| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| habshockey |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 16:28:13
Would you rather have a great guy who can put pucks in the net consistently or a playmaker who sets goals up?
I personally would rather have a playmaker. He sets up goals, whuich proves he's unselfish and generally playmakers get along much better with the rest of the team.
What do you guys think?
losers since 67 will have to wait another year |
| 16 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jeremy12 |
Posted - 12/12/2007 : 13:52:03
depends on what type of team you have.
(how good the other players on the team are)
[IMG]http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x49/Jeremy12_24/spezza_sig21.jpg[/IMG] |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 16:08:53
Willus, all of the guys I've mentioned have had 50 or more in the past few season. My point is they are always a threat.
Regardless, that solidifies my point even more. There are "statistically" only 2 players in the league that are in the 50+ goal catagory.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| willus3 |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 16:01:32
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
To reply back to this, how many pure goal scorers are their in the league? And I don't mean that flash in the pan type of guy that might get 40 goals this year. I mean that guy who is and/or has consistantly been at or close to 50 goals a year??
I can think of maybe 5. (Iginla, Lecavalier, Ovechkin, Heatley, Kovalchuk). In the same breath, I think there are only 4 amazing playmakers (Crosby, Thornton, Savard, Datsuyk). But, I would say there are at least 15 or so above average playmakers in the league (Hemsky, Sedin(x2), Briere, Jagr(was way better in his prime), Nylander, Spezza, the list goes on.
I would take Heatley with Hemsky over Thornton with a Ryan Smyth type player.
That was my point. I think there are far fewer good to great scorers in the league than there are good to great playmakers.
Just my opinion.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!!
Not to nitpick but Heatley and Ovechkin are the only ones to hit or come close to 50 goals more than once. The other guys really haven't been close.
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| Leafs Rock Planet |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 14:28:12
This thread kind of reminds me of a Sidney Crosby vs. Alexander Ovechkin discussion.
You have the great playmaking abillity of Sidney Crosby and the goal scoring and explosiveness of Alexander Ovechkin. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 14:22:11
To reply back to this, how many pure goal scorers are their in the league? And I don't mean that flash in the pan type of guy that might get 40 goals this year. I mean that guy who is and/or has consistantly been at or close to 50 goals a year??
I can think of maybe 5. (Iginla, Lecavalier, Ovechkin, Heatley, Kovalchuk). In the same breath, I think there are only 4 amazing playmakers (Crosby, Thornton, Savard, Datsuyk). But, I would say there are at least 15 or so above average playmakers in the league (Hemsky, Sedin(x2), Briere, Jagr(was way better in his prime), Nylander, Spezza, the list goes on.
I would take Heatley with Hemsky over Thornton with a Ryan Smyth type player.
That was my point. I think there are far fewer good to great scorers in the league than there are good to great playmakers.
Just my opinion.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| SuperSakic |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 13:57:01
quote:
Originally posted by habshockey
Would you rather have a great guy who can put pucks in the net consistently or a playmaker who sets goals up?
I personally would rather have a playmaker. He sets up goals, whuich proves he's unselfish and generally playmakers get along much better with the rest of the team.
What do you guys think?
losers since 67 will have to wait another year
This is sort of like the chicken and the egg. I think what teams REALLY need is that illusive player that can do both things really really well. If you put a scorer with this individual, he will get more assists. If you put a play-maker with this guy, he will tend to get more goals. I think Selanne is a good example of this kind of player. |
| ED11 |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 23:18:45
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
It all depends on the team make up. I'm sure Pitt would far prefer a scorer today than a playmaker.
Realistically, you need one of each to really flourish. Pitt is another perfect example of that today. So is San Jose and Boston. While, Ottawa proved my point.
So one or the other?? I would personally pick the scorer. Why?? I think there are far more great playmakers in the league today than there are pure goal scorers. I think an average playmaker with a great pure scorer are more productive than a great playmaker without anyone that can finish.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!!
