View Single Post
Old
02-07-2013, 06:58 PM
  #476
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,403
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
Havlat was 6th in PP TOI/PG with the Sens in 03/04, his best statistical year with them. 2nd Unit PP time after Bondra acquisition. He never really got a chance to break out until he was traded to Chicago. Koivu and Havlat were obviously not a match due to both of them being primarily playmakers. Minnesota didn't have any depth players after Koivu and Havlat played with even worse garbage in Chicago. No different situation then Nash, both put up equivalent point totals, but I'd argue Havlat elevated the play of his linemates much more in his prime years.

Ray Whitney is absolutely a legitimate first liner in this league and has been in his career. He has a higher career PPG than Nash himself, yet he is considered a player who wasn't good enough for Nash? lol.

Carter, Prospal, Federov aren't slouches either, they are all good hockey players.
Bondra did not play on the 1st unit for Ottawa. He played the point on the 2nd unit. Same role as Alfredsson on the 1st. The first unit was Hossa Havlat and Bonk with Alfi and Redden on the backend.

Koivu and Havlat hated each other. Koivu is the reason they traded Havlat.

Ray Whitney is a fantastic player. And a freak of nature. If he is the best player you've ever played with and you've have been one of the top goal scorers in the league for a decade, that is problematic. And that's putting aside the fact that he was only on Nash's team for his rookie year. When Nash was 18. And I am not sure they even played much together.

Havlat played with more talent in one shift on Chicago or Ottawa than Nash did in his entire career. You can say you don't like Nash or didn't like the trade but there is no comparison between the two here. None. And it's insane that I need to explain that.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote