Except Kane, at 19, is already better than Briere.
Once Kane puts up a 32G-95pt season, is nearly PPG in the P/O's in 57gp and has goes to the Conference Finals Back-to-Back-to-Back, then get back to me.
Once Kane puts up a 32G-95pt season, is nearly PPG in the P/O's in 57gp and has goes to the Conference Finals Back-to-Back-to-Back, then get back to me.
(..and I hate Briere..)
From the games I have watched Kane and Briere... I feel Kane is a more offensive threat because of his vision on the ice...
Also, regarding the last part of your sentence, sure Briere made the conference finals back-to-back-to back.... that doesn't say anything... first of all, making it that far, is all about a team game, and not based on any individual, no matter who you are. Second, if we do follow your logic, and give Briere the praise for those back-to-back-to-back conference final appearences, then following your logic, its safe to say Briere doesn't have what it takes to take his team to the finals... or even win a cup. I think you can see that the last part of your sentence doesn't really belong with your argument if your trying to prove Briere is better than Kane.
Once Kane puts up a 32G-95pt season, is nearly PPG in the P/O's in 57gp and has goes to the Conference Finals Back-to-Back-to-Back, then get back to me.
(..and I hate Briere..)
Briere put up one season like that an it was high flying Offensive team. It also took Briere 9 seasons to score more then Kane did in his rookie year. I think you are a little short sighted. And the playoffs we will find out this year. (hopefully)
Briere put up one season like that an it was high flying Offensive team. It also took Briere 9 seasons to score more then Kane did in his rookie year. I think you are a little short sighted. And the playoffs we will find out this year. (hopefully)
This is true and very interesting (just looked up the stats too)...
Also interesting fact is that in the Kane's first season in the NHL, he got 72 points, and so did Briere the same year...
There is definitely an argument to say that Kane is the better player now.
Briere has played a large part of his career in the old NHL, where talented, small forwards weren't as effective as they are today. If Kane were drafted in 2000, there's no way in hell he would have gone 1st overall, much less have put up 72 points his rookie season.
Kane actually has a lot of similarities to Briere. He seems pretty clutch (although that won't be definitive until we see the kid in the playoffs), fantastic hands, great vision, playmaker at heart, etc. It's not a knock on Kane - Briere is a great player whose game is entirely out of place in Philadelphia and therefore gets lambasted because they decided to overpay for him. Don't forget that Briere was Philly's leading scorer in the playoffs last season, as well.
Briere has played a large part of his career in the old NHL, where talented, small forwards weren't as effective as they are today. If Kane were drafted in 2000, there's no way in hell he would have gone 1st overall, much less have put up 72 points his rookie season.
Kane actually has a lot of similarities to Briere. He seems pretty clutch (although that won't be definitive until we see the kid in the playoffs), fantastic hands, great vision, playmaker at heart, etc. It's not a knock on Kane - Briere is a great player whose game is entirely out of place in Philadelphia and therefore gets lambasted because they decided to overpay for him. Don't forget that Briere was Philly's leading scorer in the playoffs last season, as well.
How can you decisevly say that? I mean in the old NHL, were small players unheard of?
You can't compare different generations, because in every generation the players will learn differently in juniors etc. and adjust their games for the NHL... that is why in juniors they added the shootout, once the NHL did, and they adjusted their rules, once the NHL did...
I mean if Kane was drafted in 2000, how do we know his learning could have been for the old NHL, but he could still dominate it? (He was 12 yrs old in 2000 btw)...
Even in the current NHL, there are still huge hits etc, the main difference between the old NHL and new one, is the hooking and slashing... even then, if you watch Kane, the way he plays around the boards and on the ice, is amazing at how he is able to avoid body contact with other players...
Kane's a year younger and already scoring more points. Pure skill is better than a two-way game at the top tier of young players. Kane will also fill out more than Kopitar.
Kane's a year younger and already scoring more points. Pure skill is better than a two-way game at the top tier of young players. Kane will also fill out more than Kopitar.
Yeah that one year will make a difference..
If both players put up similar numbers in the next decade than this dude probably still come up with this argument. Last season Kopitar scored 32 goals and 77 points. First Kane need to match that, you do realize that ?
Secondly, of course Kopitar is just a solid-two player with no skill...
I'm one of the biggest Kane fans here and can fully see why people love him, but at least talk some sense into us and not this nonsense.
If both players put up similar numbers in the next decade than this dude probably still come up with this argument. Last season Kopitar scored 32 goals and 77 points. First Kane need to match that, you do realize that ?
Secondly, of course Kopitar is just a solid-two player with no skill...
I'm one of the biggest Kane fans here and can fully see why people love him, but at least talk some sense into us and not this nonsense.
It's just an opinion. For the record I rate Kopitar ahead of my favorite player, Hemsky. Kopitar is a top 10 25 and under player in the league, just a few notches below Kane in my opinion. I never said Kopitar isn't a skill player. What I meant was that the two-way young players comprise less of top tier compared to more pure skill and offense guys like Stastny and Kane. Both Kane and Kopitar are at the top of their small, respective categories. When you look at the trajectory of the development of a player like Kane you might notice that so far it's not unlike a Hawerchuk or Yzerman-type path of development, taking different eras into account. Kopitar still looks more like someone who'll steadily improve like an Iginla or something.
It's just an opinion. For the record I rate Kopitar ahead of my favorite player, Hemsky. Kopitar is a top 10 25 and under player in the league, just a few notches below Kane in my opinion. I never said Kopitar isn't a skill player. What I meant was that the two-way young players comprise less of top tier compared to more pure skill and offense guys like Stastny and Kane. Both Kane and Kopitar are at the top of their small, respective categories. When you look at the trajectory of the development of a player like Kane you might notice that so far it's not unlike a Hawerchuk or Yzerman-type path of development, taking different eras into account. Kopitar still looks more like someone who'll steadily improve like an Iginla or something.
Okay, although I don't agree with it. This is something with sense. Well said.
Two way "solid" forwards win Cups over highly skilled offensive dynamos. See: the Penguins vs. the Red Wings last season.
And whoever said Kane will "fill out" more than Kopitar needs their head checked. Let me know when Kane grows 5 inches and gains about 40 pounds.
Kopitar hasn't even learned how to use his size effectively yet. He's been putting up points on skill alone over the past two seasons. Just wait until he realizes he's 6'4, 220, and starts developing more of a power forward edge, ala Getzlaf.
Two way "solid" forwards win Cups over highly skilled offensive dynamos. See: the Penguins vs. the Red Wings last season.
I think you mean, see: Young inexperienced team Vs. Experienced team.
Also, if you are implying that Crosby is not a two way player than everything you've said in this thread is discredited at this moment. Crosby is a better two way player than Kopitar. But I'm sure you don't think that's the case... even though it is.
I think you mean, see: Young inexperienced team Vs. Experienced team.
Also, if you are implying that Crosby is not a two way player than everything you've said in this thread is discredited at this moment. Crosby is a better two way player than Kopitar. But I'm sure you don't think that's the case... even though it is.
I meant it as a comparison between Zetterberg and Datsyuk, two players touted for their two way play, and Crosby/Malkin, two players touted for their highly skilled offensive games and point production.
I never said Crosby wasn't a two way player, but he's not as two way as Zetterberg or Datsyuk. Let me know when Sid the Kid gets nominated for a Selke.
I meant it as a comparison between Zetterberg and Datsyuk, two players touted for their two way play, and Crosby/Malkin, two players touted for their highly skilled offensive games and point production.
I never said Crosby wasn't a two way player, but he's not as two way as Zetterberg or Datsyuk. Let me know when Sid the Kid gets nominated for a Selke.
