Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
There was no myth about Jokinen. For a time, he WAS clearly a #1 center on the majority of teams. It took him a few years in the NHL to become one, and he dropped off afterwards, but he definitely was a 'bonifide #1 center' for a stretch.
2005/2006, Olli was the 7th best center in the NHL (and third in goals). Those are #1 Center numbers to me.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary
The following season he was the 6th highest scoring center in the league (and 2nd in goals scored).
http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary
Olli was definitely a #1 center for a portion of his career. Even his last year in Calgary, he was the 19th highest scoring center. That still makes him a '#1 center'.
I think Jokinen was an 'elite' #1 center for a few years in the NHL, and a few years sprinkled with "decent" #1 center. He was definitely a #1 center statistically for a number of years in his career. There was no 'myth' about that. |
"#1 Center" with ample PP time, on a non-contending team, is not the same. Once more, he was with 6 different organizations, that did not make the playoffs. Too much to be coincidence. What's the difference here between him and Andrew Cassels?
Then he was given the opportunity to be a top line center with
one of the top players in the world. Isn't it interesting that his production declined when he became a Flame? For the first time in Calgary, he got back to over 20 goals
after that debacle Rangers trade, when the Flames were really starting to blow.
In over a 15 year professional career, he's never demonstrated the ability to elevate his play when the game matters with the exception of international play for Finland. Like Boumeester, and to a lesser extent, Huselius, the Flames were never going to win with these players. Maybe spending winters in South Florida softens them up. Who knows? Whatever the case, there are 3 examples of ex-Panthers, who given important responsiblities to help improve the team, but did not perform to the best of their abilities.
So, you, too, can rationalize .7 PPG all you want, but Jokinen never delivered when it mattered most (and mostly never was in such a position). In baseball, Greg Maddux was asked about statistics. His response was that the only one that mattered was "Does your team win when you pitch?" The same principle applies here. A "#1 Center" or a "#1 D-man" on a supposedly contending team should be enough to put them over the top, shouldn't they? If you disagree, why is that a lesser skilled role player, like Mike Keane, was able to contribute to winning with different franchises? Could it be that he possessed certain attributes, probably acquired in Montreal, that those ex-Panthers never did?