hockeyfan1
New member
L K said:
...and his 600th career point, all at the young age of 24.
Way to go, Sidney!
2011-2012 NHL Thread
- Thread starter Leafaholic99
- Start date
...and his 600th career point, all at the young age of 24.
Way to go, Sidney!
dappleganger
Active member
Saint Nik said:
Hey Nik, I'm not making an argument, just the way I see the two players.
I think Malkin is like a modern day Messier. Everything you say about Messier I feel about Malkin. I think Malkin plays with a lot of grit and is more well rounded than Stamkos... makes players around him better and all that jazz.
Let's not discredit his conn smythe and upcoming hart trophy too much.
hockeyfan1 said:
Thanks for that article. It was interesting. I would have to say though, it is very hard to infer much about how good Gary Roberts actually is without more data -- just cherry picking the results of the top-end clients who have succeeded doesn't give an accurate picture of what "normally" happens when a client sees him. I'd like to see the scoring rate *all* his clients before and after as well as their age. Then we could could compare the results to players of a similar age and scoring ability who don't see Roberts.
dappleganger
Active member
Saint Nik said:
No, It's true! I do think that Nik. You're "He's not as good at faceoffs" argument didn't sway me.
I agree with you that Malkin isn't as special as Mark. Kinda in the same way Crosby isn't as special as Lemieux.
Who would you say is a Messier clone playing today?
Kin
New member
dm_for_pm said:
But Malkin isn't remotely the same kind of player. He's credited with 25 hits this year. That's less than Tim Connolly for instance.
dm_for_pm said:
The guy who immediately jumps out at me, the guy with a similar combination of skills like the grit, the leadership, the peripherals is Toews. Toews isn't super-physical but it's not a bad match. Getzlaf is like that, Mike Richards at his best...guys like that. Malkin is a super talented player offensively but he's not a well rounded guy who's great in all three zones. That to me is Messier.
ontariojames
New member
The point about the age was made because if we are just talking about right now, and not building for a few years down the road, it doesn't matter if Stamkos is younger because Malkin is still only 25 and in the middle of his prime.Saint Nik said:
To say that Stamkos and Malkin's expectancy to be great in the playoffs is about the same is absolutely ridiculous. Malkin has been in the playoffs 4 times, 1 of 4 was when he was a 19 year old rookie and clearly wasn't the same player he is right now and I don't think it's fair to expect a 19 year old rookie to be great in the playoffs in his first NHL season so lets disregard that and look at his last 3 playoffs. One of them was absolutely dominant, one was great, and one he dominated in the first round and then ran into the red hot Halak and the Canadiens who were doing something special that year as an 8th seed that were expected to get dominated by the Caps in the first round and both him and Crosby were shut down in that series. Also, not every great playoff player is going to be great every series or every year. Malkin has shown twice in 3 years when he wasn't a 19 year old rookie that he can come up big in the playoffs.
As far as Malkin playing on a better offensive team, the difference is smaller than it looks. Since Crosby has come back, the Penguins have scored at a much higher rate than normal and if you do the math and figure out how many goals the Penguins would have if they had scored at the same rate before Crosby came back they would be at 251. Malkin has point production has also benefited so if you give him the same ppg pace he was on before Crosby returned he would have 99 points. In that scenario Malkin would have 7 more points Than Stamkos so Malkin has helped contribute 7 more goals than Stamkos to his team, so if you give Stamkos Malkin's production then TB would have 230 goals, only 21 less than Pittsburgh. Also, the biggest factor in offensive support for a player is the linemates they usually play with and Stamkos' usual linemates and Malkin's usual linemates are pretty even. So when you factor that in there's not much difference at all.
So to recap, based on their two best seasons Malkin is averaging 18 more points and has shown he's a good bet to be great in the playoffs, whereas we have no idea if Stamkos were to play in the playoffs right now if he has the ability to be great in the playoffs and based and what we've seen so far hasn't been good. Malkin being 1.2 mil more expensive and having one bad year of injury trouble in a career where he's been pretty healthy shouldn't make anyone want to choose Stamkos over Malkin to win right now.
maplesyrup
New member
dm_for_pm said:
The broke the mold when they made Mess but the closest thing today? I think you have to look at the talented power centres that just do it all. Nowhere near the level Mess was but I see some Mess in Backes. I just love that guy.
Kin
New member
ontariojames said:
But his age is still an asset in the here and now.
ontariojames said:
Actually, what I said was that Malkin plays on a better team, period. Tampa's a little better offensively and much worse defensively. As a general rule, I think the quality of a team lifts the stats of the players on it.
ontariojames said:
That's certainly a factor, maybe the biggest, but you can't discount the impact good defensemen have on a forward line. Leaving alone great offense from defensemen for a second, just having guys who are especially good at clearing the puck are going to move the play into the offensive zone more often, giving the offense a better chance to score. The Tampa defense is a trainwreck.
Along those lines, playing on a bad team means you're more likely to be playing against a team that's protecting a lead. If you're leading the other team is liable to leave themselves open to counterattack as they try to catch up.
ontariojames said:
Those shouldn't be anyone's primary reasons but they do factor in Stamkos' favour. Like I've said, the goal scoring and physical play are probably why I'd give the edge to Stamkos.
Also, I think you're being a little unfair with regards to Stamkos in last year's playoffs. He was good. Not great, but good.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Peter D. said:Potvin29 said:
Has Quick become the Vezina favourite? He is carrying the Kings to the playoffs. He and Miller have been absolute workhorses lately.
Fun fact -- Reimer has the same cap hit as Quick.
Another shutout last night. 10 on the season now (1st overall), 1.89 GAA (2nd overall) , .931 SV% (4th overall), 35 wins (5th overall).
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Just in case your opinion of Charles Wang can't get lower (and let's throw Mike Milbury in too for his wonderful comment): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304023504577319912036433148.html
maplesyrup
New member
What a jerk.
bustaheims
Active member
Peter D. said:Potvin29 said:
Has Quick become the Vezina favourite? He is carrying the Kings to the playoffs. He and Miller have been absolute workhorses lately.
Fun fact -- Reimer has the same cap hit as Quick.
I'd say it's down to him and Lundqvist - their stats are awfully similar, but, my guess is the "East coast bias" and reputation get Lundqvist his first trophy.
