agreed, there are very exceptions to that (and that's what they are, exceptions), example : for us, Markov who can carry a PP by himself as long as you give him shooter(s), or like Lidstrom was in Detroit.
Even markov struggled without shooters. What did Subban have last year? kaberle a few months in?
think people need to understand the difference between impact and talent.
examples of impact : Claude Lemieux in the P.O. 20 goals in seasons, plays like a 50 goal scorer in PO / Saku, bringing teams no better than the one we saw saturday into the P.O. regularly / Markov, took us a very long time to learn how to win without him in the line up...
skills or not, when these players are on your team, it has an impact on the result (Not just an odd game here and there).
Subban, while very talented, highly skilled, and doing lots of things right doesnt have much impact in the game -> YET.
You realize that we learned how to win without Markov the day PK was on our team and replaced him?
Anybody that you can't easily replace on a team is impactful. I agree, he's not perfect, and still has a lot of room for improvement. But you can't argue that a player who brings so much doesn't have much impact.
You can argue that it's because we were such a bad team, but there's no way to really know this seeing how he's only played for us.
It would certainly have been interesting to see how we perform this year with both Markov and PK on our team. They have the potential of being one of the better one two punch on Defense in the whole NHL.
So, what you're saying is that when a player plays well it has some kind impact on the rest of the team, thanks for stating the obvious.
It does NOT make him an impact player though, with or without him, results are the same.
What? You are the one who is bringing up the arbitrary "impact" argument, I was just playing along with your silly notion.
Then you turn around and say the player making an impact is not an impact player.
No offense buddy, but your random qualifications are getting hard to follow.
Instead of inventing things that aren't tangible, perhaps stick to the facts? It's the easiest way to figure out a players worth. People usually use intangibles like "impact player or not" when there isn't a valid argument against the projected players worth.
Subban certainly has a lot of things to learn, but he's 23, and he's done everything we've asked of him, and more.
So he produced as much as other d-men that are QB's, but he is not good at it?
I don't think we can fault our terrible PP on Subban, that's short sighted.
Well, your stats actually kind of confirm what I think. He's supposed to be a #1 quarterback on the powerplay but he's 22nd in the league. So there are 21 better #1 PP quarterbacks than him last year.
He really refined his game last year though and I think that this is something he'll work on and perfect as well over the years. But he has to sign first and realize that he's not quite there yet.
agreed, there are very exceptions to that (and that's what they are, exceptions), example : for us, Markov who can carry a PP by himself as long as you give him shooter(s), or like Lidstrom was in Detroit.
Well, if Markov needs a shooter then he's not carrying the PP all by himself now is he?
Nobody can run a PP by themselves. You can be the big piece of the puzzle, but no puzzle holds only one piece.
That is insane. You can't blame a PP on one defenseman. You realize that the goals are mostly supposed to come from the forwards, right? If they don't score, what the **** can a defenseman really do? Holy ****.
Another person who can't read. Try and actually comment on what I wrote and I'll be glad to debate it.
Well, your stats actually kind of confirm what I think. He's supposed to be a #1 quarterback on the powerplay but he's 22nd in the league. So there are 21 better #1 PP quarterbacks than him last year.
He really refined his game last year though and I think that this is something he'll work on and perfect as well over the years. But he has to sign first and realize that he's not quite there yet.
He's 22nd in the league in terms of total points, but in terms of points per 60 mins on the PP, he's about 15th. Agreed that he has to get better, but he's proven that he's already good at it. As good as the reigning Norris trophy winner.
That is insane. You can't blame a PP on one defenseman. You realize that the goals are mostly supposed to come from the forwards, right? If they don't score, what the **** can a defenseman really do? Holy ****.
Perhaps he would be trying to say that PK isnt a PP QB, which I would agree with. He is only the point shot and he even lets it be known when he wants to unload that.
Another person who can't read. Try and actually comment on what I wrote and I'll be glad to debate it.
You claimed that if Subban was as good as claimed, that our PP wouldn't have been last. That is insane. It takes many pieces to make a PP work.
Your comments on him needing to fix his point shot are nothing new. Everyone knows he herp derps his slapshot. Being a PP QB is more than taking slapshots, though. His point production on the PP is good enough to place him among the leagues best.
Well, if Markov needs a shooter then he's not carrying the PP all by himself now is he?
Nobody can run a PP by themselves. You can be the big piece of the puzzle, but no puzzle holds only one piece.
