HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

The Calder race should be a two horse race

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-17-2004, 07:57 PM
  #76
Liquidrage*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tallahassee
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan-of-#9
I wonder if Pitkanen plays against Thornton's line, Sakic's line, Naslund's line, etc.

It's pretty hard to get many minuses on a great team playing 13:00 mins at even-strength per contest.

Let me assure you of one thing...if Pitkanen played against the foes that Hamhuis does 20:00 mins even-strength per game his +/- would be just as bad....actually way worse IMO.
No. You're missing the point. Pitkanen LEADS the Flyers in +/-.
If it was easy to do that, everyone on the Flyers would lead the team. And that just wouldn't make much sense would it?
You'd think with as good a team as the Flyers have that some of the better players that play many more minutes would have much higher +/-'s? But they don't. Pitkanen leads the team. Your husband's near the bottom of his team. That is meaningfull to a degree.

As for your matchup. Thats crap. Matchups for defenseman happen much less often then forwards. They do happen, but not as much. And if Pitkanen was bad defensively in away games he'd just get matched up against by the other teams better lines anways and it would all even out. Again, it's not a forward you just can't easily get defenseman off the ice. And yes, Pitkanen plays against all the other teams tops lines. In fact, I've seen every Flyers game this year except one (because I was in the car on route to an away game of theirs at the time) and I've never once heard or noticed Hitch matching defenseman. He's seen plenty of time against the other teams best.


Let me assure you of many things. One of them being that last time you talked in absolutes you were flat out wrong. Another one being that this time as you talk in absolutes you have nothing to back up your claim but your opinion, an opinion which appears to be nothing but that of a very big homer.

Liquidrage* is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:04 PM
  #77
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquidrage
an opinion which appears to be nothing but that of a very big homer.

you realize he's not a Predators fan, right?

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:12 PM
  #78
Fan-of-#9
Registered User
 
Fan-of-#9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquidrage
No. You're missing the point. Pitkanen LEADS the Flyers in +/-.
If it was easy to do that, everyone on the Flyers would lead the team. And that just wouldn't make much sense would it?
You'd think with as good a team as the Flyers have that some of the better players that play many more minutes would have much higher +/-'s? But they don't. Pitkanen leads the team. Your husband's near the bottom of his team. That is meaningfull to a degree.

As for your matchup. Thats crap. Matchups for defenseman happen much less often then forwards. They do happen, but not as much. And if Pitkanen was bad defensively in away games he'd just get matched up against by the other teams better lines anways and it would all even out. Again, it's not a forward you just can't easily get defenseman off the ice. And yes, Pitkanen plays against all the other teams tops lines. In fact, I've seen every Flyers game this year except one (because I was in the car on route to an away game of theirs at the time) and I've never once heard or noticed Hitch matching defenseman. He's seen plenty of time against the other teams best.


Let me assure you of many things. One of them being that last time you talked in absolutes you were flat out wrong. Another one being that this time as you talk in absolutes you have nothing to back up your claim but your opinion, an opinion which appears to be nothing but that of a very big homer.
Let me explain something to you. I'm a Sabres fan. I am a fan of hockey. I'm not a fan of Dan Hamhuis specifically. Go to the 1st page of this thread and look a my TOP 5 for the Calder....that's proof kid.

Matchups are a key coaching stategy, maybe not for Pitkanen because his role is minimal, except on the PP. Dan Hamhuis plays against top lines each and every night...that's his job.

If you inserted Pitkanen into the Preds lineup to replace Hamhuis, and play against the opposition's most dangerous offensive players, the Preds would not be in the playoff hunt right now...IMO..that's right kid....IMO.

Fan-of-#9 is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 08:52 PM
  #79
Patty Roy
Registered User
 
Patty Roy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
Zetterberg got squat time compared to Ryder. He had 44 points on Detroit-a stacked team. With Fedorov and his constant complaints about ice time, do you honestly think a rookie would get that much OT? Plus Jackman was a + 23. Which is outstanding for a rookie defenseman.
Maybe you need to check your numbers before you make a statement like that.

Zetterberg 2002-03 ice time - 16:18
Ryder 2003-04 ice time - 16:03

The only thing that the original poster in this thread got right is the fact that this years Calder race is a two horse race....Raycroft vs. Ryder.

