HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Prospects
Prospects Discuss hockey prospects from all over the world and the NHL Draft.

F Chris Kreider (2009, 19th overall, NY Rangers) II -"What's the big deal," you ask?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2012, 01:55 AM
  #326
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
Sorry, sometimes the truth hurts.
This isn't the most self-deprived arrogant statement I've ever heard in my life.

Take your high horse elsewhere.

Quote:
So you seem to think you know me well enough, what exactly do I have against the Rangers? They arent a rival of my team, and they arent even in the same conference. And I've yet to say Kreider is crap or anything like it. his history simply shows that its extremely likely his offensive upside isnt nearly as high as alot of people seem to want it to be.
I don't know, maybe the fact that it's not just people on HF saying that his upside is higher than what you make it out to be?

Maybe it's the fact that you clearly and blatantly overlook the most important part of his professional career to date and say it's such a small sample size, but yet in the same notion judge him on a relatively close sample size (29 games to 18 is such a massive gap...)

Or maybe it's the fact that your argument is one gigantic hypocritical mass of regurgitated subjective opinion that I don't need much of a psychoanalysis to see that you're clearly tired of seeing the name "Kreider" on your computer's screen.

Quote:
Im not ignoring anything. I'm valuing his long history in college of mediocre production(0.81 PPG over 114 games) over an 18 game sample size in the playoffs. Where he still only produced at a 32 point pace. He was OK in the playoffs. Thats it.
And again, what you ignore and continue to ignore as seen here is the jump from the NCAA with NO AHL TIME straight to the NHL into the NHL PLAYOFFS.

Quote:
These excuses might have a little validity if Kreider wasnt 11th in team scoring.
Ok, put your team's best prospect with a 50-man roster filler that was an unsigned UFA out of college and an unsigned goon on a line with 3rd line minutes and see how he produces.

Quote:
Again, not ignoring anything. Just not overvaluing small sample sizes.
29 games in a controlled environment isn't a small sample size? We never said he was the next coming of Crosby or someone like that (bernmeister aside, but he's been chastised by all Ranger posters for that) but you stating that you're "not overvaluing small sample sizes" is asinine at best when you're turning around and using his AHL stats as the be-all, end-all barometer and the focal point of your argument.

That is the definition of sticking your foot in your mouth.

Quote:
My arguments are history and odds driven. History is clearly on my side. Doesnt mean its a guarantee, but the odds are on the side of Kreiders history of lack of production meaning he turns into a 2nd/3rd line tweener. You cant count on him(or any other player for that matter) being the exception and not the rule.
No, your arguments aren't history nor odds driven. Your arguments are purely stats driven and the same principles you apply to your arguments you leave out of the other side of the story. You say you can't use a small sample size to evaluate a player, then in turn you use his AHL stats to do so.

You want to keep ignoring the fact that you've contradicted almost everything you've said? Fine by me. I see no further point in arguing with you. It's beating a dead horse. GWOW has pointed that out as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SMantzas View Post
I'm sorry, but you make no sense. If Torts trusted him, he'd have played more than 13 minutes a night. Compare him with Adam Henrique who played 17:30 a game (no, he wasn't playing with Kovy and Parise).

If Torts trusted him, he wouldn't have rode the pine for 10 minute increments
Right, because I'm lying about that.

Not only that, but because Kreider wasn't playing 1st line minutes that means that "Torts didn't trust him"? No, it means that Marian Gaborik and Brad Richards started playing together on a line with Carl Hagelin and it was producing well.

Stop using stats to derive arguments and start watching the games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Here's my comments from several months ago:
"If all goes well, Kreider might accomplish in the NHL what Nash already has and will continue to do. Then again, I've watched a lot of hockey and seen several young players erupt out of nowhere in the playoffs and then never come close to replicating that success again."

Please though, tell me more about what I thought and said.
The other two comments I deleted because they're very general. The first one, I wanted to address.

