The MANtha watch.....

[kickazz 5,459]

10 minutes ago, Dabura said:

I mostly agree with these assessments. Not surprising, as we seem to agree on most things.

...

Bro is there like a tl;dr to this

[Dabura 12,207]

Just now, kickazz said:

Bro is there like a tl;dr to this

The kids are alright.

[Richdg 267]

Just going through a few things posted by others. We have to remember Svechnikov was hurt to start the season and missed a big part of training camp. It does mess with guys... remember Mantha a couple of years ago?

Rasmussen will be fine in terms of points. No I don't see a 80+ point per year guy. But he is a legit 30 goal 60+ point guy with a good amount of toughness. If he does that year after year we will all be happy.

I could get behind a top 9 like this:

Mantha-Larkin-Tatar

Svechnikov-Rasmussen-need a speed guy here..... Lil Svechnikov would also fit great!

Smith-AA-Frk

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

23 hours ago, PavelValerievichDatsyuk said:

Yeah, Mantha is tha man. Really impressed with him lately. One thing is that he's been pulling off some great moves on defenders 1-on-1. Maybe it's just growing confidence, but we haven't seen as much of that from him. Also, he's stepping up his playmaking game - Just look at that set up for Nielsen last night!

And on his backhand no less. He is turning into something special for sure.

BTW, don't mean to sound like a Danish fanboy here, but I am becoming more pleased with Nielsen as the season goes on. At this rate he will somewhere around like 25ish goals for the season as a 3C. Not too shabby.

Edited November 11, 2017 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[Richdg 267]

7 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

And on his backhand no less. He is turning into something special for sure.

BTW, don't mean to sound like a Danish fanboy here, but I am becoming more pleased with Nielsen as the season goes on. At this rate he will somewhere around like 25ish goals for the season as a 3C. Not too shabby.

You mean now that he is playing at the correct level-as a 3c not a 2c he is doing well?

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, Richdg said:

You mean now that he is playing at the correct level-as a 3c not a 2c he is doing well?

Nielsen is on pace to score 27 goals this season. And I hope he does considering what he gets paid. His assists are low, but that's not surprising considering who he plays with on the 3rd line. My point is that despite being pushed down to the 3C, with lesser linemates and less ice time, he is still scoring goals at a pace higher than a lot of 2C's. How does that make him a 3C? Because he's behind Larkin and Z on the depth chart, not because his skills or numbers make it so.

Over his career, Nielsen has roughly 400 points over roughly 700 games. If my math is correct, that's an average of 0.57 points per game, or 48 points per season. Those are 2C numbers (albeit on the lower end), not 3C.

So he is either a lower end 2C (arguable)or a 3C (also arguable) with 2C numbers. 

[kickazz 5,459]

For what it’s worth Nielsen officially become the best shootout shooter in NHL history tonight

[Richdg 267]

14 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Nielsen is on pace to score 27 goals this season. And I hope he does considering what he gets paid. His assists are low, but that's not surprising considering who he plays with on the 3rd line. My point is that despite being pushed down to the 3C, with lesser linemates and less ice time, he is still scoring goals at a pace higher than a lot of 2C's. How does that make him a 3C? Because he's behind Larkin and Z on the depth chart, not because his skills or numbers make it so.

Over his career, Nielsen has roughly 400 points over roughly 700 games. If my math is correct, that's an average of 0.57 points per game, or 48 points per season. Those are 2C numbers (albeit on the lower end), not 3C.

So he is either a lower end 2C (arguable)or a 3C (also arguable) with 2C numbers. 

I don't believe he is a 2c anymore. He is 33 and players do slow down as they get older. Now what makes a guy a 1c or a 2c or a 3c? To me a 1c is a guy that puts up 80 points per year, a 2c puts up 60 points per year and a 3c puts up 40 points per year. Others may go with a different standard, which is fine. But that is my standard. Yes there are other things to look at besides points I get that. But at this point he is playing great as a 3c with all the pressure off of him. Of course this means Blashill will now make him our 1c...... LOL

[Euro_Twins 4,475]

3 hours ago, Richdg said:

I don't believe he is a 2c anymore. He is 33 and players do slow down as they get older. Now what makes a guy a 1c or a 2c or a 3c? To me a 1c is a guy that puts up 80 points per year, a 2c puts up 60 points per year and a 3c puts up 40 points per year. Others may go with a different standard, which is fine. But that is my standard. Yes there are other things to look at besides points I get that. But at this point he is playing great as a 3c with all the pressure off of him. Of course this means Blashill will now make him our 1c...... LOL

Tell that to toews 

[PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935]

4 hours ago, Richdg said:

I don't believe he is a 2c anymore. He is 33 and players do slow down as they get older. Now what makes a guy a 1c or a 2c or a 3c? To me a 1c is a guy that puts up 80 points per year, a 2c puts up 60 points per year and a 3c puts up 40 points per year. Others may go with a different standard, which is fine. But that is my standard. Yes there are other things to look at besides points I get that. But at this point he is playing great as a 3c with all the pressure off of him. Of course this means Blashill will now make him our 1c...... LOL

Only 7 players put up 80 pts or more lasr year. 4 of which were Centers. So...by your view there would only be 4 1Cs in the entire league: Crosby, McDavid, Backstrom, and Schiefele. To me, that shows your standard is unrealistic.

