View Full Version : Currently, which is the best player in the league?
Currently, which is the best player in the league?
Madferret
12-11-05, 5:23 PM
JJ is still the big meow IMO.
Newfie John
12-11-05, 5:30 PM
Bryan Mccabe....
Seriously, Jagr.
wildboy26
12-11-05, 5:34 PM
When Jagr is motivated he is unstoppable. I love watching him play when he is on. Sometimes his motivation and intensity are not there, but they seem to have come back after his World Championships performance with an injured hand. If he stays on his game, and so does Hasek everybody should be terrified of the Czechs in Turin.
wildboy26
12-11-05, 6:39 PM
Forsberg is a great choice too, definitely Forsberg or Jagr. When Jarg is bored, and Forsberg is injured, Iginla though.
Iced Tea
12-11-05, 6:46 PM
Joe Thornton.
Leaving Boston has saved his career and I expect him to keep producing every game. By the end of the season, he will win the points race and have the Sharks in the playoffs.
slapshot™
12-11-05, 9:03 PM
Unfortnately (Flames hatred and such) I'd have to say Iginla to place...just a hair below Jagr to win and Forsberg (glad he's in the East) a couple strides behind both to show.
charlio lemieux
12-11-05, 9:47 PM
Forsberg by a hair.
TimmyTabasco
12-12-05, 5:00 AM
By Points, or actual potential to be? :D
I chose Iginla.
He doesn't have the points the other guys do. But I do think he is the best player in the NHL
Gotta go with my Rejuvenated Ranger. :)
MadDevil
12-12-05, 12:43 PM
Iginla. He can do pretty much everything, which IMO can't be said of Jagr. I'd put Forsberg and Thornton ahead of Jagr as well, but maybe that's just me.
Jagr has almost twice as many points on the year as Iginla (50 > 27). Since the question is who is the best player right now, I'm not sure how one could overlook that huge scoring discrepancy.
Team success is another factor, and that's where Thornton falls short for me. He just got banished from a franchise he was supposed to carry to the promised land... but for whatever reason, Bruin teams have tanked around him. His move to San Jose looks promising in the early going here, but I still don't hand him the best player crown just yet.
Jagr, Forsberg or either of the 2 sens in the list. They are all productive high scorers (40-50 pts.) on 1st place (or close to it) teams. Jagr got my vote mainly because I'm a Ranger fan and he's the #1 scorer in the NHL.... but mainly because I'm a Ranger fan... Forsberg has been quite impressive and might get my vote otherwise.
wildboy26
12-12-05, 2:07 PM
I would like to see Forsberg shoot more, in the games I have seen Philly, rather that just pass all the time. He has been great again this year though.
Iced Tea
12-12-05, 2:11 PM
Jagr has almost twice as many points on the year as Iginla (50 > 27). Since the question is who is the best player right now, I'm not sure how one could overlook that huge scoring discrepancy.
Team success is another factor, and that's where Thornton falls short for me. He just got banished from a franchise he was supposed to carry to the promised land... but for whatever reason, Bruin teams have tanked around him. His move to San Jose looks promising in the early going here, but I still don't hand him the best player crown just yet.
Jagr, Forsberg or either of the 2 sens in the list. They are all productive high scorers (40-50 pts.) on 1st place (or close to it) teams. Jagr got my vote mainly because I'm a Ranger fan and he's the #1 scorer in the NHL.... but mainly because I'm a Ranger fan... Forsberg has been quite impressive and might get my vote otherwise.Does Jagr even know how to play in his own end?
To me best player doesn't just mean points, it means all around game, including ability to play in one's own end and the physical stuff. Jagr will never be awarded a top defensive forward prize nor will he become a physical force. To me, Jagr will always being a scoring machine who can be stopped if a physical defenseman decides to paste him into the boards every time he touches the puck.