Well, then Kopitar has a ways to go before he wins a cup because not only is he no where near where Z and D were last year in terms of two way play, he isn't even as good as Crosby in his own end. So, let me know when Anze gets nominated for a Selke.
I don't even know why i'm arguing. I took Kopitar in this poll. Guess for the hell of it.
Well, then Kopitar has a ways to go before he wins a cup because not only is he no where near where Z and D were last year in terms of two way play, he isn't even as good as Crosby in his own end. So, let me know when Anze gets nominated for a Selke.
I don't even know why i'm arguing. I took Kopitar in this poll. Guess for the hell of it.
That sounds about right. This was never a Kopitar vs. Z and D or Kopitar vs. Crosby. O.o It sounds to me like you thought someone knocked on your Pens and you came to the rescue. No harm, no foul.
And I hope Kopitar comes to utilize his frame more. I shudder to think about how much better he'll be once he actually learns how to throw around that huge body of his.
Kopitar might be off to a tough start, but the size differential is what makes it up. To have a guy who is 6'3" with the puck skills and stickhandling ability Kopitar has is amazing.
Kopitar might be off to a tough start, but the size differential is what makes it up. To have a guy who is 6'3" with the puck skills and stickhandling ability Kopitar has is amazing.
And sometimes it looks like he isn't comfortable with his size yet. In a few years he'll be an absolute stud.
And sometimes it looks like he isn't comfortable with his size yet. In a few years he'll be an absolute stud.
Exactly. Brian Boyle is going through a similar dilemma. I know it's a cliche, but both guys simply don't know their own strength yet.
Kopitar has put up the points he has on his hands, vision, etc. alone so far in his career - skills people are saying Kane runs away with in this poll. That's simply not true.
Edit: And for the record, Kopitar is beginning to break out of his point slump. He has 5 points (1-4-5) in his past 2 games. The game against Dallas was probably his best so far this season in BOTH ends of the ice.
And whoever said Kane will "fill out" more than Kopitar needs their head checked. Let me know when Kane grows 5 inches and gains about 40 pounds.
Kopitar hasn't even learned how to use his size effectively yet. He's been putting up points on skill alone over the past two seasons. Just wait until he realizes he's 6'4, 220, and starts developing more of a power forward edge, ala Getzlaf.
I would think a slight forward that's a year younger would put on more pounds relative to their current body weight compared to the guy who's already big. Kane would be able to handle contact better then. It's probably a minor point though since players like Kane don't use their size, in fact, being light can be an advantage for some forwards (e.g. Gretzky).
I've already said this in another thread, but I'll say it again here. This is an apples to oranges comparison. These are both great hockey players. If you are comparing just offensive games (which is what people really usually mean when the say "better" player), Kane is very much ahead here. He not only has at least the individual offensive skill that Kopitar has, but he makes the entire Chicago offense go. He uses his teammates better than any other young player playing today except for Crosby ( I could argue he is better than Crosby at this, but I'll save that argument for another day). This is a team game, and he makes everyone he plays with better.
Two way "solid" forwards win Cups over highly skilled offensive dynamos. See: the Penguins vs. the Red Wings last season.
And whoever said Kane will "fill out" more than Kopitar needs their head checked. Let me know when Kane grows 5 inches and gains about 40 pounds.
Kopitar hasn't even learned how to use his size effectively yet. He's been putting up points on skill alone over the past two seasons. Just wait until he realizes he's 6'4, 220, and starts developing more of a power forward edge, ala Getzlaf.
That's a bunch of crap. Some times having Two way "solid" Forwards wins cups. Sometimes high end Off. guys wins cups. It depends on what the other players on the team are like. Most Cup teams have both. Detroit did not win because Dats/Zetts over Sid/Malkin. Detroit won because there team was just better, it was deaper, better coached, oh and I heard they had this guy on d that was ok too his name slips my mind.
Last season Kopitar scored 32 goals and 77 points. First Kane need to match that, you do realize that ?