[Buppy 1,720]

3 hours ago, Richdg said:

I don't believe he is a 2c anymore. He is 33 and players do slow down as they get older. Now what makes a guy a 1c or a 2c or a 3c? To me a 1c is a guy that puts up 80 points per year, a 2c puts up 60 points per year and a 3c puts up 40 points per year. Others may go with a different standard, which is fine. But that is my standard. Yes there are other things to look at besides points I get that. But at this point he is playing great as a 3c with all the pressure off of him. Of course this means Blashill will now make him our 1c...... LOL

Reality has a different standard, lol. 

In the last 4 full seasons, a listed center has hit 80 points only 12 times, and 4 of those were Crosby. An average of 21.5 per year hit 60, 64 hit 40. (And many of those may be centers playing on the wing on a higher line.) Your standard is something only the elite players at those levels will hit.

That said, Nielsen maybe is more of a 3rd center at this point. But he's not really playing great. Slightly worse, point-wise, than he was last year (though he started pretty slow last year too). Better only relative to what you might expect, given the role.

[Richdg 267]

2 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Reality has a different standard, lol. 

In the last 4 full seasons, a listed center has hit 80 points only 12 times, and 4 of those were Crosby. An average of 21.5 per year hit 60, 64 hit 40. (And many of those may be centers playing on the wing on a higher line.) Your standard is something only the elite players at those levels will hit.

That said, Nielsen maybe is more of a 3rd center at this point. But he's not really playing great. Slightly worse, point-wise, than he was last year (though he started pretty slow last year too). Better only relative to what you might expect, given the role.

Reality is the overall talent is down. Fewer high end players + a defensive first league. Look at us. Our 1c was a 120+ point Yzerman backed  up by a 2c in the 120 point Federov. Now many get excited that Z had 60 points last year. Nice year yes but look at the production drop. In time yes it will change again these things go in cycles.

[Buppy 1,720]

7 minutes ago, Richdg said:

Reality is the overall talent is down. Fewer high end players + a defensive first league. Look at us. Our 1c was a 120+ point Yzerman backed  up by a 2c in the 120 point Federov. Now many get excited that Z had 60 points last year. Nice year yes but look at the production drop. In time yes it will change again these things go in cycles.

That may be true, but that means your standards should change to reflect that reality. Only 9 different centers have hit 80 points in the last 4 seasons. Only Crosby has done it more than once. By your standard, Crosby is the only consistent 1C in the league over the last 4 years. 

In today's game, high 60's makes you a pretty good 1C. Point-per-game/80+ puts you among the most elite.

[kliq 3,755]

52 minutes ago, Richdg said:

Reality is the overall talent is down. Fewer high end players + a defensive first league. Look at us. Our 1c was a 120+ point Yzerman backed  up by a 2c in the 120 point Federov. Now many get excited that Z had 60 points last year. Nice year yes but look at the production drop. In time yes it will change again these things go in cycles.

Overall talent is not not down, the average athlete in 2017 is stronger, faster, bigger etc. compared to the average athletes of previous generations. Go watch a game from the early 90's, its a lot slower then the game now a days.

The big difference is parity, you have a system set up now where it is very hard to have many elite players on one team, and you dont have many teams that are awful. This in addition to larger goalie equipment, more of an emphasis on D, and many other factors are the reason why guys are not scoring like that anymore.

Just one example, look at Mark Messier. As a kid, I can remember him always scoring that wrist shot while coming down the right side (at least that's what I remember). I feel that now a days that shot would never go in.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

A couple of articles regarding point production based on line position.

This one from 2011:

https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2011/9/27/2452941/common-misconceptions-how-much-should-that-forward-score

This one from 2015:

https://www.pattisonave.com/reasonable-scoring-expectations-centers/

Based on these articles, overall scoring among forwards between 2011 and 2015 is down 8% which I took into account.

I was shocked what I found in regards to point production from top 9 Wings forwards. I am really questioning my math, so if anyone finds different numbers, please correct me.