Patty Roy is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 09:00 PM
  #80
NewGuy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
Zetterberg got squat time compared to Ryder. He had 44 points on Detroit-a stacked team. With Fedorov and his constant complaints about ice time, do you honestly think a rookie would get that much OT?
Just the stats

2002/03 Zetterberg Average Time On Ice: 16:18
2003/04 Ryder Average Time On Ice: 16:03

NewGuy is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 09:03 PM
  #81
#44_delivers
Registered User
 
#44_delivers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
Zetterberg got squat time compared to Ryder. He had 44 points on Detroit-a stacked team. With Fedorov and his constant complaints about ice time, do you honestly think a rookie would get that much OT? Plus Jackman was a + 23. Which is outstanding for a rookie defenseman.

this is a very funny post

#44_delivers is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 09:22 PM
  #82
Liquidrage*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tallahassee
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan-of-#9
Let me explain something to you. I'm a Sabres fan. I am a fan of hockey. I'm not a fan of Dan Hamhuis specifically. Go to the 1st page of this thread and look a my TOP 5 for the Calder....that's proof kid.

Matchups are a key coaching stategy, maybe not for Pitkanen because his role is minimal, except on the PP. Dan Hamhuis plays against top lines each and every night...that's his job.

If you inserted Pitkanen into the Preds lineup to replace Hamhuis, and play against the opposition's most dangerous offensive players, the Preds would not be in the playoff hunt right now...IMO..that's right kid....IMO.

Do you have anything besides offering your opinion as if it were fact and then whinning when people don't agree with it?

I will say this for you. Your ability to couple baseless assertions with trash talking is amazing.

Liquidrage* is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 09:28 PM
  #83
Fan-of-#9
Registered User
 
Fan-of-#9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquidrage
Do you have anything besides offering your opinion as if it were fact and then whinning when people don't agree with it?

I will say this for you. Your ability to couple baseless assertions with trash talking is amazing.
How are my assertions baseless compared to yours?

I guess you're just outmatched on this topic...that's all.

Fan-of-#9 is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 09:49 PM
  #84
Liquidrage*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tallahassee
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan-of-#9
How are my assertions baseless compared to yours?

I guess you're just outmatched on this topic...that's all.
They are baseless because you say things like
Quote:
Why does he play the least amount of minutes out of all Flyers Defensemen?

I'll answer that for you.

He needs a lot of work on his defensive game.
Which was wrong as I pointed out. Not that everyone couldn't work on their game. But that isn't the reason.

They are baseless because you say things like
Quote:
If you inserted Pitkanen into the Preds lineup to replace Hamhuis, and play against the opposition's most dangerous offensive players, the Preds would not be in the playoff hunt right now

They are baseless because you say things like
Quote:
It's pretty hard to get many minuses on a great team playing 13:00 mins at even-strength per contest
Let me assure you of one thing...if Pitkanen played against the foes that Hamhuis does 20:00 mins even-strength per game his +/- would be just as bad....actually way worse
and

Quote:
Matchups are a key coaching stategy, maybe not for Pitkanen because his role is minimal, except on the PP. Dan Hamhuis plays against top lines each and every night...that's his job.
When clearly there was no attempt to compare +/- across teams and I said as much. But instead compared them to other teamates.

And you still have no clue about matching up and defensemen. Defenseman don't match up like forwards. Their is some matching up with defenseman on forwards. But it's not as much. Why? Because it's not easy to get defensman on or off the ice and defenseman take longer shifts but less of them which means they overlap forward groups anyways. If what you think was true then you'd be missing that other teams top lines would avoid Hamhuis/target Pitkanen when they were home and it would all even out anyways. But it's not. Taking a lot about matching up defenseman is worthless.

You're just like the other guy. You want to ignore stats and facts and argue soley based on your opinion. It's fine to have an opinion. But you want to argue them.

Liquidrage* is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 09:54 PM
  #85
Higgy4
Registered User
 
Higgy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,548
vCash: 500
WHO CARES??? Its just a trophy. I think this years rookie crop is simply fantastic. The fact that there are so many names tossed around as the Calder winner is a testament to the amount of great, young players that are coming into the league.

Last year was a 2 horse race (Jackman, Zetterberg). This year, arguments could be made for over 10 guys.

Why do these threads have to be so nit-picky and argumentative?

Geesh!

Higgy4 is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:23 PM
  #86
Fan-of-#9
Registered User
 
Fan-of-#9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquidrage
They are baseless because you say things like


Which was wrong as I pointed out. Not that everyone couldn't work on their game. But that isn't the reason.

They are baseless because you say things like



They are baseless because you say things like


and



When clearly there was no attempt to compare +/- across teams and I said as much. But instead compared them to other teamates.

