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
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?
Well we're not really talking about potential. Just about what they contributed last year.
If you want to go for similar age and include potential, you could do Toews vs Kessel... But Toews is a bit more than a 60 point player. Maybe Couture? But he's not exactly a Selke type of guy, just a pretty solid two-way guy.
Kovalchuks a bad example because he's typically a bit better offensively than a 40-40 winger, and he's also becoming pretty solid defensively. So then the comparison is actually getting into a two-way 90 point winger vs a two-way 60 point centre.
40-40 isn't Kane or Kessel, it's Kovalchuk and Gaborik.
IF you had an all-around 30/30 center you'd be describing someone like Toews
Toews is 40-40, if we're going by per-82.
The thing not being considered in this thread is the fact that most centers can easily be converted to play the wing. Wingers generally can't be converted to center easily. A 60-point two-way center can play a more offensive style if converted to the wing, and perhaps score 70-80 points. A good example is Valtteri Filppula; his production increased a great deal when he as moved to the wing last season and allowed to play a more aggressive offensive game. The center is probably more valuable because he's more versatile. A 40-40 winger isn't a huge upgrade offensively over a 30-30 center in a tight game/series, but the assumed defensive difference suggested in this thread could definitely be the game breaker. Not to mention faceoff abilities; which means puck control.
More centers/capable faceoff men and your team is more likely to control the puck. Control the puck and you are less likely to be scored on, and more likely to score.
The thing not being considered in this thread is the fact that most centers can easily be converted to play the wing. Wingers generally can't be converted to center easily. A 60-point two-way center can play a more offensive style if converted to the wing, and perhaps score 70-80 points. A good example is Valtteri Filppula; his production increased a great deal when he as moved to the wing last season and allowed to play a more aggressive offensive game. The center is probably more valuable because he's more versatile. A 40-40 winger isn't a huge upgrade offensively over a 30-30 center in a tight game/series, but the assumed defensive difference suggested in this thread could definitely be the game breaker. Not to mention faceoff abilities; which means puck control.
More centers/capable faceoff men and your team is more likely to control the puck. Control the puck and you are less likely to be scored on, and more likely to score.
Toews is not 40-40. He has never reached 40 goals.
The thing not being considered in this thread is the fact that most centers can easily be converted to play the wing. Wingers generally can't be converted to center easily. A 60-point two-way center can play a more offensive style if converted to the wing, and perhaps score 70-80 points. A good example is Valtteri Filppula; his production increased a great deal when he as moved to the wing last season and allowed to play a more aggressive offensive game. The center is probably more valuable because he's more versatile. A 40-40 winger isn't a huge upgrade offensively over a 30-30 center in a tight game/series, but the assumed defensive difference suggested in this thread could definitely be the game breaker. Not to mention faceoff abilities; which means puck control.
More centers/capable faceoff men and your team is more likely to control the puck. Control the puck and you are less likely to be scored on, and more likely to score.
How is this a guarantee? This seems like a ridiculous assumption to me.
40-40 isn't Kane or Kessel, it's Kovalchuk and Gaborik.
IF you had an all-around 30/30 center you'd be describing someone like Toews, there's very few centers who routinely put up 30 goals period, much less with stellar defensive play. Which makes this a pretty easy call for the center IMO.
It would be harder to answer if the center was a 20-40 guy.
I don't think the idea of the thread is about how many goals the player scores, it about choosing players on the opposite end of the spectrum. i.e. Kessel or Bergeron, Kane or Backes.
I don't think the idea of the thread is about how many goals the player scores, it about choosing players on the opposite end of the spectrum. i.e. Kessel or Bergeron, Kane or Backes.
Except how many goals the player scores is essential to the discussion.
The very notion of trying to compare an offensive center with selke offense to a slightly better offensive winger with no defense is inherently flawed/bias and doesn't even really exist in the NHL.
I don't think the idea of the thread is about how many goals the player scores, it about choosing players on the opposite end of the spectrum. i.e. Kessel or Bergeron, Kane or Backes.
The OP stated compare a 40-40 defensible irresponsible wing with a 30-30 all around center. I pointed out a 30 goal scoring center WAS high scoring, and made the point that if the goal scoring was only 10 goals you take the center - that's not a "game-breaking" difference. If the goal scorer is 50-30 or if the center is 20-40 it makes a much bigger difference and a much harder question. The OP didn't ask the question you're discussing, he asked the one I answered.
And for whoever was saying Kovalchuk isn't a 40-40 guy, he has 406 goals and 376 assists over 10 seasons - that's as close as it gets to 40-40. Toews is about 25-35 based on actual yearly performance, if he can't stay healthy that should play into it IMO, and as he's never gotten past 34 in a full season he doesn't get to pretend to be a 40 goal guy on his partial seasons. Mike Richards is probably a reasonable center for this comparison - he's very good defensibly, varies between 20-40 and 30-30, but could be better in the face off circle. Plekanec is a 20-40 guy, not a 30-30 guy. Datsyuk doesn't belong in this conversation - he scores far too many points.
Winger of course. Scorers always hold more value. Anybody saying center is clueless.
Definitely! Look at all those wingers who have won the Conn Smythe over the years... especially... considering... there are twice as many wingers as their are centres on a team...
Oh wait, no, only one winger has won the Conn Smythe in the last 30 years, and that wasn't a super skilled sleek winger, it was Claude Lemieux.
It REALLY depends on the centre, "2 way centre who puts up roughly 60 points" doesn't really tell us enough. Is it someone like Bergeron/Backes/M Koivu, or someone like Zajac/Stepan/Grabo? Guys like Bergeron/Backes/Koivu are right there value wise with Kessel/Kane (if you ignore age/contracts), but guys like Zajac/Stepan/Grabo are not.
i think it depends on the playoffs, wingers aren't that effective than centers since they are taller and better scoring, wingers are more for like for rebound goals, cross ice goals. centers can shoot effectively more than wingers.
I'd rather take a Patrice Bergeron over a Phil Kessel. This is just one example of course.
Yes the winger scores more, but how many goals over the course of a season does the number 2 C prevent? How many FO did he win that resulted in goals he did not assist on? etc.
I'd rather take a Patrice Bergeron over a Phil Kessel. This is just one example of course.
Yes the winger scores more, but how many goals over the course of a season does the number 2 C prevent? How many FO did he win that resulted in goals he did not assist on? etc.
Just stop it with your logical, well thought-out reasoning...it has no place here.
