HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk > Polls - (hockey-related only)
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

Adam Larsson vs Ryan McDonagh

View Poll Results: Who would you rather have moving forward and why?
Adam Larsson 107 56.02%
Ryan McDonagh 84 43.98%
Voters: 191. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2012, 05:31 PM
  #51
GM17*
ALL HAIL LORD FISH
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post
If we're going to nitpick and talk about their rookie years and age comparison, Ryan McDonagh didn't start the year with the Rangers, came up and played top-4 meaningful minutes in the playoffs, while Larsson was benched in the playoffs on a team that went to the Stanley Cup finals.

McDonagh right now. I don't see Larsson's "amazing" offensive potential that allows puts him at a Doughty/Karlsson level offensively like Devils fans and a few others have described. McDonagh gets almost no power play time was up there amongst the leaders in ES scoring amongst defenders this year.

I'd love to know how "bad" McDonagh is defensively since that's the case.

Not only that, but McDonagh finished 11th in Norris voting in only his 2nd season. Let's see where Larsson finishes next season.

McDonagh without a question. Sure, Larsson has some great potential, but that's what it is, potential.
I'm aware you're a huge homer and will never be convinced otherwise because you're in all of these threads, but here's an example of his top notch passing that leads to offence.


GM17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 06:28 PM
  #52
NH57
Habs 4 Life
 
NH57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,707
vCash: 500
Now, McDonagh easily, but Larsson in the future. Voted for Larsson as the OP says going forward.

In the future, both will be great defensemen. McDonagh will likely settle as a #2 d-man while Larsson has all-star and Norris upside. Voted Larsson.

NH57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 06:30 PM
  #53
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 31,336
vCash: 1950
Quote:
Originally Posted by noahhabib View Post
Now, McDonagh easily, but Larsson in the future. Voted for Larsson as the OP says going forward.

In the future, both will be great defensemen. McDonagh will likely settle as a #2 d-man while Larsson has all-star and Norris upside. Voted Larsson.
Why will McDonagh settle as a #2 d-man when he is already a #1? And McDonagh doesn't have Norris upside? This is his first full season and he finished 11th in Norris voting..

I get that you say Larsson in the future, but your reasoning makes no sense.

__________________
Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 06:35 PM
  #54
The Green Unit
Registered User
 
The Green Unit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 5,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post
LMFAO, considering that what I'm talking about comes from your post, specifically, I'll keep it real for you.



Elite all-around player would imply ELITE OFFENSIVE SKILL, FACT.

McDonagh will be a consistent elite shutdown defender with decent offensive numbers, which is already what he is. FACT.



All I've seen so far is this and that about Larsson's all-around potential, while myself aside, NO ONE has mentioned how McDonagh has finished 11th in Norris voting in only his 2nd season on a team that on paper didn't have an amazing defense entering this season, but ended up being one of the top corps in the NHL.

It might not have been said in those words, but it has been implied.



I did judge Larsson on his rookie year. He had a good one. Not a spectacular one, but in comparison to McDonagh's rookie year, I told you that McDonagh played meaningful minutes in the playoffs while Larsson lost out to guys who arguably belong in the AHL. Advantage, McDonagh.



Not contrived at all, all I see so far is about offensive potential from Larsson and all of Larsson's potential. Yet, McDonagh is only in his 2nd season I haven't seen a damn thing in this thread about how McDonagh still has a ton of room to grow himself. Or how he scored 30 of his 32 points at ES in only his 2nd season.

Yes, let's overlook everything for McDonagh and put Larsson on a pedestal because of his "potential".

Makes sense.
You should seriously learn to read Devils posts without a confirmation bias. That'd be helpful to have constructive discussion.


Ps: Quit the hyperbole please

The Green Unit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 06:48 PM
  #55
The Green Unit
Registered User
 
The Green Unit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 5,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Why will McDonagh settle as a #2 d-man when he is already a #1? And McDonagh doesn't have Norris upside? This is his first full season and he finished 11th in Norris voting..

I get that you say Larsson in the future, but your reasoning makes no sense.

Look, They are not what we may call veterans. Larsson's potential could be as much questioned as McDonagh's consistency. There's nothing wrong with this. Both sides should understand this.

But that's what the other poster can't get obviously.

The Green Unit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 07:54 PM
  #56
SmellOfVictory
Registered User
 
SmellOfVictory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 6,277
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Why will McDonagh settle as a #2 d-man when he is already a #1? And McDonagh doesn't have Norris upside? This is his first full season and he finished 11th in Norris voting..

I get that you say Larsson in the future, but your reasoning makes no sense.
By all indications that I could see, Girardi was NYR's #1.

SmellOfVictory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 08:27 PM
  #57
ColonialsHockey10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmellOfVictory View Post
By all indications that I could see, Girardi was NYR's #1.
Wow, what tremendous logic you're using.

It doesn't matter if Bobby Orr is ahead of McDonagh on the depth chart, he was still a #1 defenseman in his first full professional year.

ColonialsHockey10 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 09:49 PM
  #58
Krampus
Call me Nils
 
Krampus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NYC
Country: Austria
Posts: 19,480
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmellOfVictory View Post
By all indications that I could see, Girardi was NYR's #1.
So Ryan Suter wasn't a #1 either?

Krampus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 01:50 AM
  #59
ColonialsHockey10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Del Ziti View Post
So Ryan Suter wasn't a #1 either?
And Larsson has potential to be a #1, so therefore he would beat Suter in a poll.

ColonialsHockey10 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 01:54 AM
  #60
Machinehead
Moderator
1st pair Boyle
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Land of no Defense
Country: United States
Posts: 46,796
vCash: 50
The Rangers have 3 #1's. That seems to be creating alot of confusion.

That and a cyborg between the pipes is how you get to the Conference Final with very limited offensive skill.

Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 04:00 AM
  #61
stempniaksen
Registered User
 
stempniaksen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,385
vCash: 50
Ryan McDonagh.

I think that he's easily the better player now, and that he will continue to be the better defensive player. I think Larsson could surpass him offensively, but it would be by a small margin.

Great poll though, these are two great young players.

stempniaksen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 04:57 AM
  #62
Hynh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist View Post
Elite all-around player would imply ELITE OFFENSIVE SKILL, FACT.
lrn2grammar

Elite all-around player does not mean all-around elite player.

Hynh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 08:12 AM
  #63
SMantzas
Swoon
 
SMantzas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
The Rangers have 3 #1's. That seems to be creating alot of confusion.

That and a cyborg between the pipes is how you get to the Conference Final with very limited offensive skill.
I wouldn't say nyr had limited offensive skill. They just underachieved, except for Callahan and Gaborik (talking about the regular season). Richards, Gaborik, Callahan, Stepan, Anisimov, Hagelin and Dubinsky is pretty damn solid

SMantzas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 08:36 AM
  #64
Fearless Leaf*
Playiffs 2013!!!!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Markham and Lawrence
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
I think the correct answer is McDonagh is the obvious better player right now for obvious reasons but future is too early to tell and it could go either way since both are fantastic and have ton of similarities.

I wouldn't mind having either either on the Leafs and they would fill a huge huge need on the back-end.

Fearless Leaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 09:05 AM
  #65
Saugus
Ecrasez l'infame!
 
Saugus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 97,512
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Saugus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
The Rangers have 3 #1's.
When I think of a team with multiple #1 defencemen, I think of the 1995-2004 Devils, the 2007 Ducks, the 1977 Habs, and the Predators for the last few years.

I am genuinely confused who you are referring to here. It's clear that you think that McDonagh is a legit #1 already, but who are the others? Staal and Girardi? I think both fall short of being true #1s.

