Well that's the other thing. He's definitely not a 6 million dollar player. Edm is wasting about 4-5 million between him and Lucic up front. Gonna come back to bite them in the rear when it comes time to pay McD.
So are people saying they would take Backlund over Monahan as well? RNH is struggling but mark my words if hes ever traded he will break out. I love Backlund but I would trade Backlund for him in a heartbeat. We saw it with Dubynk and Petry. And now this year Schultz has played great according to HF penguins. RNH is better than all those players id expect him to be a 2-way 60 pt player. Oh and Hall also had a good start. Just take them off the Oilers and they should do good.
The Following User Says Thank You to flamesforcup For This Useful Post:
Meh not really going to argue Gaudreau and Mackinnon because they were both great as well but I thought Mathews wasn't that good and was lost defensively alongside McDavid. Thought Hopkins was much better than Mathews. Mathews picked up a lot of garbage points on the pp and was used in every favourable face off while Hopkins got all the hard match ups and less pp time.
I agree Gaudreau was definetly they best player but Matthews wasnt even close to being one of the best he was garbage. RNH was solid.
I love TSN´s power rankings. Edmonton is ranked 7th and the justification is that although they´ve only won once in their last 6, they´ve picked up points in 5 of those 6. Calgary is ranked 22nd despite only one regulation loss in their last 7.
It's honestly silly to be surprised by that kind of stuff like power rankings. We should know by now the rest of the league and media are going to jump on the Oilers bandwagon a hundred times before they hop on Calgary's because of the McDavid factor, and because of the "something special" aura that's surrounded that team for years because of the constant influx of top picks, and cause of delusional people surrounding (and atop of) that club. People want to buy into hype more than substance, even though that's what they preach. They don't give a #### that Edmonton's defence core is probably still bottom 7 or 8 in the league, or that they're actually extremely mediocre up front if McDavid is removed, or that there's very little in the system. As soon as Edmonton went on any kind of run, even if it was for a quarter or third of a season like has happened here, people were cocked and ready to jump up and say "See? I told you! Gonna be great!" even though if you look back as far as 3-4 seasons, there's evidence that nothing is a shoe in whatsoever, even with this kind of start, for that team. It doesn't matter that they've fallen back to a below playoff trajectory since starting 7-1 when they had a very easy/forgiving schedule without leaving the country (if I recall correctly). Just as much as it doesn't matter that since the Flames have shored up the goaltending issues and players have come around that it's looking like a team that can win consistently (and is), Without it's star player to boot. But people don't give a #### cause Edmonton still has the hype factor. Just how it is.
It's gonna be just like 14-15 where the Flames were not in power rankings ("top 16") even until after they qualified for the playoffs. And the team they eliminated (LA), reigning cup champs, were still there. The media will always have a hype bias. Just have to let the results actually speak for themselves. Lol it's a waste of time to act surprised at this point. The 8 goal Flames game with McDavid talk in the intermission was your first clue.
Edmonton is the special kid on the block, that gets the special treatment, and they're gonna be until McDavid dons another team's sweater.
Still doesn't mean they're actually any good though...
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to djsFlames For This Useful Post:
Whenever I hear people complaining about Power Rankings I always think of this article from The Onion. It's from 2010 but still...power rankings are meaningless.
Quote:
On the heels of their 31-17 win over the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLIV, the New Orleans Saints rose to the third spot in the most recent NFL team power rankings. "With Drew Brees running the offense, this team has what it takes to be among of the best," ESPN.com reporter John Clayton wrote in his entry on the World Champion Saints. "I'm still not convinced their defense can take them all the way to the top, though. As I said in my rankings, I think the Colts are just a better club overall.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to savemedrzaius For This Useful Post:
Do you think many good teams would want Monahan at $6.3 a year for 40 points? (If a 40 point player is what you're going to call RNH)
Monahan has two 61 point seasons in his first three seasons in the NHL. He has scored 30 goals. He also was the number 1 centre on a Flames team who unexpectedly won a round in the playoffs in his second year. I don't think every good team would love to get their hands on Monahan.
Nugent Hopkins' teams have always been at the bottom of the league - not ever close to making the playoffs. He scored 34 points last year and is on pace for 36 this season. That is terrible production for $6 million/year.
Monahan has two 61 point seasons in his first three seasons in the NHL. He has scored 30 goals. He also was the number 1 centre on a Flames team who unexpectedly won a round in the playoffs in his second year. I don't think every good team would love to get their hands on Monahan.
Nugent Hopkins outscored Monahan in his first three seasons scoring at a .72 pace while Monahan was at a .67 pace. He scored 34 points in 55 games last season. Pretty close to the same point toal that both Hopkins and Monahan are on pace for this year with presumably more games played.
Quote:
Nugent Hopkins' teams have always been at the bottom of the league - not ever close to making the playoffs. He scored 34 points last year and is on pace for 36 this season. That is terrible production for $6 million/year.
Iginla was one of the best players the Flames ever had and almost won the Hart trophy while missing the playoffs in 2002. Now Hopkins is no Iginla but when the team around you stinks, should he be responsible for that?
Hopkins has never finished a season with less than .6 points a game.
I don't deny Monahan is a better goal scorer or even a better player but if you're going to use Monahan's first 3 seasons and then ignore that Hopkins actually had a better first 3 seasons then that comes off as homerish. Both are young players who are struggling and need to be better and will be and a lot of teams would be interested in both players.
I hate defending the tenderness but when some posters (not you) claim they'd rather have Backlund, it comes off as silly. I'm the biggest Backlund fan and would take RNH in a second. He's better offensively and just as good if not better defensively.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to calgaryblood For This Useful Post:
I hate defending the tenderness but when some posters (not you) claim they'd rather have Backlund, it comes off as silly. I'm the biggest Backlund fan and would take RNH in a second. He's better offensively and just as good if not better defensively.
I'm not convinced. Who cares about "silly", it's a Calgary board. This is the hill you make your stand on? That is actually silly. Just let it go.
The Tenderness is not better defensively. No way no how.
I've maintained that RNH has been viewed as a decent defensive player only because he's been surrounded by players that had no clue about defence. The one eyed man in the land of the blind.
I guess it depends on what your team needs, but I'd lean towards Backlund as well, especially when salary is considered. Although neither of them are winning any Ironman awards.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Nugent Hopkins outscored Monahan in his first three seasons scoring at a .72 pace while Monahan was at a .67 pace. He scored 34 points in 55 games last season. Pretty close to the same point toal that both Hopkins and Monahan are on pace for this year with presumably more games played...
Hopkins has never finished a season with less than .6 points a game.
But the problem here is that Nugent-Hoopkins has never finished a season with more than 56-points or 24 goals. He has always been affected by his own health and consistency, and is clearly not as productive a player as Monahan projects to be. Do you honestly see Monahan finishing the season with less than 40 points? I don't. Do you see it as likely for Nugent-Hopkins to finish with more than 40 points? I don't.
THAT is the difference.
__________________
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?"
