1C's in the NHL

[Lavar Ball]

How many true quality number 1 Centers are there in the league heading into next season in your opinion? Obviously considering all players are healthy. I know it's hard to define what a "Number 1 Center" is, I think of it as a guy I am happy with my team having as a 1C while contending. Considering next season only, so if you vote for a guy like Stutzle it means you think he is already a 1C, not that he will be eventually.

I left the following players off as I consider them to be indisputable:

Connor McDavid
Auston Matthews
Leon Draisaitl
Nathan MacKinnon
Sidney Crosby
Aleksander Barkov

Click to read more...

 

[Dominance]

Keller is not even a centre, much less a 1C.

 

[Community]

I know he's overpaid, but less than 40% of people think Tavares is a #1C?

He's consistently ppg, good defensively, and excellent on the draw. If I gave you this description without a name I'm sure plenty more people would have him rated as a #1C.


There's a few you guys I didn't vote for, but I'm pretty sure will be an undisputed #1 C in the near future... just haven't seen enough yet (personally) or multiple years to continue their growth.

 

[Tufted Titmouse]

Some E. Lindholm and S. Couturier slander going on.

 

[bobholly39]

I know he's overpaid, but less than 40% of people think Tavares is a #1C?

He's consistently ppg, good defensively, and excellent on the draw. If I gave you this description without a name I'm sure plenty more people would have him rated as a #1C.


There's a few you guys I didn't vote for, but I'm pretty sure will be an undisputed #1 C in the near future... just haven't seen enough yet (personally) or multiple years to continue their growth.

Tavares hasn't been ppg in any of the past 3 years. He's paced for ~72-78 points per 82 games those seasons. This - in a league that is significantly going up in scoring, so even being ppg isn't as impressive as it once was.

To your overall point - I left Tavares off in my votes but I'll admit it's close. Might be my bias in seeing him consistently play as a 2C in Toronto that made me not vote for him, since it's been a while he even was a 1C. Because if he started next season on a different team, he probably still has it in him to play 1C and produce a bit more.

In my opinion though - he's definitely not a top 20C right now. He's in that ~20-30 range likely, and there are a lot of players in there so it's a moving target.

 

[Xspyrit]

I know he's overpaid, but less than 40% of people think Tavares is a #1C?

He's consistently ppg, good defensively, and excellent on the draw. If I gave you this description without a name I'm sure plenty more people would have him rated as a #1C.


There's a few you guys I didn't vote for, but I'm pretty sure will be an undisputed #1 C in the near future... just haven't seen enough yet (personally) or multiple years to continue their growth.

Tavares is good defensively? Not saying Jfresh stuff is gospel but...

 

[Mrb1p]

All the listed players are 1Cs.

There is more players with 1C ability than 1C spots.

Edit: I didn't see RyJo and Keller. I consider Keller a winger and Id have RyJo as the gatekeep between 1c and 2c, I think Id have him fall in 2C but he COULD be a 1C on a strong first line, maybe? FF9-RyJo-Duchene is a pretty good example of that.

 

[Mrb1p]

Tavares is good defensively? Not saying Jfresh stuff is gospel but...

He was on one of the worst teams in the league and the best goaltender he had up to that point in his career was Jaroslav Halak post-Blues.

Not that he was actually good, just that Jfresh's numbers are quite skewed.

 

[Drew Doubty]

Ultimately this is just one of those polls that comes down to your definition of a 1C. How someone could not see

Curious as to why so many don't consider JT miller a 1C

 

[Mrb1p]

This poll is insane though lol
15% think Point isn't a 1C
15% think eichel isnt a 1c
30% think Malkin isn't a 1C

 

[1specter]

Tavares is good defensively? Not saying Jfresh stuff is gospel but...

That's from 7 years ago on a bad team (I'm aware the Islanders made the playoffs that year, but they were a flawed team in many ways, especially defensively). He's improved quite a bit since then on the defensive end.

 

[MS]

JT Miller has averaged 88 points/82 GP over the past 3 seasons, was 9th in NHL scoring last year, and 60% of people don't consider him a #1C?

What on earth.

Meanwhile 60% of people consider Barzal a #1 for averaging 68 points/82 over the same stretch while being a worse defensive player and barely taking faceoffs.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I'd say almost everyone on that list is a "1C". I think a more interesting question would be which of those players are good enough to be a 1C on a Cup winner? I think that would probably cut the list down by half.

 

[Xspyrit]

CLAYTON KELLER Player Profile Page | leftwinglock.com

Left Wing Lock is a fantasy hockey resource that provides NHL player profiles, time on ice charts, and stats for fantasy hockey managers.

leftwinglock.com

Keller didn't play a game a Center last season

He was on one of the worst teams in the league and the best goaltender he had up to that point in his career was Jaroslav Halak post-Blues.

Not that he was actually good, just that Jfresh's numbers are quite skewed.

Not that I don't agree but I still have a hard time calling Tavares "good defensively"

That's from 7 years ago on a bad team (I'm aware the Islanders made the playoffs that year, but they were a flawed team in many ways). He's improved quite a bit since then on the defensive end.

Look at what I just said above. But also look at my original post again, there's another tweet that says :

"Tavares' historically bad defence over the course of his career...". It's not just that 2014-15 season

But it's true that he has improved and being in Toronto's system has helped him but still far from "good defensively" IMO.