Okay. I see you left out the last option. You have average playmaker+great scorer and you have great playmaker+no one. What about...great playmaker+average scorer=good scorer? And I also don't agree with your statement on there being a lot of great playmakers. I really don't think that there are many GREAT playmakers beyond Thornton, Crosby, Spezza, and a few others. And when I say GREAT playmaker I mean the type that can make others around them score more. Not just your average player that makes a pass or two. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 13:53:36
It all depends on the team make up. I'm sure Pitt would far prefer a scorer today than a playmaker.
Realistically, you need one of each to really flourish. Pitt is another perfect example of that today. So is San Jose and Boston. While, Ottawa proved my point.
So one or the other?? I would personally pick the scorer. Why?? I think there are far more great playmakers in the league today than there are pure goal scorers. I think an average playmaker with a great pure scorer are more productive than a great playmaker without anyone that can finish.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| LeafsFan4Life |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 13:24:50
personally as a general thing for myself i would prefer to see a playmaker, but i guess to be a playmaker you are normally a pretty good goal scorer too, I think the guys who are really good players have a 6th sense to see what is going on the ice before it happens myself i had played hockey up until the miget division and was going to go on to tournament hockey but i broke my collerbone and when i was playing you could tell the guys who where strong goal scorers but also great playmakers at the same time they could setup people who have never scored before to get their first goals. don't know if that makes any sense but i guess i tried  |
| ED11 |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 11:02:55
I would by far rather have a playmaker over a goal scorer on my team. There is 1 MAIN reason for this. Playmakers make 1 or 2 players around them much better. So you are getting this great player who can pass the puck and then the point production of another couple of players is going up also. Joe Thornton is the best example of this. When he came to San Jose Cheechoo scored 56 goals. Before then Cheechoo hadn't really done anything. Playmakers are also more rare then goal scorers bringing their stock up in my books. I believe they see the ice in a different way and that makes them fewer and more spread apart. Bottom line I'd much rather take Thronton or Spezza(excluding his inguries) or Crosby over Kovalchuk or Ovechkin. |
| Guest9253 |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 08:58:22
Look at what Thornton did to Cheechoo last season -I think that great playmakers can create a great goal scorer (no offense to cheechoo who I think has some real talent but was helped greatly by Thornton) |
| MSC |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 21:28:11
It's true about thornton, also Kovolchuk has had more assists then goals(03-04). I'm sure alot of them assists came off of rebounds however. |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 21:16:24
Guy Lafleur probably fits this billing. He was primarily known as a goal scorer early in his career, but became more of a playmaker as time went on.
Funny thing about Joe Thornton....he actually had a season where he scored more goals than assists. 2000-2001 I think. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 20:06:58
I guess the best way to determine if a goal scorer can become a playmaker, as compared to a playmaker that becomes a goal scorer, is to list all the players that fit the mold...
I will start with one Mike Bossy, goal scorer, became a playmaker...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| MSC |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 19:54:49
I personally believe that if you have the skill to be a talented goal scorer you also have the skill set to turn around and be a talented playmaker and vice versa. Being one or the other is simply the player choosing to play that way. I really think you're kidding yourself if you think Joe Thornton doesn't have the ability to become an elite goal scorer if he "decided" to sacrifice some of his passes and take the shot himself. So if I had to choose between a playmaker and a goal scorer it would come down entirely to the individuals I was choosing between. For example...Kovolchuk (goal scorer) over Tanguay (playmaker) BUT Spezza (playmaker) over Nash...etc... |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 18:06:51
Of course this is a total generalization - but guys who are strictly goal scorers are often highly skilled, but not really smart players, and often not team players so much. If you spend time perfecting a goal celebration instead of your playmaking, that's usually an indication of what kind of player you are.
Of course there are exceptions, but guys who distribute the puck unselfishly tend to be great team guys, who think about their teammates as much as their own stats and glory. That's the guy I want on my team every time. He may not be flashy, but he is the guy carrying the Cup arond at the end of the season. |