As for Thornton, a huge amount of pressure was on him while he was a Bruin. He was expected to carry the Bruins to the cup. Management didn't exactly get him the line mates to do this feat and Thornton became unhappy. I'm not saying Thornton wasn't responsible for any of the garbage that happened, just that he was the scapegoat for a number of issues. Becoming a Shark has taken the weight off of Thornton's shoulders and he is happy again. I don't know if he will win the scoring race but he is back to being a physical force on a team that already had the players in place to support him.
Forsberg, when healthy is clearly a dominant multidimensional player who could put any team over the top. Bertuzzi, when he plays, can be the same way. The only player I think is absolutely complete is Iginla. He can score, pass, drive to the net, play in his own end, penalty kill, hit and fight. Who wouldn't want him on their team? Yes, Iginla's points total isn't anywhere near Jagr's but Iginla does a lot more things than score.
By the way, the original question just asked who is the best player in the league and gave choices assuming everyone would think about forwards. What about goalies or defensemen?
Hasek has been on fire until recently and could win the Vezina this season. What about Redden and Lidstrom; both defensemen put up points and are excellent in their own end.
Floatuzzi??? Are you joking??? He's not even the best player on his team, and is brutal defensively. :conspire:
Hasek is a candidate for sure.
Jagrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To me best player doesn't just mean points, it means all around game, including ability to play in one's own end and the physical stuff. Jagr will never be awarded a top defensive forward prize nor will he become a physical force. To me, Jagr will always being a scoring machine who can be stopped if a physical defenseman decides to paste him into the boards every time he touches the puck.
Where are all these physical defensemen deciding to paste him into the boards if he's so easy to stop? Nowhere, because in reality he's strong as an ox with the puck, and virtually never gets pushed off even in tight traffic in front, or in the corners, wherever. He is a physical force in that regard. He doesn't lead the league in scoring by a fluke. At just 33 years of age, he already has over 1,350 NHL points. I see how dominant he is now more than ever, since he's on the Rangers and I see all his games.
The fact that he's not going to win the selke trophy doesn't bother me in at all. He does what's asked of him, and he's out there for a reason... to attack and score. That's his job.
The Rangers hold the #4 GAA and the #2 Penalty Kill in the NHL... so obviously Jagr is not the defensive liability people make him out to be.
Right now, I would not trade Jagr for Iginla or anybody else.
MadDevil
12-12-05, 4:57 PM
Right now, I would not trade Jagr for Iginla or anybody else.
Hmmm...I don't know about that one. If I could trade Jagr for Iginla straight up, I'd do it in a heartbeat, but then again I'm not a Rangers fan (although I'm starting to understand what it's like to follow a high payroll team that can't win).:D
Iced Tea
12-12-05, 5:05 PM
Floatuzzi??? Are you joking??? He's not even the best player on his team, and is brutal defensively. :conspire:Bertuzzi, when on top of his game, can be a dominant player. I said nothing about his defensive capabilites because as I said before, Jagr is not a defensive player either.
I didn't say Bertuzzi is currently the best player, I said in the past he has been at certain times.
Iced Tea
12-12-05, 5:13 PM
The fact that he's not going to win the selke trophy doesn't bother me in at all. He does what's asked of him, and he's out there for a reason... to attack and score. That's his job.
The Rangers hold the #4 GAA and the #2 Penalty Kill in the NHL... so obviously Jagr is not the defensive liability people make him out to be.
Right now, I would not trade Jagr for Iginla or anybody else.The thread is about best player, and I gave the criteria I use to make that judgement and pure goal scoring and offensive ability are not the only things I study when making my choice. I said Jagr isn't that good in his own end. The GAA is based on everyone who is on the ice as Leafs fans like to tell us and Jagr doesn't even play the PK so what does that stat have to do with him?
As for trading Jagr for Iginla, I'd do it without blinking but then I'm not a Rangers fan. I'm happy to see Jagr having a good season thanks to the new rules but he will never be the player I think of when thinking about best player in the NHL right now.
wildboy26
12-12-05, 6:02 PM
Jagr plays on a team not known as much for its defence as its offence, and that is what he has to cope with. I think his defence is alot better than peope realize, when I watch him I dont see the same type of defensive lapses that Spezza and Crosby have for example.
