Atheltic's Craig Custance Talking Cup Model With McLellan

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by VilleN

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.

i don't believe it's the same game, and that's fine, we disagree on that.

you may not feel there is enough data, but based on the hockey that i've watched, i feel fine making that statement.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by Split98

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.

sure, it's 1 goal (25% of his career playoff goals) to help support his belief.

i'm not sold on his one piece of evidence.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

every player is different, i'm talking about johnny, not pavel. different player, different style, different era.

I was simply giving one example. There are lots of players that get written off after a couple years of unproductive playoffs. It doesn't mean they will never produce.

Also, if anything, 'different era' is more favourable to Gaudreau, not less - the league gets less physical every year.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Let's be fair - is there really any argument that the game changes in the playoffs? The intensity, the way it's called especially? And is there any argument that those changes would tend not to benefit smaller, skilled players? That's something many of us - myself included - complain about all the time.

I certainly don't think there's been enough data to judge Gaudreau's playoff performance on, though. In the three series he's played in, the first two were on a bad team that probably shouldn't have made the postseason, and the third was completely overmatched. I want to see him on a team that's a real contender, or at least not an also-ran. Then I'll judge.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Let's be fair - is there really any argument that the game changes in the playoffs? The intensity, the way it's called especially? And is there any argument that those changes would tend not to benefit smaller, skilled players? That's something many of us - myself included - complain about all the time.

I certainly don't think there's been enough data to judge Gaudreau's playoff performance on, though. In the three series he's played in, the first two were on a bad team that probably shouldn't have made the postseason, and the third was completely overmatched. I want to see him on a team that's a real contender, or at least not an also-ran. Then I'll judge.

Of course it cranks up, and of course it is more physical. But guys adjust - guys of all sizes. It isn't about the size of the player, it's about the fight in the player.

And I think Johnny has a lot of fight in him.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Also, if anything, 'different era' is more favourable to Gaudreau, not less - the league gets less physical every year.

less physical every year? look at the route out of our division; anaheim, los angeles & san jose. all big physical teams that have been leading our division since the re-alignment in 13-14.

maybe it's as physical, but i think its a stretch to say it less physical now.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Of course it cranks up, and of course it is more physical. But some guys adjust - guys of all sizes. It isn't about the size of the player, it's about the fight in the player.

And I think Johnny has a lot of fight in him.

fixed for you.

yes, i agree, johnny has a lot of fight in him. johnny with all the fight in the world versus brent burns in a board battle, who comes out with the puck?

[VilleN]

I think it’s pretty universally accepted that the game is less physical now. More awareness of concussions, along with the elimination of clutching and grabbing- skilled players have more room to operate now than they ever have.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

less physical every year? look at the route out of our division; anaheim, los angeles & san jose. all big physical teams that have been leading our division since the re-alignment in 13-14.

maybe it's as physical, but i think its a stretch to say it less physical now.

I have been watching since the 60s, and yeah, it gets less physical every year. That doesn't mean you have to take it literally to apply to every team in every circumstance (it's a trend thing).

Yes, Anaheim and LA are two of the most physical teams in the league. But don't overplay that, they have been dominant over the Flames as much due to the fact that they are at their peak as teams right now as due to a size superiority.

Anaheim has a ton of playoff experience, and the current Flame roster has almost none - that is the reason, IMO, that they have owned us. The Flames haven't learned how to win in the playoffs yet - that doesn't mean they aren't capable of learning.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

fixed for you.



yes, i agree, johnny has a lot of fight in him. johnny with all the fight in the world versus brent burns in a board battle, who comes out with the puck?

