HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

high scoring winger vs two way 55-60 point centreman

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-07-2012, 01:59 PM
  #126
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamp9post View Post
The question is hypothetical a little silly. The only correct answer is that you take the best player.

For example, I'd take Kovalchuck over Plekanec because he's the better player.

But I'd take Toews over Kessel or Kane.

I'd take Backes over Whitney.

But I'd take Perry over Kessler.

So does that mean I prefer the 60 point center or the 80 point winger?

There is no right answer when the question is which category do you prefer because players don't always fit so easily within them.
Assuming you're classifying by ability, Toews is an 80-point center and he is the best player you listed. That's 20 points above the hypothetical center, with high-end defense.

Kovalchuk isn't really what the question asked about though; he's an 80+ point, defensively solid winger. The hypothetical winger i defensively weak. That's a huge difference.

Perry is coming off a 37-goal, 60-point season, but won the Hart and Richard with 51 goals and 98 points and the year before. Two-year average of 44g/79pt. He has a four-year average of 37 goals and 77 points in 81 games. Kesler has averaged 29 goals and 57 points in 81 games over the past four seasons, with one Selke. So that comparison is pretty spot on for the hypothetical, although Perry's physical advantage isn't mentioned and does play a role in whether or not you select him. For example, Phil Kessel (four-year average 34g, 66p; last two years 35g, 71p; last year 37g, 82p) is similar in offensive output given his lack of quality linemates (read:Getzlaf) but lacks the physical game Perry provides. And that is ultimately the difference between taking Perry/Kessel or taking Kesler in a lot of people' minds, is it not?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 03:19 PM
  #127
Bernier the Boats
Formerly BBurke
 
Bernier the Boats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmbr_24 View Post
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.
Maybe look a few columns over at total points. Kane has scored 88 points in a season, Kessel 82. Kane's career high in points is higher than Gaborik's and he is way younger. Kovalchuk is in a different league than all 3.

Bernier the Boats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:21 PM
  #128
lamp9post
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Assuming you're classifying by ability, Toews is an 80-point center and he is the best player you listed. That's 20 points above the hypothetical center, with high-end defense.

Kovalchuk isn't really what the question asked about though; he's an 80+ point, defensively solid winger. The hypothetical winger i defensively weak. That's a huge difference.

Perry is coming off a 37-goal, 60-point season, but won the Hart and Richard with 51 goals and 98 points and the year before. Two-year average of 44g/79pt. He has a four-year average of 37 goals and 77 points in 81 games. Kesler has averaged 29 goals and 57 points in 81 games over the past four seasons, with one Selke. So that comparison is pretty spot on for the hypothetical, although Perry's physical advantage isn't mentioned and does play a role in whether or not you select him. For example, Phil Kessel (four-year average 34g, 66p; last two years 35g, 71p; last year 37g, 82p) is similar in offensive output given his lack of quality linemates (read:Getzlaf) but lacks the physical game Perry provides. And that is ultimately the difference between taking Perry/Kessel or taking Kesler in a lot of people' minds, is it not?
First of all, Toews has never scored 80 points and I think Kovalchuk could make a very good argument about being the best player I listed.

Secondly, I'm not really sure what your point is in the last paragraph. Are physical wingers not supposed to be considered?

lamp9post is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2012, 04:41 PM
  #129
tomcat24
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
It all depends on team needs. The 2 players I thought of wih the title were Pat Kane and Ryan O'Reilly. I'm a huge ROR fan. He would be the perfect fit for the Hawks. I could see some deal worked out around these 2. Both teams could benefit. Colorado would need to add. I'm not sure what, though

tomcat24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 09:31 AM
  #130
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,864
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat24 View Post
It all depends on team needs. The 2 players I thought of wih the title were Pat Kane and Ryan O'Reilly. I'm a huge ROR fan. He would be the perfect fit for the Hawks. I could see some deal worked out around these 2. Both teams could benefit. Colorado would need to add. I'm not sure what, though
Yeah that wouldn't happen.

O'Reilly is 21. Who's is ANYBODY to stick a label on him with the tag of 55-60 point centerman? If you'd ask anyone before the beginning of last season, he was a two-way 25 point forward.

The point is, the Avs would have no interest in dealing a kid like that who could have the potential to even exceed what he put up last season. Sure, he may regress and have a 35-40 point season, that's not impossible either but a 21 year old kid putting up the kind of season he did last year at that age, the Avs would be nuts to trade him away.

The value is more than fair but the reason the Avs DON'T do it is this: if Stastny decides to test UFA in 2014, the Avs could potentially only have Matt Duchene left with a bunch of wingers??? Not gonna happen.

I like Pat Kane quite a bit and I think he's an excellent hockey player. I am curious to find out why he's involved in so many trade proposals from Hawk fans.

Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 12:15 PM
  #131
tomcat24
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
I can only speak for myself, but I think our team isn't constructed right anymore for winning the Cup. We lost solid grit up front. Plus wee have 4 all-star forwards making over 25 million. To me, one of them should go and Kane brings back the most. Iddeally I would like 2 gritty yet skilled players in the 20+ goals and 50-60 point range. It might take more than Kane, though

tomcat24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 12:26 PM
  #132
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,864
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat24 View Post
I can only speak for myself, but I think our team isn't constructed right anymore for winning the Cup. We lost solid grit up front. Plus wee have 4 all-star forwards making over 25 million. To me, one of them should go and Kane brings back the most. Iddeally I would like 2 gritty yet skilled players in the 20+ goals and 50-60 point range. It might take more than Kane, though
Gotcha...thanks for elaborating.

Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 12:59 PM
  #133
tomcat24
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
No problem. Most Hawk fans don't agree with me, though. We are too much of a perimeter team to me. We need gritty players that can score in tight-checking and physical games. Even with Toews, Hossa, and Sharp still around we shouldn't have any trouble scoring pretty goals

tomcat24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 03:31 PM
  #134
kluu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 212
vCash: 500
Didnt read all the pages but I'm sad no one mentions Patrice Bergeron.

Anyway, I pick a two-way center. WAY more valuable

kluu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 03:53 PM
  #135
tomcat24
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
Bergeron is really good, no doubt. Fun watching him and Marchand. I am always worried about his injury problems, though.

tomcat24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 11:09 PM
  #136
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlaverty06 View Post
Simple as Crosby can make pascal dupuis an almost 60 point player.

Pascal dupuis from the wing isn't making Crosby look like an 100 point center.

Center are more important
This is the craziest logic ever

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 07:21 AM
  #137
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
As shown in title, which holds more value?

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.
Calling somebody a 55-60 point centre is substantially different than a perpetual 30-30 guy.... mainly because generally players have more assists than goals, and rarely do players reach a specific milestone (30-30) every year. A 30-30 centre is a guy who's regularily around 70 points.

That being said, I believe that until you get over the ~70 point threshold for the centre, the game-breaking winger is more valuable.

There lots of centres in this league who are capable of putting up anywhere from 45-65 points and being reasonably reliable defensively. The 8 or 9 goal difference you may get with a 65 point centre versus a 45 point centre can be made up elsewhere in a lineup... but losing the gamebreaking ability of the winger is generally not something that you can replace with depth.

Don't get me wrong, a 65 point two way centreman is incredibly valuable, especially in the playoffs, but you don't lose your gamebreakers to acquire one. Once you get into the ~70 point range, you start talking about gamebreaking centres like Toews & Richards, but guys like Bergeron, J. Staal, etc. just don't meet that criteria.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 06:46 PM
  #138
Hero
Buffy is Back
 
Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,270
vCash: 500
30/30 C obviously.

You're comparing Kovy/Gaby/Kane/Kessel to Toews/Kesler(when he was better)/Bergeron(when at his best)/Richards

Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 01:31 PM
  #139
Bernier the Boats
Formerly BBurke
 
Bernier the Boats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hero View Post
30/30 C obviously.

You're comparing Kovy/Gaby/Kane/Kessel to Toews/Kesler(when he was better)/Bergeron(when at his best)/Richards
Those C's have all put up over ~75pts in there careers. They are not "55-60pt" centres.

Bernier the Boats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 01:39 PM
  #140
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadri43 View Post
As shown in title, which holds more value?

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.
It always depends on which two players are being compared but in general a 30-30 guy with excellence in all areas of the game is the guy you want in real life.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 03:37 PM
  #141
Community
44 is Rielly good
 
Community's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,674
vCash: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Canuck View Post
I'd take a Ryan Kesler player over a Phil Kessel player any day.
40 goal scoring Kesler? Definitely
Last year Kesler? Definitely not

Would you rather have Phil Kessel of last year or Jordan Staal from last year is what jumped into my head immediately after seeing this thread title...

Except I guess Staal was on pace for higher point totals than that considering he was 50pts in 62 games.... Either Staal or Weiss.... Either way, I think I'd rather have the Phil Kessel of last year than the Staal/Weiss of last year.

Community is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 04:25 PM
  #142
hlaverty06
Registered User
 
hlaverty06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NJ all day
Country: United States
Posts: 7,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shareefruck View Post
This is the craziest logic ever
So you believe pascal dupuis is what makes Crosby the center he is?

hlaverty06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 05:16 PM
  #143
Warm Cookies
The Dynamic Duo
 
Warm Cookies's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 47,686
vCash: 500
As a Pens fan, I'm glad we have Neal over Staal.

But we're in the unique position of having 2 better centers ahead of a 55-60 point two-way center plus relatively little skill on the wings.

In general, the center would be more valuable.

Warm Cookies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 09:36 PM
  #144
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,476
vCash: 500
The way I see it -- it really comes down to the role that you can expect to be filled by the player.

With Kane/Kessel/Gaborik/Kovalchuk/Perry... you've got a guy who you can reasonably expect to be your #1 winger, and never have to worry about him being miscast in that role to be a great team.

I think the answer to whether or not you take a centre over one of those guys comes down to whether or not that centre is a guy who you can say with the same confidence is a #1 centre. If you're talking about a guy who's more of a tweener (bad team's #1 C, good team's #2 C, think Kesler, Stastny, Bergeron, etc.) I think you have to take the winger, as you either already have the #1 centre, or trading for that tweener centre doesn't adequately fill a need.

seanlinden 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 05:45 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.