2011-2012 NHL Thread

[Jalili]

Better player:

Malkin > Stamkos

Better asset to build team around:

Stamkos > Malkin

You could substitute Malkin with Crosby as well.

 

[Peter D.]

Imagine if LA could score?

Quick: 32-19-11, 1.96 GAA, .930 SV%, 8 shutouts

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. 

 

[ontariojames]

I could be wrong but I highly doubt Maclean and Shannon were thinking about salary cap and the fact that Malkin has had a bit of injury trouble in his career when answering the question. It seemed to be a more straight forward who is the better  player right now question, the host mentioned Malkin being a complete player and taking the team on his shoulders and Shannon just said Stamkos is a complete player too, neither of them mentioned anything else.

Well, I can't argue too much about a radio segment I didn't hear and that neither of us seem to be entirely sure what it was about. I'm just saying that if the question is building a team around either guy I'd choose Stamkos and pretty easily.

But aside from that, Stamkos makes less because he's not as good, he's never had a 113 points and won the Art Ross and he's never lead his team to a cup and won the Conn Smythe.  Stamkos has a career high 95 points and is on pace for 96 this year, Malking is showing again this year that when he's at his best he's a 113-120 point player, that's a big difference. Stamkos being a 50 goal scorer doesn't make up for the difference in point production ability, people's idea that goal scoring counts for significantly more than overall points is completely illogical anyways.

I don't agree. I think when you have two players of roughly even points then you should give an edge to the better goal scorer. I'm not sure you could put an exact number on it but I think it's fairly significant.

And as to the general point I think that if you factor in their various supporting casts there's probably less of an edge for Malkin then you seem to think.

Well I don't feel like going through the detailed explanation of why I don't think it makes sense to value goals over points so I'll leave that.

Anyways, I'm quite certain by the way the convo went that it was a simple who is better right now or who would you rather on your team right now question and there is no reason to pick Stamkos over Malkin. Judging by their two best seasons Malkin is roughly 20 points better than Stamkos and is a conn smythe winner.

 

[dappleganger]

Sign me up for Malkin. He's a more complete player.

He really can take over a game. Stamkos is more of a pure sniper.

I think most people would take Messier over Hull in their primes even though Hull was probably the premier goal scorer in the NHL from '88-'94.

That's the way I look at it.

 

[Kin]

Well I don't feel like going through the detailed explanation of why I don't think it makes sense to value goals over points so I'll leave that.

Anyways, I'm quite certain by the way the convo went that it was a simple who is better right now or who would you rather on your team right now question and there is no reason to pick Stamkos over Malkin.

Again, those are two different questions. Who would you rather have on your team right now is a question that would take things like age and cap hit and health into account.

But more to the point, there is a very good reason why someone would prefer Stamkos to Malkin in that regard. It's just that you apparently don't feel like going into why you disagree with it.

Judging by their two best seasons Malkin is roughly 20 points better than Stamkos and is a conn smythe winner.

I'm still not sure why on the one hand you insist the question should be strictly about who's better right now and as one of your chief points in Malkin's favour hold up something that he did four seasons ago. That's a comparison that's blatantly unfair to Stamkos. He hasn't been in the league as long and has played on worse teams than Malkin. He hasn't had as much of a chance to rack up meaningful trophies in the past.

 

[Kin]

Sign me up for Malkin. He's a more complete player.

He really can take over a game. Stamkos is more of a pure sniper.

I think most people would take Messier over Hull in their primes even though Hull was probably the premier goal scorer in the NHL from '88-'94.

But on it's face that's a comparison that doesn't hold a lick of water here. The reason people would take Messier over Hull in their primes would be because of the non-scoring things Messier brought over Hull. Things like grit, face-offs and, ugh, leadership. Does Malkin have the edge over Stamkos in any of those things? Neither guy is much for taking face-offs, neither guy is acknowledged as their team's leader and Stamkos plays a much more physical game, being credited with four times as many hits as Malkin.

Messier, it could legitimately be argued, was a more well-rounded player than Hull. Malkin does not seem to hold that edge over Stamkos. I can't pretend to speak authoritatively as to their abilities defensively but Stamkos, as mentioned, is a more physical player and the one who's gotten a little bit of PK time this year.

 

[Madferret]

As the season starts to wrap up I guess we can expect some dismissals in the near future - I'd imagine Sutter (CGY), Noel, Boucher have all got some unpleasant exit interviews on the horizon. Anyone else?

 

[Peter D.]

As the season starts to wrap up I guess we can expect some dismissals in the near future - I'd imagine Sutter (CGY), Noel, Boucher have all got some unpleasant exit interviews on the horizon. Anyone else?

I think Noel will be given a reprieve for this year.

I'd add Renney, Sacco and McLellan (if the Sharks don't make the playoffs).  I presume Cunneyworth is a given.

 

[Madferret]

As the season starts to wrap up I guess we can expect some dismissals in the near future - I'd imagine Sutter (CGY), Noel, Boucher have all got some unpleasant exit interviews on the horizon. Anyone else?

I think Noel will be given a reprieve for this year.

I'd add Renney, Sacco and McLellan (if the Sharks don't make the playoffs).  I presume Cunneyworth is a given.

I don't think I can handle another year of Noel's post game moan-fests.

 

[bustaheims]

I think Noel will be given a reprieve for this year.

I'd add Renney, Sacco and McLellan (if the Sharks don't make the playoffs).  I presume Cunneyworth is a given.

Sacco looks like he might safe into next season.

http://www.denverpost.com/avalanche/ci_20274141/joe-sacco-greg-sherman-will-return-avalanche-next

Sacco and general manager Greg Sherman will return in their respective roles for the 2012-13 season, NHL sources said Wednesday.

