Im fully aware his S% is not sustainable but its also his corsi for being significantly higher.
You can compare them here too and it's really clear Mangiapane is the more effective player. The only thing Fiala has over Mangiapane is his 25 points on the man advantage which is largely due to deployment and QOT

I get what you're saying for sure but on a team with Coleman, Lindholm, Backlund, Lucic, Tkachuk they should be looking more or less for an offensive play driving forward that puts the puck in the net. Defensively they are staunch, and with Sutter, everyone plays passable D. Fiala is twice as much now but Mangiapane has leverage and a half for negotiations, I would venture to guess that their contracts are within a million, million and a half AAV next season. You do have super valid points though and something that would likely throw a wrench in the deal above.

Because Powerplay is deployment biased. Fiala has 38 PP points over the last 3 years in just over 412 PP minutes. Mangiapane has 13 PP points over the last 3 years in 197 minutes. That's less than half the time on the man advantage. Not to mention the QOT on the powerplay when comparing 1st unit to 2nd.

My stats are not random or strictly limited. They compare the most common part of the game that both players are most evenly deployed in. Do you want me to also factor in their PK time? Mangiapane has just under 124 PK minutes played in the last 3 years and Fiala has just under 38 minutes.

Also under what context is Mangiapane not an offensive dynamo?

So we can draw a conclusion that Mangiapane brings more to the table defensively while Fiala brings more offensively. Great. Sadly, good offence is more valued / harder to find in today's game, so Fiala's value is higher. Maybe not a 1st round pick but you get the point.

I mean again, you just set it to 5 on 5 as opposed to all scenarios to twist what you want to see. Straight up all scenarios Fiala is having a better year regarding Corsi (58.5 vs 57.1), Mangiapane's best season with regards to Corsi is this season so far (57.1) which is lower than Fiala's career average (57.9)

Does he bring more offensively? Or is he just playing higher in the line up on the PP because of Minnesota's lack of better players? Also if good offense was so highly valued why is a player like Mark Stone considered a top 5 RW in the entire league?

Ok so Fiala replaces Mangiapane on the 2nd unit in Calgary because he's not pushing anyone off the 1st unit. Do you genuinely think he will be more effective than Mangiapane there? Fiala playing on the 1st unit in Minnesota has major effects here that you are not at all accounting for