Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Again, not even sure what you're talking about sometimes.
No one puts the blame on the player for playing higher than he should, that's the teams fault. And yes having a 3rd line center playing in your top 2 is one of the reasons we're drafting as high as we are, holes in the roster are a problem. Ideally a player like Backlund, with very limited offensive upside, is playing in the middle if your roster. Third line 5on5 and one of your better guys on the PK. That's where he should be.
|
Thing is, Backlund hasn't played higher than he should in any of those years. Other than being below average at faceoffs, he's been successful in every role he's been put in. +/- isn't a great stat but Backlund was a +4 the year we drafted Bennett and he's a +4 this year as a 2nd line center. He was the one player who
wasn't in over his head in his role, and his on-ice role in those years has not been that of the 3C people claim he is. It's easy to look at his counting stats and say "we're not good enough because he doesn't produce" but his line outproduces other team's top 6 lines that they're matched up with. There are guys playing 2C on playoff teams who can "produce offensively" but still barely hold their head above water in given matchups (heck, look at
Steven Stamkos the last two years). There are 3Cs who are better power play guys (Ryan Spooner, heck maybe our own Granlund who I don't even consider a 4C) too. But when I think of a term like "2C" I'm not referring to special teams performance.
Quote:
|
He doesn't qualify as copious center depth, he qualifies as plain ol' depth IMO.
|
A successful 2nd line center as your 3rd line center is more than "plain ol' depth". But anyways I don't want to drag this thread further off topic, this is the draft thread. Let's just agree to disagree. If you still want to respond to the above part copypaste it over to the Backlund thread.