That's ONE post. I've seen you and others bash him and then turn face and flip flop. Didn't I just mention that before?

You might not have been as bad as Cash For Nash was or some of the other fans that were on the "Bash Kreider, But We Really Want Kreider" bandwagon, but I know I've seen you on it. Now, I won't go back up and pull up an entire post history, don't have the time nor will I expend the effort to do that. It's ridiculous.

However, it doesn't change the fact that you're one of the many throughout the Nash saga that I've seen in these threads with a negative criticism of Kreider. You're not a bad person for it, I'm just saying it's a broken record.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 02:27 AM
  #327
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 16,142
vCash: 515
He is 6'3" 231lbs can skate well (pretty elite for someone his size) and has pretty good hands. He won a National Championship, a WJC Gold medal and has been to two World Championships already. He also didn't look out of place when he broke through to the NHL last year during the postseason. Those guys are going to be big deals.

He has struggled in the AHL this year, but it is the physical gifts that make guys drool over this player and I see no reason to pretend this is the end. He has done a lot of things to establish why he is a top flight prospect that Rangers fans should be excited about. Heck as a USA fan I know I am excited about what he may hopefully bring in the future to our national setup. A long ways to go, but once again his physical makeup is what makes him a big deal to date.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 03:48 AM
  #328
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Historically you are right but in the more recent drafts more of the picks are making the league and having a significant impact as well.

Not including foreign players, who have a legitimate alternative to play in, it looks like around 85% of all 1st round position players have or will play over 100 NHL games since the 01 draft.

For what it is worth 9 players, picked after him in the 1st round in 08, so far have played in the NHL with every player picked ahead of him playing in the NHL as well.
Not all first round picks are the same. Kreider was picked 19th, which isn't quite the same as #1 or even a top 10 pick. Yes an NHL team wants and expects an NHL player out of the first round, but if you get a truly elite player after the top 10 then you really did well. To get a solid probable 20 goal scoring winger, in the latter part of the first round is a good pick up.

Just because Kreider wanted to stay in school doesn't mean that the players picked ahead of him who have maybe 4 NHL games like Holland are better than him.


The only players I'd trade Kreider straight up for in that draft are:

Tavares
Hedman
Duchene
Kane
Schenn
Ekman-Larsson
Cowen
Kulikov



maybe

Rundblad
Leddy
de Haan

just because mobile defenseman are very valuable.


For comparison previous #19 picks

Luca Sbisa
Logan McMillan
Mark Mitera
Jakub Kindl
Lauri Korpikovski
Ryan Getzlaf
Jakub Koreis
Shaone Morrisson


Other than the absurdly talented Ryan Getzlaf you have to like Kreider at 19 better than just about anybody else. And this is me assuming that Kreider turns into a 20 goal 30 point player.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 04:24 AM
  #329
crt
Registered User
 
crt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 380
vCash: 500
JVR lite.

Decent tools, no toolbox.

crt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:53 AM
  #330
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 13,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post
The other two comments I deleted because they're very general. The first one, I wanted to address.

That's ONE post. I've seen you and others bash him and then turn face and flip flop. Didn't I just mention that before?

You might not have been as bad as Cash For Nash was or some of the other fans that were on the "Bash Kreider, But We Really Want Kreider" bandwagon, but I know I've seen you on it. Now, I won't go back up and pull up an entire post history, don't have the time nor will I expend the effort to do that. It's ridiculous.

However, it doesn't change the fact that you're one of the many throughout the Nash saga that I've seen in these threads with a negative criticism of Kreider. You're not a bad person for it, I'm just saying it's a broken record.
You don't have to look through my entire posting history; I already did last night. That's where those three comments came from.