The thread is about best player, and I gave the criteria I use to make that judgement and pure goal scoring and offensive ability are not the only things I study when making my choice.
I realize your criteria, and that's fine... it doesn't mean I have to go along with your reasoning. Sometimes players who are powerhouses in one aspect, might not specialize in other areas for a variety of reasons. If the Rangers asked Jagr to PK a lot, how do you know he would not excel in that role? The fact is, he does PK a little bit... very little, but still more than Forsberg. Top-notch offensive weapons are not usually asked to PK because the teams want them fresh to do what they do best. Score. It's common sense.
I said Jagr isn't that good in his own end.
He's not a glaring liability either. Many offensive stars are not noted as great 2-way players, are they? I know there are some, but I'm talking the norm here. Jagr can hold his own. Obviously that's not why he's here... but he's at least adequate in that part of the game.
The GAA is based on everyone who is on the ice as Leafs fans like to tell us and Jagr doesn't even play the PK so what does that stat have to do with him?
It proves my point that you don't have to be a jack-of-all-trades to be a great player. I remember years where Mario was well into the 3-digit point totals... but was a double-digit minus. His team gave up a lot of goals. Would you take Iginla over Mario in his prime because of that. I doubt it, but according to your criteria it sounds like you would. Mario wasn't much for fighting either. I don't remember if he spent a whole lot of time on the penalty kill either.
Was Gretzky noted as a 2-way player who could kill the penalty, bring a physical force to the game? and fight? So I guess based on your criteria, you'd take Iginla over Gretzky in his prime (?)
Bottom line - This is a team game and guys have roles. Best player to me is the player who has the biggest impact on the game at hand, for himself, for his team, and in the standings (wins). He doesn't necessarily have to be a jack-of-all-trades.
As for trading Jagr for Iginla, I'd do it without blinking but then I'm not a Rangers fan. I'm happy to see Jagr having a good season thanks to the new rules but he will never be the player I think of when thinking about best player in the NHL right now.
I would not mess with the incredible winning chemistry this team has developed in such a short time.... Iginla for Jagr straight up right now? No thank you!
Hasek is actually a better choice than Heatley for one thing, so good call you Nuckleheads. ;) At this rate he'll (unless something is serious wrong) get another Vezina nomination and it wouldn't shock me if he won. Recently though, Tea? He was the main reason your Canucks didn't (at least) double up on us Friday. We were playing brutally but Dom saved the bacon...... sort of, he stole us one point. Granted the Naslund goal was weak. Redden and Lidstrom are good picks for defenseman, too BTW so another good call. Both are flourishing under the new rules, though Redden is injured now unfortunatly. I'd throw Chara's name in there, he's better than Redden as far as I'm concerned and Ohlund is another name that could deservedly be thrown out there. Neidermayer / Pronger are, as always, worthy of consideration but both of those player's stock has dropped IMO.
Voted Jagr. Not great defensively but the best offensive talent in the NHL, bar non as far as I'm concerned. Forsberg is close, but is playing with better linemates. Peter the great makes the players around him better if anything, not the other way around, but I'd rather Gagne on my line than Ruchinsky, for example. Forsberg is injured alot too. Like right now.......
Iced Tea
12-12-05, 11:28 PM
Was Gretzky noted as a 2-way player who could kill the penalty, bring a physical force to the game? and fight? So I guess based on your criteria, you'd take Iginla over Gretzky in his prime (?)Times have changed a lot from the times when Dave Semenko was sent out as Gretzky's protector. There is no longer room on a team for a goon who can't score so the stars need to look after themselves. Gretzky rarely went into the corner scrums and showed what the physical game did to him in the last years of his career and quite frankly, I don't think he would survive in the playoffs if he was currently playing.
In the current NHL, I would take Iginla over Gretzky.
In the current NHL, I would take Iginla over Gretzky.
I'm no fan of Gretzky, and I like Iginla a lot, but that statement is just :eyebug:
slapshot™
12-13-05, 10:33 AM
In the current NHL, I would take Iginla over Gretzky.