No but the biggest piece is a power-play QB and PK is not the QB. Wiz was the PP QB when markov was out that year and is the only reason Kaberle was traded for last season.
Everyone knows he herp derps his slapshot. Being a PP QB is more than taking slapshots, .
Including him, and it was obvious he was trying to fix it as the year went on. He was taking a lot less shots, going for more soft wristers and open passes.
Early in the year he struggled, but I thought he adapted pretty well as the season went on.
What? You are the one who is bringing up the arbitrary "impact" argument, I was just playing along with your silly notion.
Then you turn around and say the player making an impact is not an impact player.
No offense buddy, but your random qualifications are getting hard to follow.
Instead of inventing things that aren't tangible, perhaps stick to the facts? It's the easiest way to figure out a players worth. People usually use intangibles like "impact player or not" when there isn't a valid argument against the projected players worth.
Subban certainly has a lot of things to learn, but he's 23, and he's done everything we've asked of him, and more.
quite easy to understand, you can replace ANY player on a team with a better player and it will have an impact on the team.
but being an impact player is more than just being better than the guy you replace. It means that your play, wether you're a skilled player or not, have an immediate impact on teammates or on the games results.
I'll get back to the Koivu example, when playin on his Wing, Brian Savage was a 25 goal scorer, once taken off Koivu's wings he slowly disappeared from the NHL (injuries didnt help, but still), Higgins when playing alongside Koivu was a 20 goal scorer, something he never repeated once taken off Koivu's wing...
on the other hand, while he was as productive as Koivu, and sometimes more, Ribeiro didnt really make anyone better, nor did he help the Habs/Stars accomplish anything.
I know Markov is LD (especially on the pp) but since he needs a shooter on his side to be most effective on the Powerplay, why can't we put Subban on his left as the shooter? Markov might be out of his comfort zone on the right side but him and PK on the 1st pp wave is miles better than Kaberle-Bouillon or whatever garbage they put out vs the Leafs Saturday.
Subban definitely helped the PP... The difference between Subban and no Subban on the PP was Habs being Worst PP in the Conference vs Worst PP in the Conference, but a couple of % points further from the Second Worst PP.
The only urgency of signing Subban is in putting more of a show for the fans of the Bell Center. Subban was on our PP, PK and 5 on 5 and we were still the Worst team in the Conference. We haven't improved visibly in any sphere. There's no urgency on the ice.
Subban definitely helped the PP... The difference between Subban and no Subban on the PP was Habs being Worst PP in the Conference vs Worst PP in the Conference, but a couple of % points further from the Second Worst PP.
The only urgency of signing Subban is in putting more of a show for the fans of the Bell Center. Subban was on our PP, PK and 5 on 5 and we were still the Worst team in the Conference. We haven't improved visibly in any sphere. There's no urgency on the ice.
Another person who supports tanking if it means putting Subban in his place.
You realize that we learned how to win without Markov the day PK was on our team and replaced him?
Anybody that you can't easily replace on a team is impactful. I agree, he's not perfect, and still has a lot of room for improvement. But you can't argue that a player who brings so much doesn't have much impact.
You can argue that it's because we were such a bad team, but there's no way to really know this seeing how he's only played for us.
It would certainly have been interesting to see how we perform this year with both Markov and PK on our team. They have the potential of being one of the better one two punch on Defense in the whole NHL.
huh... P.K. was brought in for the P.O... he played 2 reg. season games for us in his first year, we sure didnt learn how to win enough reg. season games to make the PO because of him.
No need to reach that far, no one is saying Subban sucks.
quite easy to understand, you can replace ANY player on a team with a better player and it will have an impact on the team.
but being an impact player is more than just being better than the guy you replace. It means that your play, wether you're a skilled player or not, have an immediate impact on teammates or on the games results.
I'll get back to the Koivu example, when playin on his Wing, Brian Savage was a 25 goal scorer, once taken off Koivu's wings he slowly disappeared from the NHL (injuries didnt help, but still), Higgins when playing alongside Koivu was a 20 goal scorer, something he never repeated once taken off Koivu's wing...
on the other hand, while he was as productive as Koivu, and sometimes more, Ribeiro didnt really make anyone better, nor did he help the Habs/Stars accomplish anything.
See, impact vs skills
So what does this have to do with PK and his worth though? And who else on this current team would you say have "impact" ?