Listed  is projected totals for this season based on 82 games being played:

Mantha =  72 points = Good 1W

Larkin = 68 points = Average 1C

Z = 50 points = Elite 2C

Tatar = 32 points = Poor 2W

Nyquist = 36 points = Average 2W

AA = 32 points* = Average 2W

Frk = 41 points = Good 2W

Abby = 41 points = Good 2W

Helm = 32 points = Poor 2W

Nielsen = 36 points = Elite 3C

 * = prorated for full season

Of course these are based on a full 82 game season being played which not every player accomplishes every season. Obviously the numbers would be lower with injuries/fewer games played.

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

46 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

A couple of articles regarding point production based on line position.

This one from 2011:

https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2011/9/27/2452941/common-misconceptions-how-much-should-that-forward-score

This one from 2015:

https://www.pattisonave.com/reasonable-scoring-expectations-centers/

Based on these articles, overall scoring among forwards between 2011 and 2015 is down 8% which I took into account.

I was shocked what I found in regards to point production from top 9 Wings forwards. I am really questioning my math, so if anyone finds different numbers, please correct me.

Listed  is projected totals for this season based on 82 games being played:

Mantha =  72 points = Good 1W

Larkin = 68 points = Average 1C

Z = 50 points = Elite 2C

Tatar = 32 points = Poor 2W

Nyquist = 36 points = Average 2W

AA = 32 points* = Average 2W

Frk = 41 points = Good 2W

Abby = 41 points = Good 2W

Helm = 32 points = Poor 2W

Nielsen = 36 points = Elite 3C

 * = prorated for full season

Of course these are based on a full 82 game season being played which not every player accomplishes every season. Obviously the numbers would be lower with injuries/fewer games played.

Well, at least there's Larkin and Mantha. They're pretty much the only reason I still get excited about games, the occasional flashy Athanasiou move as well.

[LeftWinger 4,951]

There is only 5 reasons I try to watch:

 

Larkin, Mantha, AA and Frk.  When I see any of them in the bottom 6 it gives me my 5th reason, to dog the hell out of Blashill.

IMO, those 4 should be 4 of our top 6 each and every night!  The other two should be Z and which ever one of Nyquist/Tatar is playing worthy of top 6 minutes.

Nyquist - Z - Mantha

AA - Larkin - Frk

period. No Abby, No Helm, No Glendening.

[Richdg 267]

Yup. The only reason I watch is to see the growth and development of the under 26 crowd. Heck I spend as much time checking the minors, juniors, and college hockey now as I do the RW..... just to see how our guys are coming along. Hey Holland.... good job at getting me interested in those levels of hockey!

20 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

A couple of articles regarding point production based on line position.

This one from 2011:

https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2011/9/27/2452941/common-misconceptions-how-much-should-that-forward-score

This one from 2015:

https://www.pattisonave.com/reasonable-scoring-expectations-centers/

Based on these articles, overall scoring among forwards between 2011 and 2015 is down 8% which I took into account.

I was shocked what I found in regards to point production from top 9 Wings forwards. I am really questioning my math, so if anyone finds different numbers, please correct me.

Listed  is projected totals for this season based on 82 games being played:

Mantha =  72 points = Good 1W

Larkin = 68 points = Average 1C

Z = 50 points = Elite 2C

Tatar = 32 points = Poor 2W

Nyquist = 36 points = Average 2W

AA = 32 points* = Average 2W

Frk = 41 points = Good 2W

Abby = 41 points = Good 2W

Helm = 32 points = Poor 2W

Nielsen = 36 points = Elite 3C

 * = prorated for full season

Of course these are based on a full 82 game season being played which not every player accomplishes every season. Obviously the numbers would be lower with injuries/fewer games played.

So what you have posted adds weight to my standards on being a 1c a 2c and a 3c. Interesting. Now here is the part that hurts. How much money are we spending on all those average/below average 2nd/3rd line players........

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

3 hours ago, Richdg said:

Yup. The only reason I watch is to see the growth and development of the under 26 crowd. Heck I spend as much time checking the minors, juniors, and college hockey now as I do the RW..... just to see how our guys are coming along. Hey Holland.... good job at getting me interested in those levels of hockey!

So what you have posted adds weight to my standards on being a 1c a 2c and a 3c. Interesting. Now here is the part that hurts. How much money are we spending on all those average/below average 2nd/3rd line players........

Yes and no. Larkin's projected numbers put him as an average 1C. Z at an Elite 2. Nielsen an Elite 3. You could make the argument that giving Z and Nielsen more ice time with better wingers would increase their numbers thus making them a 1C and 2C respectively. Z's career numbers actually make him an Elite 1C and Nielsen's an Average 2C. Both are trending down however, and I know I'm probably in the minority about Nielsen as a 2C. 