And you still have no clue about matching up and defensemen. Defenseman don't match up like forwards. Their is some matching up with defenseman on forwards. But it's not as much. Why? Because it's not easy to get defensman on or off the ice and defenseman take longer shifts but less of them which means they overlap forward groups anyways. If what you think was true then you'd be missing that other teams top lines would avoid Hamhuis/target Pitkanen when they were home and it would all even out anyways. But it's not. Taking a lot about matching up defenseman is worthless.

You're just like the other guy. You want to ignore stats and facts and argue soley based on your opinion. It's fine to have an opinion. But you want to argue them.
I like how you didn't finish some of my sentences in the quotes to try and make me look like an idiot, but I couldn't care less anyways. When I give an opinion I state that it's my opinion. You have not brought one fact to the table...you speak as if you have clearly brought all the facts to the table and I'm responding with baseless opinion. My opinion is not of great importance, but this is some theory involved.

I'm not arguing that I think Hamhuis is better or that he deserves the Calder, I'm arguing because you tried to claim that Pitkanen was better defensively...and you were wrong...watch Hamhuis if you want proof or facts, because I ain't got any to support it. It's the truth.

I have easily agreed that Pitkanen is the better of the 2 offensively. I think you are having trouble agreeing that Hamhuis is better defensively.

With this:

Quote:
If you inserted Pitkanen into the Preds lineup to replace Hamhuis, and play against the opposition's most dangerous offensive players, the Preds would not be in the playoff hunt right now...IMO..
I'm not sure what you don't understand about that, but what I mean is that if Philly traded Pitkanen to Nashville for Hamhuis, and had him play over 20:00 a game in all situations, going up against the other team's top units, Nashville would not be as good. Not because Hamhuis is an overall better Dman, but because Pitkanen is not able to play that role on a team as well as Hamhuis does this year for Nashville.

And if you think Pitkanen would be a +16 on Nashville as a #1-2 D-man you're loco chico.

Fan-of-#9 is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:27 PM
  #87
Gator Mike
 
Gator Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Woburn, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,978
vCash: 500
This entire thread is irrelevant, because if the voting were held today, it would be a one horse race...

Ryder and Hunter and Pitkanen and Hamhuis have all had fine rookie seasons.

But barring a major flop in his last eight games, Andrew Raycroft should arguably receive consideration for the Calder, Vezina, and Hart Trophies.

Gator Mike is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:31 PM
  #88
Malakhov
Registered User
 
Malakhov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Martinique
Posts: 3,430
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Malakhov
Quote:
I just give more weight to being exceptional in net or on defense as a rookie.
Quit the contrary for me, I give absolutely no weight to being expeptional in net as a rookie. Too many 1 year seasons in the past for goalies.

People thought they were the second coming then next year they weren't even playing regular.

Malakhov is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:46 PM
  #89
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by #44_delivers

this is a very funny post
Why? Jackman deserved that trophy. There are too many circumstances to tell whether one player is better than another. Right now, I will admit I was wrong, and in comparison of rookie seasons, I would say Ryder is better. I know its generally easier for Canadian players to make the transition to the NHL than it is for European players. Look at Naslund. He didn't get his start for a while there. But who knows. Zetterberg could turn out to be a passing wave and Ryder could turn into a bonafide superstar a la Forsberg or even Lemieux. One can never tell.

detredWINgs is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:46 PM
  #90
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Another Preds fan here: Hamhuis has looked marvelous recently. You can't compare his numbers with Liles or Pitkanen. Hamhuis recieves quite a bit less PP time (Where offensive Dmen get the bulk of their points) than either (100 total minutes less than Pitkanen and 36 less than Liles). Now the lack of PP ice time doesn't mean that Hamhuis is a slouch offensively. Far from it. It's a small list of Dmen that would see more PP time on the Preds than what Hamhuis has so far (and that lists doesn't include Joni or Liles). They just aren't going to supplant Zids and Timonen, one of the top duos on the PP. Hamhuis has that ceiling he can't breakthrough just yet. Plus, we rely on him as one of our top PKers. That and recently, he's been used against lines centered by players like Morrisson and Thornton. You don't rack up too many points trying to stop Thornton and make up for the mistakes of your D partner (whether it's Zids or York, neither has shined in a defensive role this year).

That being said, I think Pitkanen is better than Hamhuis. But the difference isn't nearly as big as those here would believe. Hype is a powerful thing. And Martin and Liles? Please...