 

[Mrb1p]

I'd say almost everyone on that list is a "1C". I think a more interesting question would be which of those players are good enough to be a 1C on a Cup winner? I think that would probably cut the list down by half.

Even so, what if the player is centered by prime Ovechkin and Kane? Even that question is very interpretative. I'd say you could probably formulate it like "In a vacuum and not accounting team chemistry, which center gives you the best chance to win a cup?"

I'd say almost everyone on that list is a "1C". I think a more interesting question would be which of those players are good enough to be a 1C on a Cup winner? I think that would probably cut the list down by half.

Even so, what if the player is centered by prime Ovechkin and Kane? Even that question is very interpretative. I'd say you could probably formulate it like "In a vacuum and not accounting team chemistry, which center gives you the best chance to win a cup?"

Ive seen David Desharnais and his 5 foot 6 get to the ECF because he was dragged kicking and screaming by Carey Price, you're telling me any number of 2nd liner wouldn't be good enough ?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Even so, what if the player is centered by prime Ovechkin and Kane? Even that question is very interpretative. I'd say you could probably formulate it like "In a vacuum and not accounting team chemistry, which center gives you the best chance to win a cup?"


Even so, what if the player is centered by prime Ovechkin and Kane? Even that question is very interpretative. I'd say you could probably formulate it like "In a vacuum and not accounting team chemistry, which center gives you the best chance to win a cup?"

Ive seen David Desharnais and his 5 foot 6 get to the ECF because he was dragged kicking and screaming by Carey Price, you're telling me any number of 2nd liner wouldn't be good enough ?

Clearly the intent was that that player also was relied on to play a significant role as either the best forward or one of the best forwards on a Cup winner.

Montreal neither won the Cup that year nor was Desharnais a significant reason for their success. In my scenario, the team he played on won the Cup and he was a big part of why.

For instance, I'd consider Brayden Point a "yes" for my scenario because he was a] the number 1 center on the Cup winning team and b]he played a significant role in them winning. A player who has to be carried to a Cup because the team is stacked elsewhere doesn't fit the criteria of what I was asking.

 

[haseoke39]

So the guys left off the poll plus the guys with 50% of the vote equals 20 players right now.

That's about what I expect from HFBoards. People are always skewing the qualifications to fill a role upwards around here. Always looking for a model that even hypothetically only 2/3 of teams could follow.

Ask about #1 goalies next. There's been a legit decline in teams using an established 1G at this point. Very few guys play 60 games anymore, and there's not much distinction between two guys playing 47 and 35 games. Could probably wrap that list up in 10 or less.

 

[EichHart]

32 teams=32 #1 Centers

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

32 teams=32 #1 Centers

This is a technical, yet flawed, way to look at things because not all teams have good centers.

That's like saying, "How many legitimate franchise players are there in the league" and someone saying "well, there are 32 teams, so I'd say 32 franchise players".

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Pretty much all of them

 

[biturbo19]

Some E. Lindholm and S. Couturier slander going on.

Lindholm was a tricky one for me. I went ahead and said yes. But as much as i like him as a player, and he can play a #1C on TV...i'm not sure the production is there to call him that, if (i guess now it's when?) you take away two of the most productive wingers in the league. Including one of the more prolific "puck carrying" and "line driving" sort of wingers in Gaudreau who takes over a lot of #1C type offensive responsibilities in that regard.

Lindholm is a terrific "complementary" center. Plays a good two way game, shares the puck, contributes but lets his wingers do a lot of the offensive heavy lifting and "playmaking".

But to me, a #1C is more of a guy who can take some pretty average wingers, and make them look really good. The real "engine" on a top line offensively. Not sure Lindholm is that dynamic vs how much of it is the same effect that hit Monahan. But we're probably going to get to find out.


Couturier though, absolutely.

 

[InfinityIggy]

This is a technical, yet flawed, way to look at things because not all teams have good centers.

That's like saying, "How many legitimate franchise players are there in the league" and someone saying "well, there are 32 teams, so I'd say 32 franchise players".

It's not flawed if you approach it with the premise that the 32 will not be evenly distributed and so some teams will have 2 Centers in that top 32 and other teams will have none.

The initial number 32 comes from the number of #1 slots available in the league, but does not mean to suggest that they will be evenly distributed.

 

[tarheelhockey]

So the guys left off the poll plus the guys with 50% of the vote equals 20 players right now.

That's about what I expect from HFBoards. People are always skewing the qualifications to fill a role upwards around here. Always looking for a model that even hypothetically only 2/3 of teams could follow.

Ask about #1 goalies next. There's been a legit decline in teams using an established 1G at this point. Very few guys play 60 games anymore, and there's not much distinction between two guys playing 47 and 35 games. Could probably wrap that list up in 10 or less.

I think some of it is the OP asking for “legit, quality” #1 centers.

I approached the question from the standpoint that I would not be at all concerned with the #1C position on my team if ________ were filling it. The idea that there are about 20 guys matching that description actually sits right with me. If I have a guy in the bottom 1/3 of the league’s top centers, I’m nervous about matchups. That to me is not a “legit, quality” #1C.