My point was to show:

1. The 2 best point producers on the team this year, and the only 2 who are putting up 1st line numbers (MANtha and Larkin) are both pending RFAs. That's good news for them, but not for the cap situation. Could be expensive to re-sign both.

2. As much flak as Abby, Tatar, and Nyquist get, they are still putting up 2nd line numbers. (I am still not buying Helm. He's a 3rd liner.) However, I don't know what the average number of games played was to generate those totals used in those charts. (If they're playing 10 or 12 more games to get those numbers, then their positions should drop accordingly.)

3. Based on points the lines should be:

Z - Larkin - Mantha

Abby - Nielsen - Frk

Tatar - AA - Nyquist

[toby91_ca 620]

On 11/12/2017 at 7:30 PM, Richdg said:

Reality is the overall talent is down. Fewer high end players + a defensive first league. Look at us. Our 1c was a 120+ point Yzerman backed  up by a 2c in the 120 point Federov. Now many get excited that Z had 60 points last year. Nice year yes but look at the production drop. In time yes it will change again these things go in cycles.

Actually, I see the opposite...reality is that overall talent is up (across the board, including coaching and techniques).  Defensive play and goaltending is way better now, it's much harder to score.  In today's game, Yzerman puts up no where near 120pts.

[Richdg 267]

8 hours ago, toby91_ca said:

Actually, I see the opposite...reality is that overall talent is up (across the board, including coaching and techniques).  Defensive play and goaltending is way better now, it's much harder to score.  In today's game, Yzerman puts up no where near 120pts.

I agree with you that the coaching is better and that starts at the youth level. GK are also better with larger equipment. The league has become a defensive league. But the high end isn't nearly as good. There isn't a player in the league as good as Howe, or Gretzky, or Mario or Orr. They don't exist. The bottom on the other hand is better.

Yes Yzerman would still score a ton. He would blow past most of todays Dmen and it wouldnt be much of a challenge. Same with Federov. Look what datsyuk used to do in todays game.... Federov was a way better player and athlete.

[Son of a Wing 1,644]

2 minutes ago, Richdg said:

I agree with you that the coaching is better and that starts at the youth level. GK are also better with larger equipment. The league has become a defensive league. But the high end isn't nearly as good. There isn't a player in the league as good as Howe, or Gretzky, or Mario or Orr. They don't exist. The bottom on the other hand is better.

Yes Yzerman would still score a ton. He would blow past most of todays Dmen and it wouldnt be much of a challenge. Same with Federov. Look what datsyuk used to do in todays game.... Federov was a way better player and athlete.

I could see how if you were just looking at numbers you might think that, but I couldn't disagree more.

The average and top end talent is better and much less one dimensional.  Everyone on the ice plays defence.

The disparity between the players is less so statistically you don't see anyone run away from the pack very often.

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

28 minutes ago, Son of a Wing said:

I could see how if you were just looking at numbers you might think that, but I couldn't disagree more.

The average and top end talent is better and much less one dimensional.  Everyone on the ice plays defence.

The disparity between the players is less so statistically you don't see anyone run away from the pack very often.

I agree. I hate the above argument. Couldn't disagree more. The skill level is better today from top to bottom and it's not even close in my opinion.

[e_prime 1,936]

He's a BEAST!

[kliq 3,755]

5 hours ago, Richdg said:

I agree with you that the coaching is better and that starts at the youth level. GK are also better with larger equipment. The league has become a defensive league. But the high end isn't nearly as good. There isn't a player in the league as good as Howe, or Gretzky, or Mario or Orr. They don't exist. The bottom on the other hand is better.

Yes Yzerman would still score a ton. He would blow past most of todays Dmen and it wouldnt be much of a challenge. Same with Federov. Look what datsyuk used to do in todays game.... Federov was a way better player and athlete.

This just isn't true with the exception of maybe Gretzky as he was just an outlier in every way.

I'm guessing you grew up watching guys like Yzerman, Lemieux, Gretzky etc. and as a result put them on a pedestal. Howe on the other hand is simply a legend around here, and Orr also has that feel to his legacy. Kids now a days are going to have the exact same opinion of guys like Crosby, Ovie, and likely McDavid. As they get older most fans won't have the same level of respect for kids that are younger then them, then what they had for the stars of their childhood. 

Also, lets not forget, these guys didnt have the same pool to play against that players now a days do. Imagine how good Crosby would be compared to the rest if you took out alot of the European players. No Ovie, Malkin etc. and Crosby starts to look a lot more like Gretzky. 

And for the record, I am not a Crosby fan lol.

Edited November 16, 2017 by kliq