Meds got you thinking funny, Iced.
butterfly_style
12-13-05, 11:27 AM
Now Iced, if you're talking Brent Gretzky, I'd have to agree with you. Brent (http://www.looksmarthockey.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCM/is_7_29/ai_73023302)
But I think Wayno might be a more prolific scorer in today's NHL.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 12:44 PM
Seriously, do any of you think Gretzky could sit behind the net in the new NHL without a player flushing him out, do you think Gretzky had the strength to drive to the net, or do you think teams would send out a defensive forward with the sole purpose of riding Gretzky like a rented mule?
I think he'd be just fine. Gretzky was always thinking 3 plays ahead of every body else. They guy was just magic.
The 2-line pass... the crackdown on obstruction... the increase of power plays, and four-on-fours (more open ice).
That would all favor Gretzky's incredible talents.
Seriously, do any of you think Gretzky could sit behind the net in the new NHL without a player flushing him out, do you think Gretzky had the strength to drive to the net, or do you think teams would send out a defensive forward with the sole purpose of riding Gretzky like a rented mule?
You're drunk.
butterfly_style
12-13-05, 1:03 PM
Gretzky's greatest skill was not his skating ability, or a booming shot, or a physical presence.
He was able to break/hold all offensive records by his ability to see the ice, always aware of his surroundings.
Gretzky's office (http://www.wordspy.com/words/Gretzkysoffice.asp)
So perhaps, he would not have been as prolific as he was, but still a huge offensive threat.
Though, in my opinion, the new rules would have been greatly in his favour.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 1:24 PM
You guys seriously think Gretzky would be a better player than Iginla, Jagr or Forsberg in the new NHL? Too bad we will never find out because Gretzky is retired. I can put a player from the past into the present game as well. Bobby Orr is ten times better than any current NHL defenseman and if he played these days and his knees didn't give out, Bobby Orr would be the MVP over Gretzky any year. The Bruins would be unstoppable with Orr on defense.
butterfly_style
12-13-05, 1:34 PM
That's a lot of IFs there, Mr. Tea.
No doubt the current rules would have been in Bobby's favour as well.
Some people say that he was the greatest hockey player ever.
I would love to see Gretzky and Orr in the league at the same time, in their prime, with the current rules.
Also, Orr's knees may not have been an issue at all.
There have been many advances in surgery, especially on the knees.
What used to be a "Let's cut him open too have a look" can be accomplished with MRIs and Orthoscopic surgery.
While were at it, let's bring back Terry Sawchuk to see how he would have faired agianst an offensive attack, like the sens, nucks, avs, etc.
Bobby Orr is ten times better than any current NHL defenseman and if he played these days and his knees didn't give out, Bobby Orr would be the MVP over Gretzky any year. The Bruins would be unstoppable with Orr on defense.
Finally somebody who knows what they are talking about.
I'm surprised nobody chose Heatley... you could definitely make a case that he's been the best in the league this season to date....no?
Whether Orr would be MVP over Gretzky is not the question and I agree I'd take him over "the great one" anyday prime vs prime (I'd take Howe and Lemieux too btw), but the question is Gretzky over Iginla and while Iginla might've had an advantage in the trapping, clutch and grab NHL of the last 10 years, even then Gretzky would blow him away in his prime, and certainly would in this "no-touch" NHL of today.
Just look at his numbers in '97 and '98 during the height of that era, even in his late 30s with not a lot of help he was very near the lead in the scoring race, scoring as well at that age as Iginla ever has and in the same era.
Again, I'm no Gretzky fan and a big one of Iginla's, but you're talking about a guy who's not even close to the league leaders in scoring this season vs one of the top 4 players of all-time and by far the greatest scorer of all-time.
