Quote:
Originally Posted by ScorchyScorch
Stop pulling stats from a less than 10 game samples and using that to make general statements/conclusions on players. It's ridiculous and dumb.
|
Ummm, that's not what I did, if that was aimed at me. I pulled stats from that period and made a conclusion about the results over that 10 day span (see "at this point"). And I admitted it was a tiny sample size to boot.
My bigger point was that a third line centre like Backlund could be has more defensive responsibilities (which is his stronger suit) while a second line with, say Bennett and Colborne, can be sheltered but still given offensive ice time. So it wasn't really initially a "who's better" argument.
Perhaps it's a difference in how I view the usual roles. I see the first line as being expected to score against the top defenders but also often go against the other team's top line. I see second lines as providing secondary scoring hopefully against lesser defenders. I see third lines as suited for defensive specialists who can be matched up as much as possible against the top line of the other teams. The fourth line provides energy and rest time, and hopefully doesn't get killed when the top line gets out against them on the road or on an icing.
I do think Backlund gets you a better return than Colborne. He's a regular centre with a stronger history.