@tadhockey

Neither party did a spectacular job of refuting the opposite side's points. However, phillyjabroni's arguments were based on facts, statistics, and tangible things of that nature. rangersandislesfan's arguments were based mostly on opinions and other intangible and subjective matters, (Norris votes, leadership, etc.) This is the main reason why my point goes to phillyjabroni.

Who won?

My point automatically goes to PJ because of the fact that I don't even have to read this argument to already know who won.

Votes from the official panel are 2-0 phillyjabroni. 3 votes (Booth, bolts, and IceGirl) are still outstanding.

Related note: The new Hockey PDOcast has a discussion about Oscar Klefbom and his true value. https://hockeypdocast.com/2017/08/02/ep-187-its-so-nice-lets-do-it-twice/

i'm not gonna listen to the whole thing ... what did they say about him?

Basically that he is a great defensemen.

did they say he's top 10?

no they did not. they didn't directly say he isn't top 10 either

ok

Jonathan Willis (the guest on the show) classified him, in general terms, as a high-end #2 defenseman (which means he's probably top 30 in the league). But phillyjabroni is right, they haven't classified him either as or as not top 10.

a high-end #2 D-Man would be more like a 31-35 in the league.

what kind of logic is that?. Not every team has a #1 defensmen

yeah, but some have more ... like, Nashville pretty much has four number 1s.

Id consider ellis a high end #2. Comparable to Klefbom. Dont see Ekholm as a number 1

RAIF, this was an argument extremely easy for you to win. If the other three don't vote for you, it'd be a shame. Your side of this was quite easy to defend, losing this would be a disgrace

Ekholm and Ellis are #1s if you ask me. They were unbelievable in the playoffs.

good thing i wasnt asking you. Lets get back to the voting

Are you saying you think i was right or that i was wrong?

However, the winner isn't determined by if Klefbom is a top 10 D-man or not. It is determined by who argued their side effectively, and put across believable and ligament points.

I think your point is right, but the way you defended it wasn't effecient enough. You let PJ pick you apart without picking him apart. You should have won this argument hands down, and you basically let PJ walk all over you