Let Iggy win a few more scoring titles and blow the competition away doing so, a few Hart trophies, Conn Smythe or two and some Stanley Cups, then he can be considered, until then, he's just a very good player right now, certainly not an all-time great.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 2:01 PM
Ok, no one will agree with me about Iginla being better than a current day Gretzky. Screw you guys. hehehe. Is there any current player that you Gretzky brown nosers would pick over Gretzky? How about Crosby? Seems like most fans are Crosby butt kissers who think Sidney is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
LiAmTrAnSdEmOn
12-13-05, 2:12 PM
No, there's no one in today's NHL that I would take over Gretzky. The thing with Gretzky is that he was just so good that his defense didn't really matter because the opposing team was defending him when his team didn't even have the puck. They were so scared of what he could do, they didn't want him to touch the puck. He was playing defense just by being out on the ice. Gretzky is the only guy that had that effect, and to a smaller extent Lemieux experienced it too. Orr probably would have done the same thing if he was a forward.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 2:19 PM
No, there's no one in today's NHL that I would take over Gretzky. The thing with Gretzky is that he was just so good that his defense didn't really matter because the opposing team was defending him when his team didn't even have the puck. They were so scared of what he could do, they didn't want him to touch the puck. He was playing defense just by being out on the ice. Gretzky is the only guy that had that effect, and to a smaller extent Lemieux experienced it too. Orr probably would have done the same thing if he was a forward.You wouldn't even take a healthy Forsberg over Gretzky? Forsberg, who can sit out half a season with injury and still end up near the top of the points leaders list. Forsberg, who can score anytime he steps on the ice. Forsberg, who has diving down to an art. Forsberg, who makes Gagne look like a good player. Forsberg, big tough guy who could squish puny little Wayne.
You wouldn't even take a healthy Forsberg over Gretzky? Forsberg, who can sit out half a season with injury and still end up near the top of the points leaders list. Forsberg, who can score anytime he steps on the ice. Forsberg, who has diving down to an art. Forsberg, who makes Gagne look like a good player. Forsberg, big tough guy who could squish puny little Wayne.
Did you bang your head this morning?
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 2:23 PM
Did you bang your head this morning?I'm trying to have a pleasant conversation here and if you don't wish to participate, there are threads in the Lounge that are active.
I'm trying to have a pleasant conversation here and if you don't wish to participate, there are threads in the Lounge that are active.
Holy $hit man take a joke already.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 2:55 PM
Holy $hit man take a joke already.I was joking. Gretzky is possibly the greatest player ever, although I like Orr more, but I want to challenge members to see beyond the butt kissing they have for the players in the poll.
Frankly, there was no stipulation that we were talking solely about offensive forwards, although the poll assumed we would think of it that way. There is more to being a great player than offensive talent. More people need to realize that certain great players receive little recognition for their talents. Think about contracts, the top offensive players get the big contracts but what about the defensive forwards that keep the opposing scorers from putting the puck in the net. While a team obviously needs players who can score, they also need players who can keep the other team from scoring.
The same goes for defensemen, offensive defensemen win the Norris trophy. There is a trophy for defensive forward so why not a trophy for defensive defenseman?
Goalies have one job, keep the puck out of the net. Wins, GAA and Save percentage all come into play when choosing the top goaile so why is offensive talent the sole means by which we determine the best player right now.
Just as an example, I'm not trying to say he's the greatest. Trevor Linden has had a long career and gone from the 1st line all the way down to 3rd or 4th line. But he has adjusted to his role. He's a top penalty killer and excels when down 2 players so much so that he's ask to spend the entire penalty kill on the ice. He gets very few goals now but I'm glad he's on the team. Does this make him valuable, darn tootin. Another example is Mattias Ohlund. He puts up decent numbers but his number one job is to keep the other team's top line off the scoresheet. Is he valuable? I say yes. I'd rather have Mattias Ohlund on the ice than an offensive defenseman because even if Ohlund doesn't help the team score, he will keep the team from losing.
So I vote for Mattias Ohlund as best player right now. You can laugh and bring up stats but we will be talking about apples and oranges unless you can find a similar defenseman who plays better in his own end.
butterfly_style
12-13-05, 3:08 PM
That's why it's a team sport.
And the best team may not have the "best" player on it
And conversely, even if you have the "best" player, you don't necessarily have the best team.
The best team has a mixture of people with different skills, as well as coaches who can get the best of these skills from these players.
