Quote:
Originally Posted by Regorium
I thought for a long time whether I should include Toews in there because I figured some would take that point and not comprehend the rest of the post. I could easily argue that Bergeron is a #1C as well. Heck Couture is a legitimate #1C as well. Why just point out Toews and not my other choices?
I'll say that perhaps the "true #1C" words were poorly used on my part, but I had hoped people would understand the context for which it was said. For that I mean the #1C role is GENERALLY used to define a go-to offensive center - Thornton, Crosby, Malkin, Stamkos, Datysuk, Tavares are stereotypical. I'm talking about needing a go-to 1st line offensive talent, and having a center anchor that top line in Draisaitl might be the best result.
I'm just saying that Drasaitl has the ability to anchor a new top line by himself. Dal Colle and Bennett are complementary pieces to what we currently have. We need both, but unless we're thinking Eichel/McDavid (who also seem to have the potential to anchor new lines), I think it'd be better to get the center.
Also, I'm saying we HAVE our Toews already - Monahan is that guy. Would you rather have 2 Toews or a Toews and a Kane?
|
I didn't think it was necessary when I posted Bergeron's stats next to Krejci's. How could you argue that Toews isn't THE go to offensive center on that team considering he has more goals than Kane in less games played. The same thing goes for Bergeron. Especially on a team like the Bruins where no one scores a lot of goals.
And I understood exactly what you were saying.