Tkachuk and Lindholm as co-1C

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

To be fair, Neal earned it

The obsession started before Neal sucked. Basically the moment he was acquired. To be fair that poster largely turned out to be right in his assessment of the player.
I always figure stuff like that though has to involve some personal interaction that went poorly. Certainly I've had a couple of those that has impacted my perception of players I used to like. Similarly, some of my favorite players are those I've had positive interactions with.
Really we shouldn't conflate good athletes being good people - but its hard to not root for the good guys.

[jessnuts]

Step one: tell them you’re not a fan of nastiness
Step two: immediately insult someone (I think?)
Step three: profit

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by kurwamac

you should look in the mirror and worry about yourself.. you fight for scraps in Canada - I've got it made keep tap dancing for a bunch of guys son - I've got it good where it counts boy

...and then, because the screwdriver flew west for thanksgiving, all enterprises begin with favourable wind delays.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The obsession started before Neal sucked. Basically the moment he was acquired. To be fair that poster largely turned out to be right in his assessment of the player.
I always figure stuff like that though has to involve some personal interaction that went poorly. Certainly I've had a couple of those that has impacted my perception of players I used to like. Similarly, some of my favorite players are those I've had positive interactions with.
Really we shouldn't conflate good athletes being good people - but its hard to not root for the good guys.

This post is spot on and it's why I have tried to learn less and less about athlete's private lives as the years go by. Aside from it being none of my business, I don't want to confuse my appreciation for the sport with what happens outside of it. I think you also have to realize that an interaction with an athlete is but the briefest possible snapshot into their life and may not be reflective in any way of them as a person. Or that these are young men for the most part who will mature over time.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

This is such an odd take. I wouldn't consider Kylington cocky at all.


You know who is a little cocky? Rasmus Andersson! And it's my favourite thing about him.


Maybe he's getting them mixed up?

All those Swedish defenceman look alike to him.

[kurwamac]

if it makes you guys feel good keep patting each other on the back

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by kurwamac

if it makes you guys feel good keep patting each other on the back

Back pats have nothing to do with it, you just don't make any sense

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Back pats have nothing to do with it, you just don't make any sense

And are seemingly belligerent, but it's hard to actually tell.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by kurwamac

if it makes you guys feel good keep patting each other on the back

Look man, over here in the nether world we’ll keep doing jumping jacks for the lobsters... not me though, I’ll keep skipping to the beat of my own xylophone. Stay gold pony boy.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by blankall

A lot of other posters have already mentioned it, but a lot of 1-2 strength down the middle is hindsight bias. ROR being the best example. Everyone thought he was a borderline #1 Centre, until he won a cup.

Once again if you pull out Pittsburgh, who had Crosby, the winners are all over the place in terms of where their strengths came from.

Boston: Krejci is hardly elite. Bergeron was developing and not elite.

Chicago: Toews and Richards. Both players were not their peak selves when Chicago won the 2014/15 championship. IMO Toews was always highly overrated, and it's become more and more obvious over time that Kane, the winger, is driving that forward group. While I would still take 2014/15 Toews/Richards over Monahan/Backlund, I just don't see how the gap is so unsurmountable that you can't bridge it by having more depth on the wing.

Kings: Yes Kopitar/Carter is a good 1/2 punch. However, the rest of the forward depth was abysmal. The true strength of this team was team play and grit. It was Sutter team. Sutter took the Flames to game 7 of the cup final with....Conroy?

Ducks: This was the Selanne/Neidermeyer show. Similar to Bergeron, Getzlaf had not developed into the player he was going to be. Their number one centre was....Andy McDonald?

Canes: Yes, Staal and Brind'Amour were great, but the real strength was depth.

I also think that as the game opens up, we are going to see teams become even more complex. More and more teams will rely on their defencemen to provide the offense, taking further emphasis away from centres.

If you are going to compare Backlund favourably with Bergeron and Toews, then there really is no convincing you.

Those teams winning 5 recent SC doesn’t prove that you can easily win SC’s without centre depth, it just proves you are wrong in your assessment. And you forgot about LA and Kopitar.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

If you are going to compare Backlund favourably with Bergeron and Toews, then there really is no convincing you.

Those teams winning 5 recent SC doesn’t prove that you can easily win SC’s without centre depth, it just proves you are wrong in your assessment. And you forgot about LA and Kopitar.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

For one, he does mention LA and Kopitar. And two, Bergeron then is a decent (but not perfect) comparison to Backlund today. Backlund will never get to the level Bergeron got to after he won the cup, but it's not ridiculous to compare the player Bergeron was at the time.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

For one, he does mention LA and Kopitar. And two, Bergeron then is a decent (but not perfect) comparison to Backlund today. Backlund will never get to the level Bergeron got to after he won the cup, but it's not ridiculous to compare the player Bergeron was at the time.