So I vote for Mattias Ohlund as best player right now. You can laugh and bring up stats but we will be talking about apples and oranges unless you can find a similar defenseman who plays better in his own end.
Now I now you banged your head. Ohlund isn't even the best dman on the Canucks right now let alone the league, let alone the best player.
You should think about a trip to Emergency.
LiAmTrAnSdEmOn
12-13-05, 3:13 PM
Iced Tea, you have basically said what I have been argueing for the past 2 months. People need to look past the offense into the other parts of the game. That's why I laugh at people that love to praise Rick Nash, Ilya Kovalchuk, and Pavel Datsyuk. Sure they are great offensively, but don't come even close to being respectable defensively. People don't look at 100% of the game, they would rather throw all the credit to people that excel at half of it.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 3:20 PM
Now I now you banged your head. Ohlund isn't even the best dman on the Canucks right now let alone the league, let alone the best player.
You should think about a trip to Emergency.You would take Baumgartner over Ohlund? I'll send the guys with the white coats and butterfly net over to pick you up right now. :D
Seriously though, explain to me how Salo is playing better in the Canucks' end than Ohlund is.
There aren't many guys in history who have been so dominant offensively, that it didn't matter how bad they were defensively. Between PP scoring and the puck always being on their stick, it simply didn't matter.
Gretzky and Mario are far away the best, and there are a few guys who could soon be there (I'd argue Kovalchuk is going to be there very VERY soon).
As for Gretzky.. here's the one thing that detracts from everything he did IMO. It wasn't until very recently that a lot of teams started to play their best players against the other teams best players. It only makes sense you'd want to do that, but it hasn't been happening very often.
Gretzky led the league in turnovers. By a lot. But it never mattered. Why? Because the guy stealing the puck from him had no idea what to do with it.
I'd love to see what would've happened to Gretzky against some of the elite-outscorers in this league.. Modano in his prime, Thornton, Forsberg, etc.
Best player in the league today? Forsberg hands down. I'd say he's the best defensive player in the league, he's physical.. his offense speaks for itself. He made Steven Reinprecht and Chris Drury look like 50 goal scorers, and right now is making Gagne look like a 70 goal scorer.
Thing is, most of the guys listed are pretty complete players, Datsyuk, Kovalchuk and Nash aren't even in the poll. But you still have to look at who the dominant players are, so just because Iginla has been dominant, doesn't mean he is right now, he just isn't, Forsberg, Jagr, etc are.
You would take Baumgartner over Ohlund? I'll send the guys with the white coats and butterfly net over to pick you up right now. :D
Seriously though, explain to me how Salo is playing better in the Canucks' end than Ohlund is.
I can't believe a Canucks fan is asking that question,:eyebug: Salo has been BY FAR the Canuks best AND most consistent dmen, probably their best player in fact, at BOTH ends.
Ohlund has struggled with his foot speed and therefore has lost a number of 1-1 encounters to quicker players, has been caught out of position repeatedly and has taken numerous bad penalties.
Have you watched the Canucks play this year?
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 3:26 PM
That's why it's a team sport.
And the best team may not have the "best" player on it
And conversely, even if you have the "best" player, you don't necessarily have the best team.
The best team has a mixture of people with different skills, as well as coaches who can get the best of these skills from these players.I agree with that.
But if it's such a team sport, how can the NHL decide a game with a shootout, which is the closest thing to individualism in hockey. Suddenly worse case scenario, a GM or coach is not icing a complete team but thinking about who can win the game individually.
LiAmTrAnSdEmOn
12-13-05, 3:29 PM
I realize that Datsyuk, Kovalchuk and Nash aren't on the poll, but there are many people that would like to argue that they are in the top 5 players in the league. Many people call me bias and dumb because I say I would take Gagne over any of those players. Maybe that is the reason but I would take a complete player like Gagne or any of those above players.
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 3:30 PM
I can't believe a Canucks fan is asking that question,:eyebug: Salo has been BY FAR the Canuks best AND most consistent dmen, probably their best player in fact, at BOTH ends.