Saugus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 09:08 AM
  #66
Voodoo Child
Lǎobǎn
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Hangzhou-Suzhou
Country: China
Posts: 3,290
vCash: 500
McDo is a fine player and will certainly be a stud on that NYR top pair for a long time, but can we please stop ramming '11th in Norris voting!' argument please? He got 13 points (Karlsson got 1069), playing in front of the best goalie in the world, with two other guys on the squad who finished in the top-20 voting, things that do make a difference.

Gun to my head I take Larsson.

Voodoo Child is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 09:58 AM
  #67
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 29,836
vCash: 50
It seems like half of New York's blue line is supposed to be a #1. Then, on top of that, they have Lundqvist in net, who is their savior every night. Can both be true? The math doesn't really add up on that one. How do they ever get scored on?

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 10:01 AM
  #68
SMantzas
Swoon
 
SMantzas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
It seems like half of New York's blue line is supposed to be a #1. Then, on top of that, they have Lundqvist in net, who is their savior every night. Can both be true? The math doesn't really add up on that one. How do they ever get scored on?
Aliens

On a serious note, I think many Nyr fans are having trouble differentiating between #1 dmen and minute eating defenseman

SMantzas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 10:18 AM
  #69
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 29,836
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMantzas View Post
Aliens

On a serious note, I think many Nyr fans are having trouble differentiating between #1 dmen and minute eating defenseman
I think that's a better term. On top of that, they all seem to feed off of each other a bit. Refering to the example of Anaheim having two #1's, we also had a bigtime minute-muncher in Beauchemin. All three of them could play 30 minutes a game, but when compared to the likes of Niedermayer and Pronger, the minutes played, and how the minutes were put to use, was quite different.

I look at the votes for the three NYR defensemen more as evidence that there was no true standout. I think a legitimate #1 would have earned the vast majority of the votes, instead of three defensemen taking votes from each other.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 10:26 AM
  #70
Fearless Leaf*
Playiffs 2013!!!!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Markham and Lawrence
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
It seems like half of New York's blue line is supposed to be a #1. Then, on top of that, they have Lundqvist in net, who is their savior every night. Can both be true? The math doesn't really add up on that one. How do they ever get scored on?
I have to agree with this. Numerous times many Rangers have suggested without Lundqvist, they would be a fringe play-off team or so along the lines. If that's true, then all the three #1 d-mans and solid forward group are hardly contributing anything, amirite?

Fearless Leaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 11:39 AM
  #71
lboogie42*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
The Rangers have 3 #1's. That seems to be creating alot of confusion.

That and a cyborg between the pipes is how you get to the Conference Final with very limited offensive skill.
hes not a cyborg. hes the queen of the biggest pads.

lboogie42* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 11:43 AM
  #72
FoppaForsberg*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
The Rangers have 3 #1's. That seems to be creating alot of confusion.

That and a cyborg between the pipes is how you get to the Conference Final with very limited offensive skill.
three #1 Dmen? If you're referring to Staal and Girardi, they're #3-#4 Dmen. Even McDonagh is a #2 only.

FoppaForsberg* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 11:55 AM
  #73
LatvianTwist
Global Moderator
 
LatvianTwist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Texas A&M
Country: Latvia
Posts: 23,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoppaForsberg View Post
three #1 Dmen? If you're referring to Staal and Girardi, they're #3-#4 Dmen. Even McDonagh is a #2 only.


They're all great #3s at worst. Probably all top-pairing defenders. They're just not #1s, as none of them really do much offensively.

LatvianTwist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 02:43 PM
  #74
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 31,336
vCash: 1950
Quote:
Originally Posted by lboogie42 View Post
hes not a cyborg. hes the queen of the biggest pads.
Didn't Brodeur just increase the size of his pads?

Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 02:44 PM
  #75
Kane One
HFB Partner
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 31,336
vCash: 1950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
It seems like half of New York's blue line is supposed to be a #1. Then, on top of that, they have Lundqvist in net, who is their savior every night. Can both be true? The math doesn't really add up on that one. How do they ever get scored on?
I didn't know it was impossible to have a great goalie and great defensemen at the same time.

Kane One 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 08:32 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.