View Single Post
10-22-2013, 11:41 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Beijing
Country: China
Posts: 206
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by habsrule4eva3089 View Post
Very VERY false. Define better. Perhaps in the area of more talented SOME, but the others, do they bring what the grinders and fourth line pugilists bring. No, they would be thrown away by fans in Montreal, Boston and Philly and most of the NHL where tough in your face, work your ass off Hockey is the name of the game. Most of the top scorers in the KHL all require an opportunity to play in the top 6 and they bring nothing to the depth position. Your kidding yourself if you think 100 players in the KHL are NHL worthy, don't underestimate the competition level. Just breezing through the top 50 scorers and from my recollection of seeing the majority of these guys play, your incredibly lucky if you can count 2 dozens who can even label themselves as top players that can perform if given a chance in a top 6 role.
I define better as in overall better or equal to. It's at least what my point was.

I'm sorry but I did not really understand what you said for the most of it.

Correct me if I am wrong now, but as I understood you said that the worst 100 players in NHL are stronger, tougher and overall better than the best 100 players in the KHL with same role on the ice? If so I disagree with this. I am positive I could replace a lot of Americans and Canadians with Europeans from the KHL. And many North Americans did just the season before they came to the KHL play in the NHL. Same with a lot of the Europeans.

And the last bolded part about the top 6 role, can you explain it because I don't understand it. Do you mean the top 100 players in the KHL no one could be one of the top 6 players in any team? If so it's strange since I was talking about the worst players spots in the NHL not the best players.

robwangjing is offline   Reply With Quote