View Single Post
Old
12-26-2012, 01:13 AM
  #56
Le Chacal
Rookie User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: San Jose, California
Country: United States
Posts: 1
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
Actually very good observations and could be valid. However, Pavelski was playing very solid hockey right from the game 1. It's not just about the stats, it is what you show on the ice. He impressed a lot of people in Minsk and in Russia by his skills and work output. The guy is the big time player. When he leaves KHL there are going to be a lot of disappointed fans. I haven't seen a lot of him in the NHL but I will surely want to follow him much more now when the NHL returns.

As far as Jagr and Bure it is hard to say if they were just as mediocre in their first NHL games as Kane and Lupul were in the first KHL games. I seriously doubt that since they are some of the most electrifying players in the history of the sport.
I watch Pavelski almost every game in San Jose, and he is a blue-collar hockey player who does all the little things that coaches want (winning face-offs, back-checking, blocking shots, dirty work in front of the net, etc). He's not a great skater by any means or a natural offensive talent like E Kane, but Pavelski is a much smarter hockey player who has a better attitude and is willing to do whatever the coaches want. So I think Pavelski has succeeded in Russia because he's a determined, team-oriented player, whereas Kane is not.

As for Lupul, he's obviously a very productive offensive player when surrounded by good line mates, but is not a star by any means. So I think the fact that he was playing for the worst team in the KHL means that he probably had poor talent around him. But if he was on Dynamo Moscow or CSKA or SKA, I'm sure he'd put up close to a PPG average. Just my opinion.

Le Chacal is offline   Reply With Quote