Sacco is in the final year of a three-year contract, but he is expected to sign an extension at least through next season once this season is over.

 

[bustaheims]

As the season starts to wrap up I guess we can expect some dismissals in the near future - I'd imagine Sutter (CGY), Noel, Boucher have all got some unpleasant exit interviews on the horizon. Anyone else?

I know it's his first season behind the bench, but Mike Yeo could be another candidate for dismissal. Also, even though it's not an end of the season thing, if the Canucks don't go deep into the playoffs, Vingeault is probably done as well.

 

[Kin]

Sacco looks like he might safe into next season.

http://www.denverpost.com/avalanche/ci_20274141/joe-sacco-greg-sherman-will-return-avalanche-next

Sacco and general manager Greg Sherman will return in their respective roles for the 2012-13 season, NHL sources said Wednesday.

Sacco is in the final year of a three-year contract, but he is expected to sign an extension at least through next season once this season is over.

I think that's pretty fair. A lot of the talk before the season was how the pick they traded to Washington might end up being the #1 overall. Even though the Caps fell apart to actually have taken the Avalanche above the Caps is a pretty legit job by him.

 

[Madferret]

As the season starts to wrap up I guess we can expect some dismissals in the near future - I'd imagine Sutter (CGY), Noel, Boucher have all got some unpleasant exit interviews on the horizon. Anyone else?

I know it's his first season behind the bench, but Mike Yeo could be another candidate for dismissal. Also, even though it's not an end of the season thing, if the Canucks don't go deep into the playoffs, Vingeault is probably done as well.

It's a cruel league.

 

[ontariojames]

Well I don't feel like going through the detailed explanation of why I don't think it makes sense to value goals over points so I'll leave that.

Anyways, I'm quite certain by the way the convo went that it was a simple who is better right now or who would you rather on your team right now question and there is no reason to pick Stamkos over Malkin.

Again, those are two different questions. Who would you rather have on your team right now is a question that would take things like age and cap hit and health into account.

But more to the point, there is a very good reason why someone would prefer Stamkos to Malkin in that regard. It's just that you apparently don't feel like going into why you disagree with it.

Judging by their two best seasons Malkin is roughly 20 points better than Stamkos and is a conn smythe winner.

I'm still not sure why on the one hand you insist the question should be strictly about who's better right now and as one of your chief points in Malkin's favour hold up something that he did four seasons ago. That's a comparison that's blatantly unfair to Stamkos. He hasn't been in the league as long and has played on worse teams than Malkin. He hasn't had as much of a chance to rack up meaningful trophies in the past.

Not if when you're asking who would you rather have right now you literally mean right now and aren't taking into consideration a few years from now. As i said, I really don't think they were thinking about all those things when asking the question.

You're saying Malkin showing he can be dominate in the playoffs shouldn't be taken into consideration when he's still in his mid twenties and has shown he's every bit the player he's ever been and when we have no diea if Stamkos will ever be dominate in the playoffs like that?

 

[Kin]

Not if when you're asking who would you rather have right now you literally mean right now

That doesn't make a ton of sense. If a guy's on your team right now issues of health, contract and age still exist.

You're saying Malkin showing he can be dominate in the playoffs shouldn't be taken into consideration when he's still in his mid twenties and has shown he's every bit the player he's ever been and when we have no diea if Stamkos will ever be dominate in the playoffs like that?

No, I'm saying that the question is either right now or it isn't. You don't get to have it both ways.

 

[ontariojames]

Not if when you're asking who would you rather have right now you literally mean right now

That doesn't make a ton of sense. If a guy's on your team right now issues of health, contract and age still exist.

You're saying Malkin showing he can be dominate in the playoffs shouldn't be taken into consideration when he's still in his mid twenties and has shown he's every bit the player he's ever been and when we have no diea if Stamkos will ever be dominate in the playoffs like that?

No, I'm saying that the question is either right now or it isn't. You don't get to have it both ways.

Malkin is healthy, is on pace to only miss 7 games, is only 25, and only makes 1.2 mil more than Stamkos. If the question is who do you want right now to help you win a cup I don't see how you don't go with the 113 point big center who has shown he can dominate in the playoffs over a guy who we have no idea if he'll ever dominate like that in the playoffs and in the one playoffs he's been in was rather underwhelming.

 

[Kin]

Malkin is healthy, is on pace to only miss 7 games, is only 25, and only makes 1.2 mil more than Stamkos.

Stamkos is 22(42 months younger than Malkin), makes less and, unlike Malkin, hasn't missed 61 games over the last 3 seasons.

If the question is who do you want right now to help you win a cup I don't see how you don't go with the 113 point big center who has shown he can dominate in the playoffs over a guy who we have no idea if he'll ever dominate like that in the playoffs and in the one playoffs he's been in was rather underwhelming.

Stamkos is the better goal scorer, a more physical player and is putting up the numbers he's putting up on a worse team.

As to the playoff question we've seen more of Malkin not dominating in the playoffs than we've seen him do it. If we're asking ourselves "Will these guys be great in the playoffs" the reality is that the answer is more or less the same. With Malkin it's "He might, he's done it before but his record in that regard is pretty spotty" and with Stamkos it's "He could. He's certainly good enough but he hasn't yet". Both guys records the last time they were in the playoffs are pretty similar.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Good article outlining the players who have trained with Gary Roberts, and some up-and-comers....

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/45945-Kennedy-Cody-Hodgson-due-for-breakout-season-in-201213.html

 

[L K]

Crosby with another 4 point game but had a big scare taking a puck to the face.

 

[seahawk]

Crosby with another 4 point game but had a big scare taking a puck to the face.

Another one? I saw in the paper this morning that he missed almost 1/2 a period against the Islanders.