Ohlund has struggled with his foot speed and therefore has lost a number of 1-1 encounters to quicker players, has been caught out of position repeatedly and has taken numerous bad penalties.
Have you watched the Canucks play this year?I didn't say Salo is a bad player. Ohlund has not played nearly as bad as you think. He, along with many other NHL defensemen, has had difficulty adjusting to the new rules but he's improving with each game and obviously Crawford thinks the same way I do.
I just wanted you to explain to me your way of thinking.
*I might be a smidgen bias towards Ohlund as he is one of my favourite Canucks. :D
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 3:38 PM
I realize that Datsyuk, Kovalchuk and Nash aren't on the poll, but there are many people that would like to argue that they are in the top 5 players in the league. Many people call me bias and dumb because I say I would take Gagne over any of those players. Maybe that is the reason but I would take a complete player like Gagne or any of those above players.I think growing and maturing as players will turn Datsyuk, Kovalchuk and Nash into complete players. Although with Nash being injured, only time will tell if this happens.
Would Gagne be anywhere near the complete player you think he is if Forsberg had not become a Flyer, would he have maybe taken another year or two to become a complete player or would he be a complete player at all without a player like Forsberg on his line?
I didn't say Salo is a bad player. Ohlund has not played nearly as bad as you think. He, along with many other NHL defensemen, has had difficulty adjusting to the new rules but he's improving with each game and obviously Crawford thinks the same way I do.
I just wanted you to explain to me your way of thinking.
*I might be a smidgen bias towards Ohlund as he is one of my favourite Canucks. :D
Well up until this year I thought of Ohlund as the Nucks best dman (still not an elite one on the level of a Lidstrom, Blake, Pronger, Niedermayer, etc), but this year he's really struggled and Salo has excelled big time.
I think growing and maturing as players will turn Datsyuk, Kovalchuk and Nash into complete players. Although with Nash being injured, only time will tell if this happens.
Would Gagne be anywhere near the complete player you think he is if Forsberg had not become a Flyer, would he have maybe taken another year or two to become a complete player or would he be a complete player at all without a player like Forsberg on his line?
I think Gagne's always been good at both ends, what Forsberg has done for him is make him a more dynamic scorer, he's always been overrated in that area imo, but he's never been a defensive liability, quite the contrary. Still, not a chance I'd take him over a dynamic player like Datsyuk or especially Kovalchuk.
LiAmTrAnSdEmOn
12-13-05, 3:47 PM
I think growing and maturing as players will turn Datsyuk, Kovalchuk and Nash into complete players. Although with Nash being injured, only time will tell if this happens.
Would Gagne be anywhere near the complete player you think he is if Forsberg had not become a Flyer, would he have maybe taken another year or two to become a complete player or would he be a complete player at all without a player like Forsberg on his line?
While Forsberg has definitely helped him out scoring wise, he has always been a great defender. He played against the top lines of the other teams, shutting them down before this year. This is the first year he has been on the top line and is showing that he deserves to be. Like I said though, Forsberg helps him out offensively, and I in no way think that he is a natural 60-70 goal scorer. I do however think he could pot 40 and push for 50 with other linemates on the 1st line.
butterfly_style
12-13-05, 3:50 PM
But if it's such a team sport, how can the NHL decide a game with a shootout, which is the closest thing to individualism in hockey. Suddenly worse case scenario, a GM or coach is not icing a complete team but thinking about who can win the game individually.
I am not a fan of the shootout.
Even though I think our goalie will win more than his share of them.
But if we are going to use a shootout to decide ties . . .why does the NHL still award a point if the game is tied after three periods ?
Iced Tea
12-13-05, 5:17 PM
I'm glad we can argue but agree that everyone has a worthwhile opinion. Now who wants to group hug? Yoata's in the middle. :D
http://www.cosmicmonkey.org/bob_eden/be_3/images/Group_hug1_JPG.jpg
I'm glad we can argue but agree that everyone has a worthwhile opinion, no matter how bad their head injury is.
Fixed. :D
vBulletin® v3.6.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.