View Single Post
Old
08-25-2012, 02:53 PM
  #340
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,510
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Nothing I have stated has been naive.
You are using the "first full season" argument and comparing DD to Giroux, and thus ignoring the difference between age 20 and age 24, which is naive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
YOU have yet to offer anything other than snide comments to disprove what I have stated.
I just gave you a detailed example explaining why a first full season at age 23-25 should not be evaluated as a "first full season" in the conventional sense.

It's basic point and very logical, and hardly snide at all. It does refute your argument that Giroux's first season was less productive than Desharnais', by exposing it as a non-argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
DD may turn into a flash in the pan.
Nobody's arguing that he can't repeat his production given the same opportunities, it's a strawman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
DD gave us a great season, and should not automatically be assigned to the 4th line as center because we drafted Galchenyuk.
Nobody wants DD as the 4th line center either, another strawman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
I never liked Ryder on the Habs. He scored garbage goals that had little to do with skill, and a lot to do with luck. I wanted to trade him after his rookie season because I knew, and told plenty of people at the time who thought I was nuts, that he would not become a great player for us. He was not a great goal scorer, he was simply lucky more often than not. DD looks far more skilled and involved in the production of his points. The situation is definitely comparable, but the type of players we are comparing are very different. I will admit that Ryder was always around the net, which was a key reason he was able to get the goals he did get, but he was not a guy who inspired confidence in you that he could score a game winning, or even an important, goal when necessary.
There was nothing flukey about Ryder's first season: he maintained that pace over his entire career. He has 197 goals and 199 assists in 631 NHL games. That's a huge sample size, and thus we can conclude that luck has nothing to do with it.

You have 20 years of hockey evaluation experience, but clearly you sometimes make mistakes if you thought Ryder's production was all about luck.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote