Slim to no chance. Superstar=top 10 player in the league only id say. Even then thats stretching it. Probably just Malkin, Ovy, Crosby, Lids, and Brodeur.
I don't think he'll ever be one of the leagues most elite players. Ovechkin, Iginla, Crosby, Malkin ect...
I do think he is a star player though. He's a good enough hockey player that he can take a game over and dominate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Quarter
He's been around awile, I'd say he's probably close to his peak.
He's continued to get better since the lockout. He's a better hockey player now than he was last year, I don't know why he'd stop getting better. He's only 25 years old.
You should be careful to define 'superstar'. In my opinion the deal goes like this, and this is just my opinion, but... here it is:
Franchise Player:
The top players in the league, perrenial all-stars and frequently at tops of award voting consistently. You can have serious gaps in your team, but they can overcome with their shear ability to impact the game. This list has 13 players IMO, your top 7 forwards, top 3 D, and top 3 Goalies. My list below is arguable.
Top 7 forwards in the league (Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Iginla, Thornton, Lecavlier, Zetterberg), Top 3 Defensemen (Lidstrom, Chara, Pronger), Top 3 Goalies (Luongo, Broduer, Lundqist)
Superstar:
These are guys who are quite often the best player on their team, but not necessarily (Hossa, Datsyuk, Spezza). Their names are usually flirted with in the bottom echelons of my above list, and for most purposes, can be interchanged. AKA, you could say that at time Hossa is a Franchise player, their names combat with players who could fall down to this list. The biggest drawback for these guys, is that they do not dominate *every* year like the franchise players, even though for short periods of time they can be the best at their job. Consists of perhaps 9 forwards, 4 D, and 4 Goalies, for example:
8 forwards (Heatley, Kovalchuk, Spezza, Alfredsson, Savard, Datysuk, Hossa, Getzlaf)
4 D (Phaneuf, Kaberle, Neidermeyr, Bouwmeester)
4 G (Nabokov, Kipper, Gigeure, Vokoun)
These guys are all typically allstars for large parts of their careers. They also receive large numbers of votes for hardware.
Star:
This list typically contains 'the next' superstar and franchise players. Guys who are too young to have made a consistent impact, or else are largely excellent but inconsistent. Generally, unless they completely dominate at a young age (Crosby, Malkin, Phaneuf) these players are knocked down to this list by the sheer consistency of older players in the above list.
These are guys who may be the best players on their team, but are not developed or good enough to carry the team to excellence on their own. They may have been an all-star once or twice in their career. Players in this list are guys like:
Typically, they won't be perennial all-stars yet, or if they are older players: may have had one to three years where they one a couple awards, but that is it.
Elite:
These guys are generally, on a deep team: top 6 forwards, top 3 d-men, 'average' starters, and on weak teams: top liners and number 1 and/or 2 dmen. Usually older guys.... for their younger contemporaries get bumped to the above lists for accomplishing the same feats 5-10 years earlier than them.
So this in my opinion, is a rough breakdown of the different status' of great players in our game. IMO this list is constantly fluctuating and evolving. Consistency nets you higher regard, as does all-star appearances over a career, votes for awards, etc. Guys who have had maybe 1-2 breakout seasons are not necessarily thrown into higher categories *yet*. In some cases, you could make an argument for a guy like Kovalchuk to be a franchise player, or that a guy like Souray is merely *elite*.
To sum up, Hemsky is at the 'star' level of player. He is the best forward on our team, and at only 25, I expect to see him gunning at 80-90 points per year for the foreseeable future. Like the argument with Nash, *if only he had better linemates....this and that.* works against him. Hemsky and Nash both have holes in their game which stop them from reaching super-stardom and franchise levels. But I fully expect both of them to be on that next list within 1-2 years.
Id argue superstar is pretty close to franchise player. Spezza and savard arent superstars. They are stars. Superstar=name some hockey outsiders would know. Aka top 5 players mostly. Brodeur, Roy, etc. Kipper as a superstar. He sucked the last 2 years...
Franchise player: Someone who can carry the team on their back and win many games all by themselves. 10 forwards (Ovechkin,Malkin,Crosby,Iginla,Thornton,Lecavalier ,Kovalchuk,Zetterberg,Heatley,
Datsyuk) 5 Defenseman (Lidstrom,Pronger,Chara,Niedermayer, Zubov) 3 Goalies(Luongo,Brodeur,Lundqvist)
A superstar is just below that level. A Forward who can score 80-90 Points. A defenseman who can get Top nominations for the Norris Trophy, a Goalie who really stands out in the league but is not part of the best.
Franchise player: Someone who can carry the team on their back and win many games all by themselves. 10 forwards (Ovechkin,Malkin,Crosby,Iginla,Thornton,Lecavalier ,Kovalchuk,Zetterberg,Heatley,
Datsyuk) 5 Defenseman (Lidstrom,Pronger,Chara,Niedermayer, Zubov) 3 Goalies(Luongo,Brodeur,Lundqvist)
A superstar is just below that level. A Forward who can score 80-90 Points. A defenseman who can get Top nominations for the Norris Trophy, a Goalie who really stands out in the league but is not part of the best.
Before Hemsky got injured this season he was on pace for almost 30 goals and around 55 assists for 85 points. So I don't think it's unreasonable that he can never reach something close to that status. What defines superstar? It's such a ridiculous term anyway.
I'd like it explained to me how at 25 some actually believe Hemsky has reached his peak potential? He's been improving every year and he's taken another step this season.
Before Hemsky got injured this season he was on pace for almost 30 goals and around 55 assists for 85 points. So I don't think it's unreasonable that he can never reach something close to that status. What defines superstar? It's such a ridiculous term anyway.
Hard to define superstar but 85 points as a winger over a full season certainly wouldn't constitute it.
Before Hemsky got injured this season he was on pace for almost 30 goals and around 55 assists for 85 points. So I don't think it's unreasonable that he can never reach something close to that status. What defines superstar? It's such a ridiculous term anyway.
I'd like it explained to me how at 25 some actually believe Hemsky has reached his peak potential? He's been improving every year and he's taken another step this season.
85 points mean nothing for a "superstar". For me, there are only about 10 players in the league who are superstars, and no disrespect to Hemsky, but he's just not at that level. To be a superstar, you have to score [obviously], but also be a factor game in and out [somehow] and do that consistenly.
Also, 05-06 to 06-07, did he improve, in your opinion?
What if he did it while playing with a fridge and a third line center?
Still no "superstar" Jagr was a superstar, Ovechkin is a superstar. Hemsky will never be on that sort of level. Superstars don't have excuses about line mates to elevate them to that "superstar" status.
85 points mean nothing for a "superstar". For me, there are only about 10 players in the league who are superstars, and no disrespect to Hemsky, but he's just not at that level. To be a superstar, you have to score [obviously], but also be a factor game in and out [somehow] and do that consistenly.
Also, 05-06 to 06-07, did he improve, in your opinion?
Points isn't the end all be all in my opinion. 05-06 - 06-07, yes - I would say Hemsky improved in many aspects of his game. That season IIRC was an injury riddled one for Hemsky but yet I did see many marked improvements in his game.
This season Hemsky is a game changer almost every night for the Edmonton Oilers, he is their offense and he creates on average 3 or 4 excellent chances a game by himself for the team.
Superstar is a term that holds no water to me anyway; it's a term that harbors a different opinion from everybody as evidenced by this thread. Hemsky may not be a 'superstar' but I do know he is incredibly underrated outside of Edmonton.
Last edited by Klaus*: 01-19-2009 at 10:41 PM.
Reason: spelling
I don't think he'll ever be one of the leagues most elite players. Ovechkin, Iginla, Crosby, Malkin ect...
I do think he is a star player though. He's a good enough hockey player that he can take a game over and dominate.
He's continued to get better since the lockout. He's a better hockey player now than he was last year, I don't know why he'd stop getting better. He's only 25 years old.
Still no "superstar" Jagr was a superstar, Ovechkin is a superstar. Hemsky will never be on that sort of level. Superstars don't have excuses about line mates to elevate them to that "superstar" status.
Put Hemsky in the South East division and were not having this conversation IMO.
__________________
George McPhee....The Teflon GM. 15 years of failure and counting....
6 - Number of playoff series the Capitals have won since George McPhee took over as General Manager in 1997 (which makes him the third-longest-tenured GM in the League), three of which came in McPhee's first season on the job.
I think he's reached the All Star level. Had it not been for Souray having probably the best overall season of his career and that "one guy from each team" rule, Hemsky would probably be going to the game.