Yeah, it is laughable. But we will have to agree to disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Roof-Daddy]

It's weird. I've never seen Bergeron get under rated like this before.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

It's weird. I've never seen Bergeron get under rated like this before.

It's not intended to be under-rating at all. Bergeron for the better part of the last decade has been an elite center in the league and the best two-way center period. That doesn't mean he was at that level 9 years ago, though.

It's not a criticism by any means, but not every player is the player they eventually become at the start of their NHL career. Look at MacKinnon, would anyone say he's not an incredibly dominant center and one of the very best in the league? Could anyone have honestly said that five or six years ago?

What about Blake Wheeler? or Brad Marchand? or even Mikael Backlund. Not every good, great, or even elite player starts out that way, sometimes they take time.

I don't think it's an insult to suggest that Patrice Bergeron at 25 after missing an year with an awful concussion and changing the way he played the game was similar to a 30-year old Backlund at his absolute peak.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Sochi Olympics proved Bruins’ Bergeron is elite

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...rgerons-elite/

It has taken longer for Bergeron to be appreciated as one of the best all-around players in the NHL. Maybe it started during the Boston Bruins’ 2011 Stanley Cup run or last year’s trip to the final, but after playing a major role in Team Canada’s gold-medal performance at the Sochi Olympics, the 28-year-old is surely considered among hockey’s elite centres.

"I think what he’s done is he opened a lot of people’s eyes," Boston coach Claude Julien said. "I know at his first Olympics he didn’t have, whether it was the opportunity, to do what he did. The last one I think people realized how good he is."

In that tournament, as defenceman Chris Pronger told CBC Sports recently, Bergeron had a smaller role that was "probably a little unfair to him."

"Patrice would sit on the bench for long periods of time and then we’d get a penalty and turn to him and say, ‘OK, go out and kill it,"’ Pronger told CBC. "That’s a pretty tough, but important, job."

Yeah, but you guys knew at the time...

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...rgerons-elite/



Yeah, but you guys knew at the time...

Him not being recognized as elite by 2011 isn't evidence that he wasn't.

In 2012 he won the Selke and got Hart votes (of course awards aren't the best metric). It's always a chicken/egg thing with these guys.

In 2011 Bergeron was a top 20 C in the league. Semantics whether you want to call that elite or not. I'm not sure peak-Backlund is even a top 40 C?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The obsession started before Neal sucked. Basically the moment he was acquired. To be fair that poster largely turned out to be right in his assessment of the player.
I always figure stuff like that though has to involve some personal interaction that went poorly. Certainly I've had a couple of those that has impacted my perception of players I used to like. Similarly, some of my favorite players are those I've had positive interactions with.
Really we shouldn't conflate good athletes being good people - but its hard to not root for the good guys.

Rumblings about Neal pre-dated his acquisition by the Flames. When he was signed, I looked up comments about him from earlier stops, and they were concerning. Local reporters in Pittsburgh commenting on the trade to Nashville said his act had worn thin, and his attitude wouldn’t be missed in the dressing room. Similar comments about Neal’s stint in Nashville.

[Strange Brew]

Neal's attitude was widely known and I truly believe Treliving thought the team needed his type of swagger. If only it had come attached to a short term deal.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Him not being recognized as elite by 2011 isn't evidence that he wasn't.

In 2012 he won the Selke and got Hart votes (of course awards aren't the best metric). It's always a chicken/egg thing with these guys.

In 2011 Bergeron was a top 20 C in the league. Semantics whether you want to call that elite or not. I'm not sure peak-Backlund is even a top 40 C?

sometimes when I wander in here I feel like Alice in Wonderland.

Bergeron had 2 70 pt seasons by the time he was 21.


In 2005-6 Bergeron was tied for 11th in goals by a center and 21st in Pts by a Center as a 21 year old.


Gaudreau broke into the league as a 21 year old and was established as Johnny Hockey and an elite player in his first 2 seasons with 64 and 78 point seasons.


How much extra do points scored as a Flame count??

To argue that Bergeron was not elite basically from the start of his career is absurd.


I can't believe that with 20/20 hindsight as both player's are over 30 and their careers are winding down that anyone would compare Backlund to Bergeron.

Maybe Backlund is elite as a 2C, definitely an elite 3C

[Roof-Daddy]

Now I feel like Alice in Wonderland, because I just read a ricardodw post and my head was nodding in agreement pretty much the whole way.