As a rule, I don't get involved in hyping prospects to the moon or in cutting them down until they've had some serious NHL time. Want to see what I normally do? Here's a thread started last night on Ryan Johansen: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1313761

I don't have a negative criticism of Kreider. I've urged restraint in declaring him the next wunderkind, because players who fit the scouting profile that he does (incredible physical tools, limited hockey IQ) tend to not develop into stars despite flashes of brilliance. I believe I mentioned Gilbert Brule and Dan Fritsche earlier, both of whom came through Columbus and had exactly the same profile, and I know I mentioned Raffi Torres. All of them were highly-touted on their physical tools, and with the exception of a couple of seasons for Torres, none of them amounted to a damn thing.

Am I saying that's in the cards for Kreider? He's 21; how the hell would I know?

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:04 AM
  #331
Chaos
3, 2, 1
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 7,632
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Chaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post
I don't know, maybe the fact that it's not just people on HF saying that his upside is higher than what you make it out to be?
Because again, those people always get it right.

Quote:
Maybe it's the fact that you clearly and blatantly overlook the most important part of his professional career to date and say it's such a small sample size, but yet in the same notion judge him on a relatively close sample size (29 games to 18 is such a massive gap...)
Im judging him more on his lack of production over his 114 game college career than anything else.

Quote:
Or maybe it's the fact that your argument is one gigantic hypocritical mass of regurgitated subjective opinion that I don't need much of a psychoanalysis to see that you're clearly tired of seeing the name "Kreider" on your computer's screen.
Subjective? Please. You cant a couple lines later say my opinion is stats driven, but then say its subjective. You cant have it both ways.

Quote:
And again, what you ignore and continue to ignore as seen here is the jump from the NCAA with NO AHL TIME straight to the NHL into the NHL PLAYOFFS.
Nope, not ignoring anything. Just not massively overvaluing a 32 point pace over an 18 game sample size. The way some of you guys talk, you would think he came into the playoffs and put up a point a game.


Quote:
Ok, put your team's best prospect with a 50-man roster filler that was an unsigned UFA out of college and an unsigned goon on a line with 3rd line minutes and see how he produces.
Again, the crappy team argument would have a little validity if he wasnt his teams 11th leading scorer.

Quote:
29 games in a controlled environment isn't a small sample size? We never said he was the next coming of Crosby or someone like that (bernmeister aside, but he's been chastised by all Ranger posters for that) but you stating that you're "not overvaluing small sample sizes" is asinine at best when you're turning around and using his AHL stats as the be-all, end-all barometer and the focal point of your argument
.
Of course its a small sample size. Its a slightly larger sample size than his 32 point pace NHL playoffs performance. But its not the be-all end-all of my argument. His mediocre production over 114 college games is fr more important.

Quote:
No, your arguments aren't history nor odds driven. Your arguments are purely stats driven and the same principles you apply to your arguments you leave out of the other side of the story. You say you can't use a small sample size to evaluate a player, then in turn you use his AHL stats to do so.
Yes, they are history and odds driven. History and the odds show that players that dont produce that much in juniors and college go on to produce not that much at the highest level in the world. Its wishful thinking expecting to be him the exception and not the rule.

Quote:
You want to keep ignoring the fact that you've contradicted almost everything you've said? Fine by me. I see no further point in arguing with you. It's beating a dead horse. GWOW has pointed that out as well.
Your boy GWOW has repeated the same garbage points and BS excuses. repeating BS doesnt suddenly make him any more correct.

This whole thread is typical HF. You say something that isnt glowing about a teams prospect, and of course the "defend them to the death" mindset immediately takes over. Guess what, not everyone's top prospect is going to be a 1st or 2nd line caliber player.

__________________
Chaos is always right.

-Vagrant
Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:10 AM
  #332
Steve Holt
Fire Bylsma
 
Steve Holt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredmale View Post
Their was tons of hype about him before he suited up for the Rangers. To me his AHL season tells me that he isn't the kind of guy that will create his own offense and his offense will be the product of the system he is in.
To me, he has the capability to fit in the Top-6 if need be, a second liner ideally. I just don't see his offense being that of a first liner. At worst he could be a third liner. We'll have to see how he develops of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeetchisGod View Post
How many power forwards are finished products at 21?
None. So it's hard to say either way.

