I have raised it before--would they be as effective if they did not play oon the same line or were individually on a less overall talented team than London?
In other words is Kane "really" that good? Is Gagner really that good?"
Well-we did see Kane on Team USA at the WJHC-u-20 and he was very good...then Gagner was out of the London lineup last night due to that concussion he got i the previous game...What did Kane do last night (albeit Kostitsyn was still there and the rest of the London talent) = a 4 point night (2g+2a --his 2nd goal was the OT winer
in a 5-4 win over Windsor)!!
So--answer: KANE DOES NOT NEED GAGNER TO BE AN IMPACT SUPERSTAR TALENT.
The question now resolves to GAGNER --is he as goodd as his points suggest?
Probably not--though if you saw him play-make you cannot deny he is also a very good player...so I guess the answer on him would be--no he wouldn't have as many points without supertalents like Kane and Kostitsyn to finish his passes into scores
==BUT what I do not know is if without them he would compensate by being more selfish and shooting/scoring more goals by himself (that may be a reasonable assumption)...
So with Gagner it is hard to say whether he will continue to be be primarily a play-making centre or will transform himself into more of a "go to" goal scorer ...this may also play into whether he can project to a true #1 centre (if the playmaking translates to goal scoring by the wings on his line at the NHL level) --or whether his upside is as a mere #2 centre with more or equal parts goal scoring to assists...
I would have been very interesting to see how Gagner would play in London without Kane in the lineup (of course Kostitsyn is still there so he probably would be dishing off passes first before selfishly shooting himself) --but I guss we won't get a chance to ***** this reverse situation...
So--we know KANE is great even without Gagner--we don't know if the reverse is true.
I think Gagner makes the players around him better.
I don't think anybody needs to make Kane better, he's just flat out good on his own, no matter who he plays with.
Soooo... Gagner's stats certainly benefit from having good players around him, but he'd still be a good player and top-10 pick who makes those around him better, even if he was playing with lesser guys. He'll have a tougher time stepping up than Kane will, which to an extent we already saw in the WJC, since Kane already plays above the speed of the OHL, whereas IMHO Gagner still plays at an OHL speed.
The USHL is a solid developmental league, but the USA NTDP plays some stiff competition as well. In the USHL last year, Gagner only had 46 points in 56 games. Kane posted 102 points in 58 games last year for the U-18s. And, if you want to screen out the NAHL games from the NTDP schedule since the NAHL is worse than the USHL, Cane posted 51 points in 35 games against US College teams and various U-18 teams from around the world. That's darn impressive.
What this tells us is that Kane had proven to be a dominant player prior to this year. Gagner hadn't. Then the two paired up, and Kane continued to dominate at a similar clip, and Gagner's production suddenly exploded. This year's WJC only highlighted this, IMO. Kane was awesome for Team USA. Gagner struggled to find himself on Team Canada and was sort of a non-factor.
I don´t think we ´KNOW´ that Kane is dominant alone. It would be more accurate to say that he´s had some good games this year without Gagne.
On the other hand, this could hurt both of their stock if GMs aren´t sure who benefits the most from the pairing. And it´s not even fair to say that it´s a pairing. The entire team is incredible so they both benefit from that.
Put John Tavares on that team and he would have a 30 point lead on the league.
If I am a GM, i´d always lean to a great player on a mediocre or bad team. That way you KNOW he´s good.
If I am a GM, i´d always lean to a great player on a mediocre or bad team. That way you KNOW he´s good.
Interesting philosophy. I can see the merits of this but there would certainly be some players from time to time on good teams that would be/are safe picks. Kane I believe, is one of those exceptions. I do not have a crystal ball to predict the future, but I can see him developing into a Pat LaFontaine-type player in the NHL (hopefully without the concussions).
I have raised it before--would they be as effective if they did not play oon the same line or were individually on a less overall talented team than London?
In other words is Kane "really" that good? Is Gagner really that good?"
Well-we did see Kane on Team USA at the WJHC-u-20 and he was very good...then Gagner was out of the London lineup last night due to that concussion he got i the previous game...What did Kane do last night (albeit Kostitsyn was still there and the rest of the London talent) = a 4 point night (2g+2a --his 2nd goal was the OT winer
in a 5-4 win over Windsor)!!
So--answer: KANE DOES NOT NEED GAGNER TO BE AN IMPACT SUPERSTAR TALENT.
Kane is the real talent. He's got stuff you don't teach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawksfan50
The question now resolves to GAGNER --is he as goodd as his points suggest?
Probably not--though if you saw him play-make you cannot deny he is also a very good player...so I guess the answer on him would be--no he wouldn't have as many points without supertalents like Kane and Kostitsyn to finish his passes into scores
==BUT what I do not know is if without them he would compensate by being more selfish and shooting/scoring more goals by himself (that may be a reasonable assumption)...
So with Gagner it is hard to say whether he will continue to be be primarily a play-making centre or will transform himself into more of a "go to" goal scorer ...this may also play into whether he can project to a true #1 centre (if the playmaking translates to goal scoring by the wings on his line at the NHL level) --or whether his upside is as a mere #2 centre with more or equal parts goal scoring to assists...
I would have been very interesting to see how Gagner would play in London without Kane in the lineup (of course Kostitsyn is still there so he probably would be dishing off passes first before selfishly shooting himself) --but I guss we won't get a chance to ***** this reverse situation...
The last time Kane and Kostitsyn were out of the lineup. Gagner was in on all 4 of London's goals in a win. He can play without them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawksfan50
So--we know KANE is great even without Gagner--we don't know if the reverse is true.
Either can play without each other. The fact that they play on the same team should not be a negative.
Kane is also a year older then Gagner. Wait till Gagner play at next years WJC before making similar comparisons.
Either can play without each other. The fact that they play on the same team should not be a negative.
Agreed. They're both talented hockey players, no doubt. Personally, I think Kane is a tad better, but just because they're teammates doesn't automatically mean that they enhance the other's appeal.
The USHL is a solid developmental league, but the USA NTDP plays some stiff competition as well. In the USHL last year, Gagner only had 46 points in 56 games. Kane posted 102 points in 58 games last year for the U-18s. And, if you want to screen out the NAHL games from the NTDP schedule since the NAHL is worse than the USHL, Cane posted 51 points in 35 games against US College teams and various U-18 teams from around the world. That's darn impressive.
What this tells us is that Kane had proven to be a dominant player prior to this year. Gagner hadn't. Then the two paired up, and Kane continued to dominate at a similar clip, and Gagner's production suddenly exploded. This year's WJC only highlighted this, IMO. Kane was awesome for Team USA. Gagner struggled to find himself on Team Canada and was sort of a non-factor.
Only? I can't think of another player besides Vanek that had such an impact in the USHL at such a young age. Besides, the USHL is a notoriously low-scoring league, the top ten is made up of players barely sustaining a ppg average. It's like comparing the RSL stats and NHL stats. It holds no water.
Interesting philosophy. I can see the merits of this but there would certainly be some players from time to time on good teams that would be/are safe picks. Kane I believe, is one of those exceptions. I do not have a crystal ball to predict the future, but I can see him developing into a Pat LaFontaine-type player in the NHL (hopefully without the concussions).
As a Flyers fan hoping that we draft Kane, I like that comparison of LaFontaine. I didn't get to see a lot of his career, and didn't really know how big he was, so I went to look it up, and he's listed at 5'10", 180. I assumed LaFontaine was bigger, but that should quiet the critics of Kane's size a bit. Also, I looked at LaFontaine's draft year, and check out who was drafted at #12:
I think Gagner makes the players around him better.
I don't think anybody needs to make Kane better, he's just flat out good on his own, no matter who he plays with.
Soooo... Gagner's stats certainly benefit from having good players around him, but he'd still be a good player and top-10 pick who makes those around him better, even if he was playing with lesser guys. He'll have a tougher time stepping up than Kane will, which to an extent we already saw in the WJC, since Kane already plays above the speed of the OHL, whereas IMHO Gagner still plays at an OHL speed.
