Post season, I disagree. I don't feel his game translates well to the playoffs.
It’s the same game. It’s more a matter of him seizing the moment in the playoffs, which I don’t seen any reason why he wouldn’t.
__________________
Quote:
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
The Following User Says Thank You to VilleN For This Useful Post:
I think elite wingers are always downgraded here. While they do not drive success like the center position an elite winger is required to win the Stanley Cup. The only team that might not have an elite winger was the first 2 Crosby/Malkin cup teams.
You really need to be above average throughout the roster. I don't think that you can point to a position on a team and say They didn't have a good X and won the cup.
Vernon was hardly average when the Flames won the Cup. He had the 4th best save percentage in the league in 88-89 and the 2nd best GAA. I’m not sure you need an elite goalie, but you do need a very good one.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to madmike For This Useful Post:
I think elite wingers are always downgraded here. While they do not drive success like the center position an elite winger is required to win the Stanley Cup. The only team that might not have an elite winger was the first 2 Crosby/Malkin cup teams.
Err… I think you just demonstrated that you don't require an elite winger to win the Stanley Cup.
I agree that it makes things a hell of a lot easier if you've got one, of course. And easier still if you've got more than one.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Err… I think you just demonstrated that you don't require an elite winger to win the Stanley Cup.
I agree that it makes things a hell of a lot easier if you've got one, of course. And easier still if you've got more than one.
If you have a generational Center an a 2nd top in the league Center you don’t need an elite winger, or if you only have 1 top 10 Center in the league you need an elite winger. A GM can’t go out and acquire one of those generational players therefore acquiring and elite winger should be on the list. And let’s not forget that Crosby only one Cup without an elite winger and didn’t win another until they acquired a motivated Kessel.
The Blackhawks first Cup they needed two elite wingers which made up for goaltending.
It’s the overall mix of a teams above average talent that’s required to win. If this was a statement of who should teams draft I would agree that a top Center and top D because they are much harder to acquire should be the focus of the draft over wings but in terms of actually building a cup winner 2 of 3 1st line players and your first D pair need to be elite, you need a line shut down the opponents top line, you need secondary scoring from the fourth line up.
All of these things need to come together to Actually win. The teams that have won the cup recently are all very solid top to bottom. The biggest trait might be having 2nd players who would be 1st line players on bubble playoff teams.
Last edited by GGG; 08-08-2018 at 08:48 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
If you have a generational Center an a 2nd top in the league Center you don’t need an elite winger, or if you only have 1 top 10 Center in the league you need an elite winger. A GM can’t go out and acquire one of those generational players therefore acquiring and elite winger should be on the list.
Quite right. I would put it a little differently, that's all: you need at least two elite forwards (preferably more), and at least one of them has got to be a centre. If they are all centres, well, that's a nice problem to have.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
he scores one nice goal and that is evidence he is a game breaker? show me all the clips where the ducks shut him down and played physically on him, taking away his time and space.
It’s the same game. It’s more a matter of him seizing the moment in the playoffs, which I don’t seen any reason why he wouldn’t.
can't tell if you're serious or not.... cause the playoffs are certainly not the same game. 9 out of 10 people who watch the playoffs will say it's different, the other 1 out of 10 is wrong.
can't tell if you're serious or not.... cause the playoffs are certainly not the same game. 9 out of 10 people who watch the playoffs will say it's different, the other 1 out of 10 is wrong.
I can’t tell if you’re serious or not... elite forwards get shut down in the playoffs every year. It’s one of the main objectives of the opponent.
Regular season, I agree.
Post season, I disagree. I don't feel his game translates well to the playoffs.
So the 11 points in 15 playoff games doesn't mean anything?
Johnny, Tkachuk and Monahan are all capable of breaking a game open with their skill sets as forwards....it doesn't matter if it's the post season or regular season. This group of players hasn't had a chance to shine yet as they were all very young, inexperienced the last time this team made the playoffs.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
he scores one nice goal and that is evidence he is a game breaker? show me all the clips where the ducks shut him down and played physically on him, taking away his time and space.
I would counter by pointing out that Gaudreau has only played a total of 15 playoff games over two seasons, and that it is way too early to be making this pronouncement. On the contrary, I see no reason to think that he won't be a great playoff performer, even if the results to this point have been mixed.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
People said Datsyuk couldn't get it done in the playoffs - too small, too soft, too Russian - after his first 3 post seasons with 3 goals and 9 points in 37 games.
But he then had 104 points in 120 games over the rest of his career.
can't tell if you're serious or not.... cause the playoffs are certainly not the same game. 9 out of 10 people who watch the playoffs will say it's different, the other 1 out of 10 is wrong.
It’s the same game. Hockey I believe it’s called. The question is whether he will rise to the occasion and can match or exceed the intensity of his opponents. Which, I don’t think there is enough data to determine at this point.
Also where did you get your stats? I’m guessing there is some old toilet paper stuck to them.
__________________
Quote:
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
Vernon was hardly average when the Flames won the Cup. He had the 4th best save percentage in the league in 88-89 and the 2nd best GAA. I’m not sure you need an elite goalie, but you do need a very good one.
Vernon was good but not great and was pretty lucky with the teams he was on. There was no better team from top to bottom than the 89 Flames and the Wings were the same.
he scores one nice goal and that is evidence he is a game breaker? show me all the clips where the ducks shut him down and played physically on him, taking away his time and space.
I'm not picking on you, but these are the types of 'dig your feet in' comments that derail any good conversation.
If you have a point, prove it with your own videos. Have a conversation.
He disagreed, and took a few minutes to find a video to demonstrate how he thought of Gaudreau in the playoffs. Not every response needs to be a thoroughly researched novel that 100% addresses your POV.
Personally, I think a playoff goal to tie it in the final seconds against the Ducks is a pretty damn good video to show in a debate like this.
So the 11 points in 15 playoff games doesn't mean anything?
Johnny, Tkachuk and Monahan are all capable of breaking a game open with their skill sets as forwards....it doesn't matter if it's the post season or regular season. This group of players hasn't had a chance to shine yet as they were all very young, inexperienced the last time this team made the playoffs.
a nearly 20% drop in production from career regular season to career playoffs, that means something to me. if you look, all elite players have a drop in production come playoffs. i just feel johnny's game doesn't translate as well as true elite players.
I would counter by pointing out that Gaudreau has only played a total of 15 playoff games over two seasons, and that it is way too early to be making this pronouncement. On the contrary, I see no reason to think that he won't be a great playoff performer, even if the results to this point have been mixed.
fair enough, i see what you're saying. my opinion is different, and he will struggle in the post season more often than not.
People said Datsyuk couldn't get it done in the playoffs - too small, too soft, too Russian - after his first 3 post seasons with 3 goals and 9 points in 37 games.
But he then had 104 points in 120 games over the rest of his career.
every player is different, i'm talking about johnny, not pavel. different player, different style, different era.
keep tap dancing for a bunch of guys son - I've got it good where it counts boy
