I don't understand your Either/Or arguement between Bure and Dione.
The whole conversation began with my assertion of "many useless 50 goals scorers throughout the history of the NHL" that many here have taken umbrage with.
I've been reading this conversation, and trying to really understand your point of a "useless 50 goal scorer." I think the refrences to retired players is a waste, they're all different players and to compare today's forwards to yesterdays forwards isn't fair or accurate imo. If a 50 goal scorer is useless, which the title itself leads just about everyone but you to believe otherwise, I'm all ears as to what useful is. If your team doesn't score goals, you don't win.. you realize that, of course. So, I think just about everyone disagrees with your logic. I would imagine Crosby, Ovechkin, and of course Parise are all useless too huh? I really think your choice of words here are horrific.. he's not useless - what I think your trying to say is he's not good at battling in the defensive zone. I believe if you reworded your ideas this way, you'd have a few more people agreeing with you, instead of thinking your wacked out.
i think the difference is, Kovalchuk can be what he is...a sniper. we have more than enough capable players that can pick up the slack in the areas of the game that he lacks. he didnt have that in Atlanta.