Steve Holt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:34 AM
  #333
SMantzas
Next Star?
 
SMantzas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 2,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post


Right, because I'm lying about that.

Not only that, but because Kreider wasn't playing 1st line minutes that means that "Torts didn't trust him"? No, it means that Marian Gaborik and Brad Richards started playing together on a line with Carl Hagelin and it was producing well.

Stop using stats to derive arguments and start watching the games.


Right, because Gaborik/Richards/Hagelin were playing 35 minutes a night. If Kreider was really THAT great Torts would have found him more ice time. Instead, he played less minutes p/g than Richards, Gaborik, Callahan, Hagelin, Stepan, Fedotenko, Boyle, Dubinsky and Anisimov. And only 20 seconds more than Prust.

Getting the 10th most minutes per game doesnt make me believe Uncle Torts had the most confidence in him

SMantzas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 11:33 AM
  #334
Ceff Jarter
Registered Duster
 
Ceff Jarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 494
vCash: 500
I see every Boston College game.

Krieder could become an elite talent, but given their college careers and short professional one's I think Atkinson is a better player right now.

Ceff Jarter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 12:15 PM
  #335
MadFlava
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 17
vCash: 500
I recently saw Krieder play last Thursday when the Whale hosted the Sound Tigers in Hartford. I was really looking forward to see him dominate the game but Bridgeport is a good team with a lot of speed. Krieder did have some shots and skated well but I think the Whale as a team overall isn't playing well at the moment. I think it is too early to tell and many NHL prospects haven't exactly lit up the AHL that many thought they would be.

MadFlava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 12:30 PM
  #336
Machinehead
Richards Supporter
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,487
vCash: 500
Some people in this thread simply don't buy the hype and have made legitimate arguments.

Others are just really mad for some reason.

Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 12:36 PM
  #337
seafoam
Fluorescent Adolescent
 
seafoam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 31,512
vCash: 0
I'll tell you what the big deal about Krieder is. His combination of size, speed, and skill can make him into a very good NHL forward one day. We all saw this in the playoffs. This is coming from an Isles fans. Stop trying to nitpick on prospects, same thing happened to Nino last year and now he's putting up a PPG in the AHL.

seafoam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 05:40 PM
  #338
jedimyrmidon
Registered User
 
jedimyrmidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 613
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seafoam View Post
I'll tell you what the big deal about Krieder is. His combination of size, speed, and skill can make him into a very good NHL forward one day..
Based on what other posters have mentioned, it's his shot and not his skills that stands out. Anyways, based on descriptions, it sounds like he resembles Erik Cole or Max Pacioretty, which is fine. For some reason, however, many Rangers fans on other boards (e.g. NHL.com) were pencilling him as the Calder Cup winner.

I don't see why some on here feel the need to defend him tooth and nail as if he were considered a prospect like Huberdeau, Tarasenko, Granlund or Kuznetsov. I've noticed that many of his staunchest defenders aren't defending him against posters claiming he will bust, they're defending him against posters trying to moderate expectations, which indicates they truly believe he's justifiably some elite prospect. Looking at other prospects from around the NHL, I'd have to disagree.

Don't worry JT Miller. You're up next.

jedimyrmidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:09 PM
  #339
seafoam
Fluorescent Adolescent
 
seafoam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 31,512
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by jedimyrmidon View Post
Based on what other posters have mentioned, it's his shot and not his skills that stands out. Anyways, based on descriptions, it sounds like he resembles Erik Cole or Max Pacioretty, which is fine. For some reason, however, many Rangers fans on other boards (e.g. NHL.com) were pencilling him as the Calder Cup winner.

I don't see why some on here feel the need to defend him tooth and nail as if he were considered a prospect like Huberdeau, Tarasenko, Granlund or Kuznetsov. I've noticed that many of his staunchest defenders aren't defending him against posters claiming he will bust, they're defending him against posters trying to moderate expectations, which indicates they truly believe he's justifiably some elite prospect. Looking at other prospects from around the NHL, I'd have to disagree.

