• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
toby91_ca

Top Scorers

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

So, it's the same old story, Crosby is the only guy scoring a greater than 100pt pace.  Having missed 6 games so far, he's still on a pace to get there, but if he misses more games, it might not happen (but ppg would likely still be there).  After that, next closest is Malkin at 93pt pace, then McDavid at 91.  What's even worse, for me anyway, is that there are only 7 guys in the league scoring at 1ppg (ignoring those that have only played a handful of games).

Scoring continues to be down, no doubt, but in terms of individual stats, maybe it's just me, but I like to see domination, I like to see guys put up big numbers.  Am I in the minority and no one else cares?  I hate seeing guys win scoring titles with less than 100pts.  It's more likely than not that Crosby gets there and this year may be a bit different because he's at a pretty good pace (111pt pace...but not a crazy pace).  However, it's still only one guy?  Are we all okay with this?  I don't want to see 30 guys scoring 100pts, it should be difficult to achieve, but I'd like it to be achievable by at least a handful of guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been saying that for years.  Big goalies with big equipment and great fundamentals have made the game a lot more boring.  So have better defensive systems. There's not a lot of 40 goal scorers and even fewer 50 goal scorers and 100 point scorers.  It has made things less enjoyable.  

This, along with the lack of fighting and old fashioned rivalries is hurting the game.    

I guess if you enjoy watching 6'6 goalies wearing giant pads and stopping everything except deflections, screened shots and breakaways, then this is the golden age of hockey for you.  Otherwise, if you grew up watching hockey in the early 90's, this is excruciating.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm not sure of though, is whether 50 or 60pts still means the same.  What I mean is, are there less people scoring at that pace now as well (so scoring down across the board) or is it just that there is less top end elite point production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It still is related to scoring being down. And Kane last year and Crosby this year are likely just outliers. 

If we want 4-5 guys put up 100+ points, that won't happen without some goalie equipment changes.  

The top scorers are still within range of each other, it's just that their rate isn't as high as it was in 2009 or before.

Mcdavid 51

Crosby 50 (although in only 37 games, clear outlier)

Malkin 49

Kane 47

Burns 45

Crosby's outlier may not happen next year. Last year he finished barely above ppg at 85 points in 80 games

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, toby91_ca said:

What I'm not sure of though, is whether 50 or 60pts still means the same.  What I mean is, are there less people scoring at that pace now as well (so scoring down across the board) or is it just that there is less top end elite point production.

Good question.  Someone told me a few years ago that there's more balanced scoring now across teams and more guys hitting 40 and 50 points throughout the lineup, but I've never bothered checking that.  It could very well be right.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there's less talent.  As a matter of fact I think there's more.  I just think that in today's game, with goalies, systems, etc. being what they are, a guy who scores 55 points now is comparable to a guy who scored 70-75 a few years ago.  The numbers are deflated, the talent isn't. In 2000-2001 Martin Lapointe scored a career high 57 points.  Tomas Tatar's career high is 56 points.  Anybody who thinks they're similarly offensively skilled is on crack.

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I don't think there's less talent.  As a matter of fact I think there's more.  I just think that in today's game, with goalies, systems, etc. being what they are, a guy who scores 55 points now is comparable to a guy who scored 70-75 a few years ago.  The numbers are deflated, the talent isn't. In 2000-2001 Martin Lapointe scored a career high 57 points.  Tomas Tatar's career high is 56 points.  Anybody who thinks they're similarly offensively skilled is on crack.

I was thinking less best of the best talent, not less overall talent because i agree, there is more talent overall.  The more I think about it though, the fact that there is more talent throughout, probably means it's harder for the top guys to score, they can't prey on less talent as much anymore.

8 hours ago, kickazz said:

Crosby's outlier may not happen next year. Last year he finished barely above ppg at 85 points in 80 games

Last year was an outlier for him though, he put up like 15-20 points in his first 20+ games, not sure what was going on...he finished pretty strong, but too much of a hole was dug.  At some point, he'll decline though, perhaps next year, he'll be 30, which often seems like a magic number for some.  He may still put up big points, but likely will start producing less in the next year or so than McDavid (if he progresses as everyone expects).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

Last year was an outlier for him though, he put up like 15-20 points in his first 20+ games, not sure what was going on...he finished pretty strong, but too much of a hole was dug.  At some point, he'll decline though, perhaps next year, he'll be 30, which often seems like a magic number for some.  He may still put up big points, but likely will start producing less in the next year or so than McDavid (if he progresses as everyone expects).

You could also consider Crosby to be the "Gretzky" of the current era. 

Do you know what I mean? For instance, Gretzky scored insane numbers but the 2nd and 3rd place scoring leaders still had high amount of points but just not as many as Gretzky. So maybe Crosby himself is just an outlier while #s 2 -5 on the list are equally elite top talent that are just not scoring as much in the post 2010 era with the way the game has changed. 