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:50 PM
  #91
detredWINgs
Registered User
 
detredWINgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
Another Preds fan here: Hamhuis has looked marvelous recently. You can't compare his numbers with Liles or Pitkanen. Hamhuis recieves quite a bit less PP time (Where offensive Dmen get the bulk of their points) than either (100 total minutes less than Pitkanen and 36 less than Liles). Now the lack of PP ice time doesn't mean that Hamhuis is a slouch offensively. Far from it. It's a small list of Dmen that would see more PP time on the Preds than what Hamhuis has so far (and that lists doesn't include Joni or Liles). They just aren't going to supplant Zids and Timonen, one of the top duos on the PP. Hamhuis has that ceiling he can't breakthrough just yet. Plus, we rely on him as one of our top PKers. That and recently, he's been used against lines centered by players like Morrisson and Thornton. You don't rack up too many points trying to stop Thornton and make up for the mistakes of your D partner (whether it's Zids or York, neither has shined in a defensive role this year).

That being said, I think Pitkanen is better than Hamhuis. But the difference isn't nearly as big as those here would believe. Hype is a powerful thing. And Martin and Liles? Please...

Consider this. You say Hamhuis will not be substituted for Zidlicky and Timonen. Well, J.M. Liles is on the PP and he has to compete with Blake and Foote, defenseman who are significantly better than Zids and Timo. I think it would be a compliment to put a rookie on the PP when you could be putting Blake or Foote out there instead. Just a thought

detredWINgs is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 10:53 PM
  #92
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
Consider this. You say Hamhuis will not be substituted for Zidlicky and Timonen. Well, J.M. Liles is on the PP and he has to compete with Blake and Foote, defenseman who are significantly better than Zids and Timo. I think it would be a compliment to put a rookie on the PP when you could be putting Blake or Foote out there instead. Just a thought
I consider both Timonen and Zidlicky quite a bit better than Foote when it comes to the PP. Foote would be a 2nd string PP Dman on the Preds as well.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
03-17-2004, 11:00 PM
  #93
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
I consider both Timonen and Zidlicky quite a bit better than Foote when it comes to the PP. Foote would be a 2nd string PP Dman on the Preds as well.

and both blake and foote have missed considerable amounts of time due to injury.

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 01:40 AM
  #94
boz
Altitude Fan
 
boz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Country: Australia
Posts: 445
vCash: 500
i would take J-M Liles over Hamhuis..jus because he plays on a better team then hamhuis doesnt mean hes leeching of all the stars...
Liles although not as good as hamhuis in the d is very steady at the back end and his play in the last 10-15 games has stepped up dramatically.. ppl must not forget that this is the guy that made skoula AND morris expendable...thats a pretty big achievement if u ask me.

boz is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 01:41 AM
  #95
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by boz
i would take J-M Liles over Hamhuis..jus because he plays on a better team then hamhuis doesnt mean hes leeching of all the stars...
Liles although not as good as hamhuis in the d is very steady at the back end and his play in the last 10-15 games has stepped up dramatically.. ppl must not forget that this is the guy that made skoula AND morris expendable...thats a pretty big achievement if u ask me.

and hamhuis made skrastins expendable.

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 01:44 AM
  #96
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,116
vCash: 500
also, Liles stats:

7 23 30

that's one more goal and 8 more assists from a defenseman who gets more PP time on a team that scores more goals...a defenseman that's offense is what makes him a good guy to have. hamhuis's offensive numbers are comparable enough...but his defensive play is light-years better than Liles. there's a poll over on the poll board that pretty much resolved the hamhuis vs liles dispute.

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 02:18 AM
  #97
#44_delivers
Registered User
 
#44_delivers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
Why? Jackman deserved that trophy. There are too many circumstances to tell whether one player is better than another. Right now, I will admit I was wrong, and in comparison of rookie seasons, I would say Ryder is better. I know its generally easier for Canadian players to make the transition to the NHL than it is for European players. Look at Naslund. He didn't get his start for a while there. But who knows. Zetterberg could turn out to be a passing wave and Ryder could turn into a bonafide superstar a la Forsberg or even Lemieux. One can never tell.
agreed 100%

#44_delivers is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 03:50 AM
  #98
thedjpd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,680
vCash: 500
Is anybody else as sick and tired as I am of the "what if" arguments?

"What if Hamhuis played on the Flyers, he'd have a lot more points."

"What if Pitkanen played on the Preds, his +/- would be a lot worse."

"What if their roles were reversed, I guarantee Pitkanen wouldn't be as good" or vice versa.

Honestly, I agree with them to an extent, but the double standard is astounding. Players like Tanguay and Hejduk are leeches because they play on a good team; however, players like Iginla are excused for poor production because they're not on a team as good.

Truthfully, I couldn't care less about what team they are on. All I care about is production. If they produce, and do so consistently, I'm happy and will concede that they are a good player. Otherwise, I'm not so easily convinced.