Don't worry JT Miller. You're up next.
I know his shot is very good, his shot is the highlight of his skillset. I never considered him and elite prospect within the conversation of Huberdeau, Tarasenko, Granlund or Kuznetsov. I think it was rag$ fans who were doing that if anyone. I just feel like some people are totally writing him off.

seafoam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:55 PM
  #340
Brewsky
King Of The Ice Mugs
 
Brewsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: King County
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,849
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Brewsky Send a message via AIM to Brewsky Send a message via MSN to Brewsky Send a message via Yahoo to Brewsky Send a message via Skype™ to Brewsky
He hasn't even played one NHL regular season game...

Brewsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:47 PM
  #341
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
Not all first round picks are the same. Kreider was picked 19th, which isn't quite the same as #1 or even a top 10 pick. Yes an NHL team wants and expects an NHL player out of the first round, but if you get a truly elite player after the top 10 then you really did well. To get a solid probable 20 goal scoring winger, in the latter part of the first round is a good pick up.

Just because Kreider wanted to stay in school doesn't mean that the players picked ahead of him who have maybe 4 NHL games like Holland are better than him.


The only players I'd trade Kreider straight up for in that draft are:

Tavares
Hedman
Duchene
Kane
Schenn
Ekman-Larsson
Cowen
Kulikov




maybe

Rundblad
Leddy
de Haan

just because mobile defenseman are very valuable.


For comparison previous #19 picks

Luca Sbisa
Logan McMillan
Mark Mitera
Jakub Kindl
Lauri Korpikovski
Ryan Getzlaf
Jakub Koreis
Shaone Morrisson


Other than the absurdly talented Ryan Getzlaf you have to like Kreider at 19 better than just about anybody else. And this is me assuming that Kreider turns into a 20 goal 30 point player.
Just to be fair let's leave the comps to forwards only.

you really think he will be the 5th best forward from that draft?

It's not a strong draft for forwards in terms of high qaulity depth but is Kreder really even ahead of Zach Kassian at this point?

Although Viggy will probably kill any progress makes he is still as good if not better prospect than Kreider right now.

I would take O'Reilly and even MPS over him as well and that's just off the top of my head.

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:47 PM
  #342
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,215
vCash: 500
The real question mark for Kreider relates to his creativity and ability to generate offense by himself vs being a complimentary player who feeds off another players creativity. I don't think he will generate an enormous amount of chances, but putting him on a line with a creative center would likely result in him finishing a healthy number of chances.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:49 PM
  #343
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Just to be fair let's leave the comps to forwards only.

you really think he will be the 5th best forward from that draft?

It's not a strong draft for forwards in terms of high qaulity depth but is Kreder really even ahead of Zach Kassian at this point?

Although Viggy will probably kill any progress makes he is still as good if not better prospect than Kreider right now.

I would take O'Reilly and even MPS over him as well and that's just off the top of my head.
I only looked at the first round, but I would take O'Reilly over Kreider.

I like Kreider over Kassian. Neither are particularly strong defensively and both offer a certain skill set. I believe Kreider's skill set is harder to find (scoring) than Kassian (physicality). MPS is a toss up because I think he has an excellent skill set but he has struggled to utilize it.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:55 PM
  #344
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Exit Dose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,578
vCash: 500
Over Johansson and Holland?

Exit Dose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:02 PM
  #345
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exit Dose View Post
Over Johansson and Holland?
Neither impress me much.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:15 PM
  #346
Stop Winnin
TANK ON BOYS
 
Stop Winnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 7,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
Neither impress me much.
Myers??

Stop Winnin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:17 PM
  #347
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kishire View Post
Myers??
????

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 12:56 AM
  #348
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,401
vCash: 500
time will tell but Kreider has long strides to make up.