I'd have to dig up the numbers to see the correlation and comparisons but I just feel like if Crosby is still maintaining 100+ point rate but everyone else isn't, he must just be an exception. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kickazz said:

You could also consider Crosby to be the "Gretzky" of the current era. 

Do you know what I mean? For instance, Gretzky scored insane numbers but the 2nd and 3rd place scoring leaders still had high amount of points but just not as many as Gretzky. So maybe Crosby himself is just an outlier while #s 2 -5 on the list are equally elite top talent that are just not scoring as much in the post 2010 era with the way the game has changed. 

I'd have to dig up the numbers to see the correlation and comparisons but I just feel like if Crosby is still maintaining 100+ point rate but everyone else isn't, he must just be an exception.

This is exactly what I'm saying, Crosby is an outlier, the rest, lucky to see 90pts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

I don't think there's less talent.  As a matter of fact I think there's more.  I just think that in today's game, with goalies, systems, etc. being what they are, a guy who scores 55 points now is comparable to a guy who scored 70-75 a few years ago.  The numbers are deflated, the talent isn't. In 2000-2001 Martin Lapointe scored a career high 57 points.  Tomas Tatar's career high is 56 points.  Anybody who thinks they're similarly offensively skilled is on crack.

Lapointe could actually score in the playoffs.  So I agree, they're not comparable.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, kickazz said:

Right but those same players had the ability to reach 100 points in the past but no longer can. Is it decline or is it because of how the game has changed? Malkin, Ovechkin for example. 

And that was actually my overall point....the game has changed and scoring is down to the point where you may have 1 outlier hitting 100pts, with 90pts a struggle for anybody else.  I totally get it, league is different.  What I'm saying is that I don't really like it, I like to see 4-5 guys at that level.  Overall comparability of players is not really different, but scoring overall continues to slide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cindy (Crosby) looking real good this year. Yes he's annoying but he has decreased his chirping and his game has stepped up, from an already elite level.

 I am weak for a superstar taking a small "another" step forward from an already supreme level. It shows dedication and work ethic.

I am a little annoyed at myself praising Cindy but hey, credit where credit is due. He deserves it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, F.Michael said:

We could use a guy like Lapointe...Getting those dirty goals around the crease.

And had an awesome well-groomed goatee, unlike these village idiots Burns and Thornton.  

Edited by GMRwings1983

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pittsburgh vs Tampa series and Pittsburgh vs San Jose series. Good amount of support for Crosby. From LGW.com.

Tough when him and Malkin were likely the biggest rivals we had since Colorado era with Sakic/Forseberg/Roy

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe people are more focused on the "pure" scoring now because stuff that made hockey interesting has been faded out step by step. If Crosby is the only one capable of running away with it, maybe just maybe he is still that much better than his peers.                                 

To answer your question: Hockey hasn't become boring because of less scoring it's boring because the good stuff isn't there anymore and thus more people are solely focusing on one aspect of the game.                                                                        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, frankgrimes said:

Maybe people are more focused on the "pure" scoring now because stuff that made hockey interesting has been faded out step by step. If Crosby is the only one capable of running away with it, maybe just maybe he is still that much better than his peers.                                 

To answer your question: Hockey hasn't become boring because of less scoring it's boring because the good stuff isn't there anymore and thus more people are solely focusing on one aspect of the game.                                                                        

Is that what we're calling fighting these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2017 at 5:34 PM, F.Michael said:

Is there a rivalry that comes close to what Detroit/Colorado had back 15 plus years ago?

No. The was the last legitimate playoff rivalry in the NHL. It could have been Pittsburgh/Detroit but that didn't last with the league parity becoming so high.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There still legitimate rivals going on. Honestly, people need to get off the Det vs Col horse rivalry. You'll never see this again, in any sport. Comparing anything to it is silly.

*PIT vs WSH, is a must watch game today. Even more so for the people that want goal scoring in this very topic.

*CHI vs STL, more so when STL had Backes.

*Almost any combo of SJS, LA, ANA are great rivals to watch. 

Many others, I'm not gonna list every single rival. I'll name a few of our very own rivals that were legitimate after the Det vs Col such as...

*DET vs SJS, This is one of the few rivalries I would consider we lost.

*DET vs ANA from 2007-2010+ this was a great rivalry

*DET vs NSH, Weber slamming Z head into the boards didn't get your blood going?

I could go on, but I didn't really want to hijack the topic. I hate the non-stop moaning (not just this topic) about how there no legit playoff rivalries or rivals anymore. People seem to think only dynasty vs dynasty can be a legitimate rivals. 

In my opinion, the main problem is we moved from the West, we lost a bunch of good rivals, which in hindsight I wish we didn't. I can honestly say I don't think we would of made the playoffs the last 2 years if we stayed and we would already be on a real rebuild. Hell maybe even had a chance at Matthews, the very least a few top 10 picks the last 2-3 seasons. But part of that's another story.

 

 

Edited by xault

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this