Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
high scoring winger vs two way 55-60 point centreman
I would take the player who could change the momentum of a game at any time, and in this case, it would be the high scoring winger. Elite talent > Great, great talent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan
but as an example... Patrice Bergeron and David Krecji fit your definition of very good 2 way centers and play for my team. I wouldnt deal either of them straight up for Phil Kessel who was also a Bruin but I might deal either of them straight up for Patrick Kane or Bobby Ryan or Rick Nash.
So I guess I think in general terms an elite game breaking winger is worth more then a very well rounded second line center
lol what. I find it funny that you think Krejci or even Bergeron straight up has enough value to get you one of Phil Kessel, Patrick Kane, Bobby Ryan, or Rick Nash. If that's all it took... dont you think Boston would've won the Nash sweeptakes?
There really aren't any perpetual 30-30 centers...20-40 is more common, and that really changes the value of the player. I'd take a winger who goes 35-45 over a center who goes 20-40 in both regular season and playoffs.
This thread all comes down to need of a team really. I mean I think it is fair to say Pitts or LA would take the winger. But someone like Toronto may be more inclined to take the C.
I'm not sure. I'd probably go with the center myself. The thing is a 30 goal center with top 2-way abilities is incredibly rare regardless of how many assists he gets. If you stuck with a vague 55-60 center like it was in the thread title instead of specifying 30 goals, I'd probably say the 1st line winger because you're just describing a great defensive 2nd line center. The 30 goals part changes it a bit and would make me say the center.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender
The center holds more value.
Go through the Stanley Cup Champs the past 20 years and see how those teams were built.
Teams built through the wings are doomed to fail.
Don't get me wrong, the high scoring winger certainly is very nice to have but the team without strength down the middle ain't going nowhere.
I guess it depends what your end game is. If you're talking about regular season success, then whatever. But if you want to win the cup, I would take 3 - two-way 55-60 point centers with a bunch of average wingers over 3 - 40-40 wingers with a bunch of average centers any day of the week.
This really isn't argument about what position you would build a team around, it's about which kind of player has more value.
I'll go with the winger because it's much easier to find a good centerman then a winger
Clearly.
Here let me help you. It's also incredibly easy to convert defencemen and goaltenders into centers as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whydidijoin
The game-breaking winger has more value and is more important, and anybody saying otherwise is a liar.
High-end centers are not more important than wingers. The "well look at stanley cup winners durrr" argument is because there are way more high-end centers than high-end wingers, not because they have some magical ability.
Uh-huh. That's why pretty much EVERYONE in this thread (everyone that's NOT running to Phil Kessel's defense that is) is saying the opposite. I guess we're ALL liars!
I'm not sure. I'd probably go with the center myself. The thing is a 30 goal center with top 2-way abilities is incredibly rare regardless of how many assists he gets. If you stuck with a vague 55-60 center like it was in the thread title instead of specifying 30 goals, I'd probably say the 1st line winger because you're just describing a great defensive 2nd line center. The 30 goals part changes it a bit and would make me say the center.
This really isn't argument about what position you would build a team around, it's about which kind of player has more value.
I already mentioned it depends on the 'end game'. If you want to put butts in the seats and NEED a Gaborik-type player to do that even though your team is going nowhere, then that's one thing. If you want to win the Stanley Cup, which should be what every team tries to do...every year, than that's something clearly different. Centers have more value than wingers, anyone that actually thinks otherwise are trying to run in and defend the Phil Kessels of the NHL.
OP never mentioned 'elite two way center'. Stepan isn't elite, but he is excellent in all areas of the game.
Stepan isn't poor defensively, but he's not good enough, nor does he play tough enough minutes, to be considered a good two-way center. Secondly, I believe we were talking about 30-30 centers, and Stepan has never and will likely never score 30 goals. OP mentioned "excellent in all aspects of the game", and Stepan is a below-average skater, null physically, not a goal-scorer, not elite defensively. Therefore he fits no qualities that the OP asked for.
My point is of course you had to come in and talk about the Rangers.
Uh-huh. That's why pretty much EVERYONE in this thread (everyone that's NOT running to Phil Kessel's defense that is) is saying the opposite. I guess we're ALL liars!
As for the second part...uh WHAT??
Yes, pretty much. You are all either liars or have no idea what you are saying and perpetuating a HFboards myth just because you've heard it.
As for the second part, most high-end players are centers. Thus many teams win with high-end centers (though not all). This is because they need a high-end player, not because they need a high-end center.
Yes, pretty much. You are all either liars or have no idea what you are saying and perpetuating a HFboards myth just because you've heard it.
As for the second part, most high-end players are centers. Thus many teams win with high-end centers (though not all). This is because they need a high-end player, not because they need a high-end center.
Ah ok. Thanks for setting me straight.
Steps away from keyboard, very, very slowly...no sudden movements...
you need both... the leafs or hawks definitely wouldn't trade kessel or patrick kane for say J. Staal or Zajac
Thats what I think he was trying to say. Its pretty tough to pick between the two. I could see the argument going both ways, but I would much rather the centerman. Especially compared to someone like Kessel and Kane, if were talking Kovalchuk type players versus Toews, then I'd rather Kovalchuk. But both ways its pretty close.
Thats what I think he was trying to say. Its pretty tough to pick between the two. I could see the argument going both ways, but I would much rather the centerman. Especially compared to someone like Kessel and Kane, if were talking Kovalchuk type players versus Toews, then I'd rather Kovalchuk. But both ways its pretty close.
No, Hawks will just sign Zajac when he becomes a UFA
There really aren't any perpetual 30-30 centers...20-40 is more common, and that really changes the value of the player. I'd take a winger who goes 35-45 over a center who goes 20-40 in both regular season and playoffs.
Hmm depends on the rest of their game though. If we're talking about a Selke calibre centre, that has a ton of value. Especially if youre specifically talking about a winger who's super soft and terrible defensively.
David Backes vs Phil Kessel is probably a reasonable comparison for this thread.
Hmm depends on the rest of their game though. If we're talking about a Selke calibre centre, that has a ton of value. Especially if youre specifically talking about a winger who's super soft and terrible defensively.
David Backes vs Phil Kessel is probably a reasonable comparison for this thread.
Hmm depends on the rest of their game though. If we're talking about a Selke calibre centre, that has a ton of value. Especially if youre specifically talking about a winger who's super soft and terrible defensively.
David Backes vs Phil Kessel is probably a reasonable comparison for this thread.
The only problem I have with this comparison is the age difference. Kessel is still potentially looking at improvement and Backes is almost certainly in the prime of his career. Can we use guys of similar age? Say Backes and Kovalchuk?
Basicly Kessels vrs Pleks.
Have to take Kessels here because him and Gally would be awesome together and we do have Eller to step up in Pleks place.
those combos must work good on your playstation. I'd take plekanec 10 times out of 10. ''eller stepping up'' to plekanec's level ? some people just don't see the gap here. quite scary.