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 04:54 AM
  #349
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMantzas View Post
Right, because Gaborik/Richards/Hagelin were playing 35 minutes a night. If Kreider was really THAT great Torts would have found him more ice time. Instead, he played less minutes p/g than Richards, Gaborik, Callahan, Hagelin, Stepan, Fedotenko, Boyle, Dubinsky and Anisimov. And only 20 seconds more than Prust.

Getting the 10th most minutes per game doesnt make me believe Uncle Torts had the most confidence in him
And again, why was he out in key defensive situations that Gaborik, Richards, Callahan, Fedotenko, Boyle, Dubinsky and Anisimov weren't in?

Another stat monger who simply just doesn't watch the game and get the point.

It's a shame because you have no excuse, being exposed to Rangers games in that MSG NY Metro Market.

Instead, you continue to post like you know, when you don't, despite having the access to possibly know.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 05:08 AM
  #350
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
Because again, those people always get it right.
They've watched him far more than you have. I'll take their word over yours.

Quote:
Im judging him more on his lack of production over his 114 game college career than anything else.
Even if you were judging him on his college career, which you're not, you're still leaving out a point per game junior season being the leading scorer on a national champion.

Quote:
Subjective? Please. You cant a couple lines later say my opinion is stats driven, but then say its subjective. You cant have it both ways.
No it IS that way because you use a stat to make one point when there are other stats there that DISPROVE your point at a higher level at you ignore them.

This isn't hard to see.

Quote:
Nope, not ignoring anything. Just not massively overvaluing a 32 point pace over an 18 game sample size. The way some of you guys talk, you would think he came into the playoffs and put up a point a game.
20-25 goal pace as a rookie, did it in the playoffs none the less. 3 of his 5 goals came against Jersey in a 6 game series. I'll take the production at the highest level he's ever played at in his career over your word and an ok college career.

Quote:
Again, the crappy team argument would have a little validity if he wasnt his teams 11th leading scorer.
Again, try playing with a goon and a 50-man filler.

Quote:
Of course its a small sample size. Its a slightly larger sample size than his 32 point pace NHL playoffs performance. But its not the be-all end-all of my argument. His mediocre production over 114 college games is fr more important.
His college production is more important than how he performed in the NHL. I guess the same can be said for others than too. Amazing argument, excellent logic.

Quote:
Yes, they are history and odds driven. History and the odds show that players that dont produce that much in juniors and college go on to produce not that much at the highest level in the world. Its wishful thinking expecting to be him the exception and not the rule.
And that's why he's enjoyed his greatest success so far at the NHL level.

Not saying he's the exception to the rule, but you look ridiculous right now saying something like that.

Quote:
Your boy GWOW has repeated the same garbage points and BS excuses. repeating BS doesnt suddenly make him any more correct.
Oh, it doesn't for him, but does for you? Because that's all you've done so far. I've seen no reasoning as to why college numbers should be more impotant than NHL numbers.

We're not judging his college or AHL career, we're judging the ability he has at the NHL level and the potential to grow on that. You don't judge that through previous college play or AHL play after he came up and had success after jumping past the AHL to go into the NHL playoffs.

You can say all you want about his college career, but at the end of the day, you still discount the fact that he did something that Reilly Smith, Jaden Schwartz and all of these others weren't doing... being a major contributor to their team deep into the playoffs.

Quote:
This whole thread is typical HF. You say something that isnt glowing about a teams prospect, and of course the "defend them to the death" mindset immediately takes over. Guess what, not everyone's top prospect is going to be a 1st or 2nd line caliber player.
No YOU are the personification of HF hypocrisy. You'll be the first to hype your own team's prospect up as if he's the next one, but you'll turn around and say that another team's fans shouldn't be doing that and their player is crap, but when the rules are applied to his own team's player, well those rules suck and are false.

You talk about others regurgitating the same BS arguments, that's ALL THAT YOU'VE DONE in this thread. Pot, meet kettle.

You might have changed the wording slightly, but we still see the same double-standard crappy argument that you've been repeating since the dawn of time.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.