View Single Post
Old
11-19-2012, 01:44 PM
  #351
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 35,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Yes, my estimate is 5X, but it I'll admit it could be 4X, and possibly as high as 6X. No one can say for sure and we are all just estimating.
And that's exactly what I said pages ago when this all kicked off. We can argue about it all day without changing the fact that it's all just guesswork.


Quote:
Whether it's 3X or 4X it's difficult to rank Harvey above Lidstrom due to this. They are very close in terms of the type of careers they had and their dominance over their peers, yet Lidstrom dealt with a much deeper talent pool. You seem to agree with this so is your only reason for placing Harvey higher because he came first?
Putting the originality issue aside, I'm not 100% certain that Lidstrom doesn't pass Harvey on merit. I've been pushing for a detailed look at the both of them for a long time (see here: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1084719) and with Lidstrom now retired, it seems there's no time like the present to do just that.

Quote:
Russia is a "ghost" that won the WJC in 2011, came 2nd last year and have produced recent talents like Malkin, Ovechkin and Datsyuk.
That's all very nice for their program, but there's little doubt of Russia's decline over the past 30 years. A handful of Russian superstars isn't exactly uncommon over history; what has changed is their ability to consistently produce dynamic talent at a rate that influences every NHL team rather than just a few. And the KHL makes it even more complicated, further reducing the NHL talent pool from where it was before.

Quote:
Sweden won the WJC last year, which was the first time in 31 years, and are producing lots of great young players. The SEL is another very strong league outside the NHL.
Indeed. When I said they are still in the same place they were before, I meant it as a compliment. A lot of Europe has moved backwards during that timeframe.

Quote:
The American program is better and larger than it ever was in the past.
Unless we're talking about grinders, I don't see how American talent in the NHL is any better than it was 15 years ago.

Chelios, Leetch, Modano, Lafontaine, Roenick, Leclair, Amonte, Weight, Guerin, Janney, Housley, Suter, Hatcher(s), Richter, Vanbiesbrouck, Barrasso
vs
Parise, Kane, Kessel, Ryan, Pavelski, Kesler, Backes, Callahan, Pacioretty, Brown, Johnson(s), Suter, McDonagh, Miller, Thomas, Quick

I'm not seeing a huge uptick in talent here. If anything, the 2012 group would be doing pretty well for themselves to have the kind of careers the older guys had. No shame in that.

Quote:
I don't think there is a legitimate case for saying hockey is on the decline in Canada. It may be more spread out and less available to the lower middle class but the kids that are being produced are fantastic.
I'm not going to touch this because I can't make eyewitness testimony. But what I have seen on this forum and in the media is not consistent with the notion of a growing Canadian talent pool.

Quote:
The only problem is it's hard to stand out when everyone can play at such a high level and are so serious about training.
Crosby, Lindros and Forsberg certainly didn't have a problem standing out. Yet they have each missed about half the time they were supposed to have spent dominating the competition over the past 15 years. Something to think about when judging the past generation or two of hockey talent.


Quote:
This was the topic so why should I have to ask? Why discuss something without giving your own opinion until I beg for it?
Protocol is generally to ask a question before you accuse someone of dodging it. Just something to consider in the future.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote