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'll take the two way center everyday, give me the guy that can shut down the other teams top line and still produce on the score board. I wouldn't trade Backes for a wingers who produces 20 more points but hurts our d and is soft. It's just not worth it imo.
A high scoring winger capable of 40-40 and does little else (Kessel, Kane). Also major game breaker.
A two way centre with perpetual 30-30 and is excellent in all areas of the game.
Does little else? Kane isn't a high scoring winger that hangs around the slot and perimeter waiting for a pass to get off a shot. Kessel and Sharp have far more in common than Kessel and Kane. Kane has more in common with players like Hossa and St. Louis where he controls the game by being the go to transition forward, creating turnovers in the neutral zone, and keeping the play alive in the offensive zone for a puck possession team. Didn't you see the game against Toronto last year where Kane was our first line center?? Kane has a nice little wrister but he isn't a goal-scoring sniper, he's really an offensive catalyst for the rest of the team who plays more like a center than a winger.
But, as for snipers who average 10-20 points higher than good two-way centers, If I had to choose a group of 3, I think the team would be better off with 3 two-way centers than three snipers.
You can't go wrong with either one, but you have to remember the following:
1) When the high scoring winger gets older, the scoring doesn't come as easily and more often than not, they end up being exposed for their lack of defensive presence and play very little.
2) A two-way center will usually have a longer career because once the offensive game begins to dwindle, they always have the defensive game they can fall back on. You've got a guy who essentially can take all the dirty draws and be out on the ice protecting that one goal lead in crucial games.
With the way the league is moving, the two way center is probably more valuable. The high scoring, high octane offensive game is becoming a thing of the past again as more and more teams are adopting the more defensively structured and grind out type game. Pretty soon, everyone on the team will be strictly two-way players.
We are talking about 55-60 pt centres, stop mentioning players like Datsyuk/Toews. These are players like Plekanec, Backes, O'Reilly. We are talking about 80+ point wingers, like Kessel, Kane, Kovalchuk, Gaborik. The skill level isn't even close. You can't build around a 55-60pt centre, you can build around an 80pt winger.
We are talking about 55-60 pt centres, stop mentioning players like Datsyuk/Toews. These are players like Plekanec, Backes, O'Reilly. We are talking about 80+ point wingers, like Kessel, Kane, Kovalchuk, Gaborik. The skill level isn't even close. You can't build around a 55-60pt centre, you can build around an 80pt winger.
A high scoring winger capable of 40-40 and does little else (Kessel, Kane). Also major game breaker.
A two way centre with perpetual 30-30 and is excellent in all areas of the game.
People always overrate scoring. Scoring 30-30 is first line production in the modern NHL. I hate people who go he is a good 2nd line player good for 50-60 points.
People always overrate scoring. Scoring 30-30 is first line production in the modern NHL. I hate people who go he is a good 2nd line player good for 50-60 points.
Only 20 centers in the NHL had 60 points
Only 9 players in the entire NHL had over 80 points. An 80 point winger is a special player.
Only 9 players in the entire NHL had over 80 points. An 80 point winger is a special player.
I know. HF has a weird habit ov pretending scoring rates are what they used to be. Prospect A will be a first line 80 or 100 point player prospect B will be a 2nd line 60 or 70 point player.
When in reality 80 points has you as the very elite and 60 points is pretty much first line production.
A high scoring winger capable of 40-40 and does little else (Kessel, Kane). Also major game breaker.
A two way centre with perpetual 30-30 and is excellent in all areas of the game.
Kessel and Kane aren't 40-40 guys, of course the center is worth more than them. I would easily rather have Toews than either of those guys. Same goes for Bergeron.
We are talking about 55-60 pt centres, stop mentioning players like Datsyuk/Toews. These are players like Plekanec, Backes, O'Reilly. We are talking about 80+ point wingers, like Kessel, Kane, Kovalchuk, Gaborik. The skill level isn't even close. You can't build around a 55-60pt centre, you can build around an 80pt winger.
I don't look at Kane or Kessel as being on the same level as Kovalchuk or Gaborik. Neither Kane or Kessel has ever scored 40 goals in a season, Kane has hit 30 one time and you want to put him on the same level as a guy who had 2 50 goal seasons and 2 40 goal seasons and a guy who had 4 30+ and 3 40+ goal seasons?
Sorry, but I don't think you are showing the proper amount of respect to Kovalchuk or Gaborik.
Does little else? Kane isn't a high scoring winger that hangs around the slot and perimeter waiting for a pass to get off a shot. Kessel and Sharp have far more in common than Kessel and Kane. Kane has more in common with players like Hossa and St. Louis where he controls the game by being the go to transition forward, creating turnovers in the neutral zone, and keeping the play alive in the offensive zone for a puck possession team. Didn't you see the game against Toronto last year where Kane was our first line center?? Kane has a nice little wrister but he isn't a goal-scoring sniper, he's really an offensive catalyst for the rest of the team who plays more like a center than a winger.
But, as for snipers who average 10-20 points higher than good two-way centers, If I had to choose a group of 3, I think the team would be better off with 3 two-way centers than three snipers.
Kesler-Toews-Datsyuk
Vs
Neal-Kessel-Kovalchuck
I'd say that's a no-brainer.
Since when do Neal, Kessel and Kovalchuk average 10-20 points more than Kesler, Toews and Datsyuk? That's not at all a fair comparison.
Kesler - played at 52 point pace battling injuries (averaged 74 points the previous two seasons)
Toews - played at 79 point pace
Datsyuk - played at 78 point pace
Neal - played at 83 point pace
Kessel - played at 82 point pace
Kovalchuk - played at 88 point pace
And that's not mentioning the fact that Neal and Kessel had breakout seasons, and were performing worse offensively than the likes of Kesler, Toews and Datsyuk before this past season. Look, I'd love it for Kessel to be averaging 10-20 points more than those guys, but that just isn't the case right now, and he wasn't even on their level offensively until this past season. The only matchup you might be able to make an argument for meeting that criteria is Kovalchuk vs Kesler, and I think Kovalchuk's the clear winner there.
Depends on the situation really. It depends on how you balance the lines. Would it have benefitted Chicago to have another Patrick Sharp type instead of Patrick Kane when they won it all? Probably not as much as having the scorer (who scored the cup winner as we all remember).
If the center in question is David Backes or Patrice Bergeron, there's no question that I would take those 2 and not look back.
If the center in question is Pavelski (I know he's a 30 goal center, but his defensive play doesn't have as big of a margin), Zajac or Plekanec, I take Kessel.
Note: I wouldn't take Kesler over Kessel given his injury status. If he comes back next season with 60+ points and a Selke nomination, then he'll be at the same level of Backes and Bergeron, but as of right now, Kessel is the better bet.
2-way centreman that can put up 60 points are the most valuable in playoff games, but given how Toronto can't even make it there, I'd look at the regular season first.
It depends. The right centreman can be a game-changer. Look at Brendan Morrison - he got thrown onto a top line with Naslund and Bertuzzi, which as we know became the best line in hockey for a period of years.
Naslund and Bertuzzi were both good players, but it wasn't until they found their "glue" on the top line that they became elite.
Kinda what I was thinking. There were only 6 centers who put up 30 goals last season. It's not typically a goal scoring position.
Thats why its stupid. Everyone would take the elusive 30 goal scoring selke caliber center..its a slanted question.
Would you take the 50 point responsible in his own end center versus a 75 point winger without the intangibles.
As the op worded it its pretty much choose a first line center or first line winger and thats not a question for anyone. A second line elite center versus first line winger is more of a debate imo
