And yes, it still applies. Staal is a tremendous defenseman. He was incredible in the post season. Saying McDonagh is better doesn't mean that Staals game has slipped at all. Saying McDonagh is better is just saying that...he's eclipsed Staal. McDonaghs got better offense, is a better skater, and is as good defensively as Staal. Staal is an elite defenseman. An all-star. a #1 defenseman on most teams in the NHL. Then again, so is Dan Girardi, and so is Ryan McDonagh. We have a frikkin amazing situation here with 3 #1 defenseman on this team. IMHO McD is the best of them. Elite in his own zone, and scored more even strength points in than Shea Weber.
agree to disagree i suppose
i think staal, for the time being, is still the better player
Do not get me wrong, McD is a ****in stud, but i think people are letting their overall excitement about him cloud their judgement a little. He wasn't as bulletproof defensively as a healthy Staal, and nowhere near as strong on the puck and in the corners.
Additionally, while he has the wheels and the tools to be more of an offensive threat, he hasn't put it all together yet and shown that he's significantly better than Marc in that respect. He scored 3 more points this year than Staal did last year.
i think staal, for the time being, is still the better player
Do not get me wrong, McD is a ****in stud, but i think people are letting their overall excitement about him cloud their judgement a little. He wasn't as bulletproof defensively as a healthy Staal, and nowhere near as strong on the puck and in the corners.
Additionally, while he has the wheels and the tools to be more of an offensive threat, he hasn't put it all together yet and shown that he's significantly better than Marc in that respect. He scored 3 more points this year than Staal did last year.
Talk about flavor of the month. Nash better than Gaborik is ridiculous.
As an all around player, he most certainly is better than Gaborik who is just an elite goal scorer and nothing else. My list would be:
-Nash
-McDonagh
-Richards
-Cally
-Staal
-Gaborik
I think Staal v. McDonagh is comparable. I don' think, however, Danny G is in that conversation. I love him, but I still think his second half of the season was WAY below his standards from the first half, and if he wasn't scoring points in the PO's his subpar defense would've haunted us. Guy is great, just not Marc or McD great.
Am i the only one with an attention span longer than one season?
Staal>McD until a concusion free season proves otherwise
does everyone forget the "Is staal the best d-man in the game?" conversations we had before this last season?
I absolutely agree with you. I think Staal is a much better defensive defensemen but McDonagh has the better overall game. Staal is better in the corners, has a better reach and better positioning. He also doesn't panic getting the puck out of our zone which McD struggle with a lot this year but it's obviously something he can improve on. McD has incredible skating ability though that Staal lacks. In the end though there's no other defensemen on our team I'd rather have defending a 2v1 or 3v1 than Staal.
You may feel otherwise after seeing Nash every game. Gaborik is a better goal scorer. I would take Nash over him in every other phase, and Nash stays far healthier.
Right on the money dude. Saying Nash is the better all around player than Gaborik in no way, shape or form demeans Gaborik who is our best goal scorer!
I just don't think Nash is this "complete player" everybody has been trying to say. He PK'd in Columbus like Gabby PK'd in Minnesota. Gabby does everything Nash does instead muck it up in the corners, which he shouldn't, since he should be waiting for the other person on his line to do that so he then can get him the puck near the net and score.
I just don't think Nash is this "complete player" everybody has been trying to say. He PK'd in Columbus like Gabby PK'd in Minnesota. Gabby does everything Nash does instead muck it up in the corners, which he shouldn't, since he should be waiting for the other person on his line to do that so he then can get him the puck near the net and score.
IMO, Nash is the harder player to contain, and his physical toolset is far superior to that of Gaborik's.
I never felt this confident in a positional player in my time as a Rangers fan. I feel so comfortable when McDonagh is on the ice and I'm the one that gets nervous as hell during regular season games.
IMO, Nash is the harder player to contain, and his physical toolset is far superior to that of Gaborik's.
Gaborik is more like a ninja. Nash is a bull.
I agree, but i'll always remember Gabby basically dragging the 09-10 Rangers kicking and screaming anywhere near the playoffs. With Hank's help, of course.
Nash is a beast and will be plowing guys over. But Gabby is not a liability defensively either and has 100 more career points in only 50~ more career games. Whatever Gabby does, he does it really well, and I think he gets underrated (or outright bashed) because he doesn't "dominate" other teams- he slowly kills them.
IMO, Nash is the harder player to contain, and his physical toolset is far superior to that of Gaborik's.
Gaborik is more like a ninja. Nash is a bull.
As weird is that is...i totally agree with that. Nash brings such a completely different element to this team than what Gaborik does. Gabby is at his best when he's not seen. Quick strike offensive guy. Invisible, then appears out of nowhere for a goal. Nash on the other hand is at his WORSE when he's like that, and is at his best when he's visible shift in and shift out. When Nash disappears, he doesn't bring that quick strike ability. Nash is at his best when hes got his legs moving at full speed, attacking players, playing the boards, getting to the front of the net, making his presence felt.
2 completely different players, each effective in their own way.
most importantly, they give the other teams different looks. it's much easier to contain teams that are exactly the same type of player over and over agian than it is to contain a team that can show you different things. thats what the Red Wings are built on. When they were at their best, they could do it all. ugly goals, pretty goals, cycle, puck possession, speed game, transition, turnovers, defend, offense.... Detroit is the franchise we are trying to model ourselves after imho, in that, we now have layers, and we now can beat you in many different ways.
We actually have some pure talent now (Nash, Gabs, Richards, Kreider), without having to just rely on gritty goals. We can actually score some skilled goals now. like Inferno said, many ways we can beat you now. Hank, defense, cycling, puck possession, sniper shots, rebounding, etc. This year is looking awesome.