Again, those arguments are valid to an extent, but it seems as if certain players are punished for being on a good team and others are being praised for being on a bad team. That's really stupid, and this thread is an absolutely perfect example.

I'm so tired of the what if arguments. Blah blah. Who cares? It's all about production. Are they producing or not. That's the key. Luongo is on a terrible team, and it's obvious he's doing his part.

Bottom line: Great players make the team competitive.

Not to mention other fallacious assumptions that are repeated ad nauseum. Whoever said Pitkanen is bad defensively, or is miles behind Hamhuis, just made an absolutely foolish statement. I'm sorry, but it is. Hamhuis *MAY* be better, and I don't know if he is or not, but they are close. There's a reason Pitkanen is considered a potential franchise D. Hamhuis may one day be a #1, but a franchise one, doubtful.

But of course, since Pitkanen is hyped so much, everybody that watches him play and notices the same things is just "giving in to the hype." Lord knows they can't do perhaps what you've done with Hamhuis and form their own opinion? In addition, since Hamhuis hasn't been hyped as much, he's automatically underrated. Perhaps he's not deserving of it? It works both ways.


Last edited by thedjpd: 03-18-2004 at 03:56 AM.
thedjpd is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 06:24 AM
  #99
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs
Zetterberg got squat time compared to Ryder. He had 44 points on Detroit-a stacked team. With Fedorov and his constant complaints about ice time, do you honestly think a rookie would get that much OT? Plus Jackman was a + 23. Which is outstanding for a rookie defenseman.
Others already dealt with the ice time issue, but even if it were true, it makes no difference. Rookie of the Year is about what you do on the ice. If your team sticks you on the fourth line, sticks you in the minors, sticks you in the pressbox, you can't win. Regardless of how much talent you have.

It doesn't matter what the reason was, Zetterberg was unable to perform well enough to win.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
03-18-2004, 08:58 AM
  #100
Fan-of-#9
Registered User
 
Fan-of-#9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedjpd
Is anybody else as sick and tired as I am of the "what if" arguments?

"What if Hamhuis played on the Flyers, he'd have a lot more points."

"What if Pitkanen played on the Preds, his +/- would be a lot worse."

"What if their roles were reversed, I guarantee Pitkanen wouldn't be as good" or vice versa.

Honestly, I agree with them to an extent, but the double standard is astounding. Players like Tanguay and Hejduk are leeches because they play on a good team; however, players like Iginla are excused for poor production because they're not on a team as good.

Truthfully, I couldn't care less about what team they are on. All I care about is production. If they produce, and do so consistently, I'm happy and will concede that they are a good player. Otherwise, I'm not so easily convinced.

Again, those arguments are valid to an extent, but it seems as if certain players are punished for being on a good team and others are being praised for being on a bad team. That's really stupid, and this thread is an absolutely perfect example.

I'm so tired of the what if arguments. Blah blah. Who cares? It's all about production. Are they producing or not. That's the key. Luongo is on a terrible team, and it's obvious he's doing his part.

Bottom line: Great players make the team competitive.

Not to mention other fallacious assumptions that are repeated ad nauseum. Whoever said Pitkanen is bad defensively, or is miles behind Hamhuis, just made an absolutely foolish statement. I'm sorry, but it is. Hamhuis *MAY* be better, and I don't know if he is or not, but they are close. There's a reason Pitkanen is considered a potential franchise D. Hamhuis may one day be a #1, but a franchise one, doubtful.

But of course, since Pitkanen is hyped so much, everybody that watches him play and notices the same things is just "giving in to the hype." Lord knows they can't do perhaps what you've done with Hamhuis and form their own opinion? In addition, since Hamhuis hasn't been hyped as much, he's automatically underrated. Perhaps he's not deserving of it? It works both ways.
It doesn't seem like you read the thread, considering some of your comments. This thread is not about who produces more points. That argument can be determined by looking at the stats sheet.

Hamhuis and Pitkanen are almost on par when it comes to points. The difference is that a) Hamhuis plays a lot more minutes, which favours Pitkanen in a way, but b) Pitkanen gets te majority of his points on the PP, playing wiht future hall of famers...if you don't think that makes a difference in point production..then I guess that's your opinion.

I think the major reason for the arguments is simple, everyone arguing against Hamhuis has not seen more than 1-2 Preds games this year...if that's the case, stop arguing because you have ho basis for any claims against him...offensively or defensively.

And yes, IF Pitkanen was on Nashville he WOULD NOT be a +18....that's as close as you can get to being a factual statement.

Fan-of-#9 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:01 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.