Hard to compare the two, since Kane has had an extra year of Junior/NTDP play, as they are a year apart in age. Kane should rip it up again next year in the OHL, as should Gagner, who will another year after next to light it up even more!
I'm not sold on Gagner at least not yet. He's not a dominant player 5 on 5. Take a look at a guy like Crosby. Out of the 90 points he has 44 are on the power play while still a whopping 46 are at even strength. He leads in PP points and I think only Lecavalier has more ES points (I could be off). Gagner on the other hand has far more power play points than ES. To me that hurts him. Hey there's nothing wrong with lighting it up on the powerplay but you have to prove you can score at least as good even strength. I dont see that with Gagner yet, Kane I do
If I am a GM, i´d always lean to a great player on a mediocre or bad team. That way you KNOW he´s good.
The counter argument to that is you dont know if that player looks so great because he gets all the ice time and all the power play opportunities. Can he fit into a successful team strategy?
Hard to compare the two, since Kane has had an extra year of Junior/NTDP play, as they are a year apart in age. Kane should rip it up again next year in the OHL, as should Gagner, who will another year after next to light it up even more!
I would take either of them. It is unbelievable how much these two want to win. They could be in on all 4 goals but if they're down 5-4 late in the game, they push for the the win. Many London fans have witnessed come-from-behind wins all year. Winning, not points, is what it is all about. Can they raise their level when it matters most!
Gagner played well enough to crack Team Canada's roster as a 17-year-old without Kane at his side. He didn't play much, but he made the team.
That said - I think Gagner benefits more from playing with Kane than vice versa. Mind you Kane is nearly a year older, so it should be expected. Also; Kane is the best player in this draft class, so Gagner has a pretty lofty standard to match.
Gagner played well enough to crack Team Canada's roster as a 17-year-old without Kane at his side. He didn't play much, but he made the team.
That said - I think Gagner benefits more from playing with Kane than vice versa. Mind you Kane is nearly a year older, so it should be expected. Also; Kane is the best player in this draft class, so Gagner has a pretty lofty standard to match.
Only? I can't think of another player besides Vanek that had such an impact in the USHL at such a young age. Besides, the USHL is a notoriously low-scoring league, the top ten is made up of players barely sustaining a ppg average. It's like comparing the RSL stats and NHL stats. It holds no water.
Very well said - too many people think stats from every league are analogous. If his argument worked guys like Michalek would have fallen to the 5th round in his draft year...
Agreed, Sam looks more like a Ray Whitney type player than his father. Dave Gagner was a little more of put-your-head-down, north-south skating scorer.
Sam Gagner is more of head up, superb vision, playmaker etc. Dave Gagner had a little more bulldog to his game - would be nice to see Sam develop that a little more over time.
I'd like to think Kostitsyn has a role in making both of them look good...but i can't.
It's hard to tell who of those three is making the others look great and whatnot. I'm not going to argue that Kane is the most talented of the three, but I think Kostitsyn does help the other two look better, and vice versa.
That said, I'm not sold on Gagner just because of his WJC performance. He's got lots of time to prove me wrong though, and next season he'll likely be playing without both Kane and Kostitsyn so we'll see how he does on his own.
__________________
This content is hosted here with the objections of the poster.
It's hard to tell who of those three is making the others look great and whatnot. I'm not going to argue that Kane is the most talented of the three, but I think Kostitsyn does help the other two look better, and vice versa.
That said, I'm not sold on Gagner just because of his WJC performance. He's got lots of time to prove me wrong though, and next season he'll likely be playing without both Kane and Kostitsyn so we'll see how he does on his own.
To take two names off the top of my head. I think Gagner had better WJ's then both Rick Nash and Joe Thornton. I don't know why people are so hung up on Gagner's WJ performance.
Gagner's stats certainly benefit from having good players around him, but he'd still be a good player and top-10 pick who makes those around him better, even if he was playing with lesser guys. He'll have a tougher time stepping up than Kane will, which to an extent we already saw in the WJC, since Kane already plays above the speed of the OHL, whereas IMHO Gagner still plays at an OHL speed.
