View Single Post
12-22-2012, 06:52 PM
Registered User
letowskie's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In your worst nighmare
Posts: 3,506
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
There is no way that Kane is worth a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. They are too rare and few teams have one. At the same time there is no way Yandle is a legitimate NHL level #1 defenseman. Gormley is the only defenseman you have that has the potential to possibly develop into one but if he does, that won't happen for many years to come. There is a slight potential O.E.L. could change from a primarily offensive defenseman to a solid two way defenseman at franchaise level, but more likely he will round out as a legitimate NHL level #3.

Just because Yandle fills the team's #1 defenseman roster spot does not mean he has the same game influencing skills as true #1 defensemen such as Chara or Webber have. At NHL defenseman level, Yandle would be considered a legitimate #3 defenseman. A highly skilled, offensive oriented defenseman capable of playing big minutes. A #2 NHL defenseman is a soild two way defenseman who plays big minutes with relatively few mistakes and is usually the steadying influence of the defense core. A legitimate #1 NHL defenseman plays big minutes and though is as skilled as a #2 defenseman tend to take more chances but who's overall play can often influence the outcome of the game. Generally a legitimate #1 NHL defenceman is the team's franchiase player.

For example, the Canucks have five ligitimate top 4 defensemen on their roster and not one of them is a legitmate NHL #1 defenseman. Edler, if he continues to develop may develop into a #1 defenseman in 2 or 3 years if he is lucky and continues to improve.
That's not exactly a statement that a sane person makes. If Yandle is only a #3 at the NHL level, then according to your own criteria (#1 has to be dominant on both ends of the ice while playing big share of minutes in a game, then there would be less than a handful of #1 D in the league, and even with top-pairing (#1 + #2), you would have about dozen around the league. So you are basically arguing that at least 25 of the 30 NHL teams do not have NHL-worthy D-corps. That is simply an oxy-moron statement that is demonstrably and false in terms of its material logic.

letowskie is offline   Reply With Quote