Ridiculous argument. Brent Burns vs. Patrick Kane on the boards, vs. Prime Wayne Gretzky, vs Martin St.Louis, vs. Pavel Datsyuk... totally meaningless.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

fixed for you.

yes, i agree, johnny has a lot of fight in him. johnny with all the fight in the world versus brent burns in a board battle, who comes out with the puck?

lol

Yes, size is the only determinant in who wins hockey battles. In the playoffs, the biggest teams always win. You have convinced me.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by VilleN

Ridiculous argument. Brent Burns vs. Patrick Kane on the boards, vs. Prime Wayne Gretzky, vs Martin St.Louis, vs. Pavel Datsyuk... totally meaningless.

playoff board battles meaningless? haha, that's where games are won and lost.

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

playoff board battles meaningless? haha, that's where games are won and lost.

That’s what I meant, obviously. So then you believe Patrick Kane, St.Louis , Wayne Gretzky, Paul Kariya weren’t good playoff performers because they likely would lose a board battle with Brent Burns?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Northendzone]

I think guys win board battles by having quick feet and hands, being able to twist and turn in a small area is likely more of an advantage than being 6 foot 4 and slow.

Also, having high hockey IQ.

Is there a state on board battles somewhere?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I think guys win board battles by having quick feet and hands, being able to twist and turn in a small area is likely more of an advantage than being 6 foot 4 and slow.

Yes and no.

I was fascinated by Sergei Makarov when he first came over to the NHL, and watched him every chance I got when he was on the ice. (Hard to do, alas, for those games that were only on radio.)

Offhand, I don't recall Makarov ever winning a board battle… but he hardly ever lost one either. He just didn't get into them. If he had the puck, nobody could trap him against the boards because he was so quick and shifty on his feet. If he didn't have the puck, he would just reach in with his stick and see if he could pry it loose, and next thing you knew, he was streaking the other way towards a scoring chance. He didn't need to outmuscle guys along the boards. That wasn't his game.

Johnny Gaudreau reminds me of Makarov more than any other player I have seen play in all the years since then.

[N-E-B]

This seems like a bad hill to die on. Gaudreau can be on my playoff team any day of the week. If you want to stick with unsung guys then go ahead. But I’ll take my chances with Johnny.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Yes and no.

I was fascinated by Sergei Makarov when he first came over to the NHL, and watched him every chance I got when he was on the ice. (Hard to do, alas, for those games that were only on radio.)

Offhand, I don't recall Makarov ever winning a board battle… but he hardly ever lost one either. He just didn't get into them. If he had the puck, nobody could trap him against the boards because he was so quick and shifty on his feet. If he didn't have the puck, he would just reach in with his stick and see if he could pry it loose, and next thing you knew, he was streaking the other way towards a scoring chance. He didn't need to outmuscle guys along the boards. That wasn't his game.

Johnny Gaudreau reminds me of Makarov more than any other player I have seen play in all the years since then.

Makarov, IMO, was one of the strongest and proficient puck protecting forwards of his generation.
Incredible strength and balance for 5’ 9” 185 pounds.

[GreenLantern2814]

Lol @ Chris Osgood being average. He's 12th a time in wins, has three Stanley Cups and won his last two ten years apart. He followed that up with a return trip to the finals.

Sorry, Chris Osgood is going to the Hall of Fame. As sure as Stephen Harper is eventually going to have Calgary International Airport named after him.

[savemedrzaius]

For ranking the Pacific you guys got 3.5 out of 5.

Anaheim, LA, and SJ ranked above you. Oilers, LV , Arizona and Vancouver ranked below.

Oilers with 2 out of 5 and Vancouver with 0 out of 5.

This whole thing is pretty subjective and pointless but good for the summer. It's basically just Craig Custance randomly saying why with no stats to back up his opinion.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by timbit

Makarov, IMO, was one of the strongest and proficient puck protecting forwards of his generation.
Incredible strength and balance for 5’ 9” 185 pounds.

That's true. Gaudreau hasn't got his overall strength. On the other hand, Makarov did not have Gaudreau's twitch muscles and hair-trigger agility, which strike me as a shade beyond human. Both players earned their keep by avoiding battles instead of winning them.