Nash a grand and all but don't use his lack luster poor showing at the All Star game as an example of his skill. He were playing with the best in the game getting set up by masters and didn't bury a shot. That doesn't mean he is bad but for scat sake, it don't make him good either.
Best Overall Player: Nash V.S. Frolov
- Thread starter Hockey Moose
- Start date
- Status
The question was "most complete player" not best goal scorer.Handsome B. Wonderful said:
Frolov is a better overall player.
How is he overrated?Frolov right now is the better overall player..he plays defense,plays the boards well,creates scoring chances,takes the body.luongofan said:
When Nash learns to play defense he will be ahead of Frolov...Frolov would have more points if he got the PP time Nash got.
How do you figure that?You would think all the good players would give him MORE points, he is playing with guys like Stumpel,Klatt,Robitaille etc.Sting004 said:There is no comparison whatsoever. Frolov is getting points because all the real good LA players are out. I'm not saying he's bad, but he's not a franchise/superstar. Nash is already a franchise player and he's 5000x better than Frolov will ever be imo. And I don't like Columbus
Rick Nash in the future will probley be better but the question was RIGHT NOW who is the better player...Nash has like 4 or 5 more points then Frolov,is that enough to cover up his defensive deficiences? Its not a bad comparison at all.
Telperiën
Registered User
If a person comes up to me and asks if I'd rather have Nash or Frolov on my team, I'd choose Nash in an instant. As many have pointed out, at this point, it's not exactly a fair comparison.
Why is it "not fair" who would you rather have right now?IlyaK17 said:
Right NOW I want the more polished player...for crying outloud Nash has 3 more points.
RallyKiller said:
Sure but when was the last time a 19 year old was leading the league in scoring?
Sting004 said:
Your arguement isn't valid but I'll prove you wrong using your own logic.
So Nash is leading the Jackets in scoring while Frolov is leading the Kings so lets take them out of the equation. ( Nash has 1 point more then Frolov but Nash is - 25 while Frolov is +15)
The Jackets have 2 players with more then 10 goals ( Vyborny 16 and Sanderson with 10)
The Kings have 5 players with over 10 goals ( Klatt and Robitallie with 14 Belanger has 11 and Armstrong has 10 as does Straka who should be back in the line up in a couple of weeks)
THe Blue Jackets have 1 player over 30 points (Vyborny)
The Kings have 3 players with over 30 points ( Robitaillie Klat Stumpel )
I can provide for FYI for you but I think you get the point.
In conclusion, you are wrong and the Kings still have more tallent (more scoring) on the team then the Blue Jackets therefore your arguementing (which was suposed to aid Nash) is actuall working against Nash.
Cheers
Frolov 6'3
Unregistered User
This does highlight though the entirely false train of thought that seems to dominate all sports where fans tend to show stupid amounts of favour to the player who's name the recognize the most and those are usually the player who puts the puck in the net, ball in the hoop, hits the home run etc. For people to argue that at 19 Nash is a much better goal scoring forward with special grit and skill in his opponents end and looks to be more of a superstar quality player than Frolov is fair.
To say that Nash is better all around player than Frolov is an incorrect statement without any factual support. If it is an opinion based on your personal feelings of the two than it is certainly valid. If it is an agruement you are trying to float as factual "Nash is so much better than Frolov that it isn't even a fair comparison" then you are simply wrong and falling into the trap of "the bloke who scores the goal is the best player". It just isn't true.
Nash is big and strong and a monster around the net who has 22 points on the PP. He is a handful and makes loads of room for his line mates. Talent and youth and size. All dandy things to have. He has little if any skill in the Nuetral or defencive zones. His plus minus matters in that he is by far the worst on his team in that category.
IF he were one of many on his team that were close to the same then you could blame it on several team related reasons. Since it is him alone, it shows a lack of skill. Granted, he is a lad and only to get better but, that same arguement is usefull with Frolov.
Frolov is 21. Last year he had 31 points (rookie year) and was +10 (memory) amoung rookies recieving NO PP time and little time until the end of the season with any skilled forwards. In fact, a few of the dogs he were forced to play with are either out of the game or on other teams and struggling there as well. He starts this season on the Kings "energy" line playing with the off and on Eric Bellanger (-13) leading all Kings at this point until he went down with injury (eb) and other "energy" types. He saw less then 15:30 mins a game (atoi) yet still was doing grand. He is and has been all season his teams PK top option. (supporting the fact that he should have a worse +/- if anything). His two way play is stellar, not just good, but amoung the best of the forwards in the game. Have a look.
He has 40 points. He is +15. He plays loads of PK time. He is the anchor of his line and becoming a very highly spoken of two way player.
Nash has a star quality that IF he can develope (no evidence yet) his defencive game will make him one of the best players in the league. Frolov looks to be a more all around player who will give you solid play in both ends. Nash will always be flashy and maybe more. Frolov will be the exact same thing yet only in less glamourus areas.
Who is the best all around player right now? FROLOV, without a doubt. Nash DOESN'T play anywhere well other than in the offencive zone. He has one more point than Frolov. He is minus 22 (or whatever it is today). Who is the best goal scorer? NASH without a doubt. Frolov has 20 goals, Nash has 31 (or more, last I checked) at least and is a constant threat to score them. Frolov tends to score more of the work hard and a goal is scored goals where Nash is a brute that uses his skill size and the rest to burry his chances.
The reason I rambled on so is to show how some of us just look at one thing and entitle a player as the greatest thing ever when it isn't so. 66 and 99 had a quality that neither Nash or Frolov have developed yet, they made thier team mates go from dog to glory in several instances. Messier and Stevie Y can Capt and score and set up and play tough. The list goes on. Of the two of these young talented kids, Frolov is the better all around player by far, to date. Nash is the better goal scorer and I feel, (not a fact, simply an opinion) that Nash has a quality to his game that IF he can develope the rest of it, could be a legendary talent where Frolov will probably become a very good top talent that is just a hair below superstar quality.
To say that Nash is better all around player than Frolov is an incorrect statement without any factual support. If it is an opinion based on your personal feelings of the two than it is certainly valid. If it is an agruement you are trying to float as factual "Nash is so much better than Frolov that it isn't even a fair comparison" then you are simply wrong and falling into the trap of "the bloke who scores the goal is the best player". It just isn't true.
Nash is big and strong and a monster around the net who has 22 points on the PP. He is a handful and makes loads of room for his line mates. Talent and youth and size. All dandy things to have. He has little if any skill in the Nuetral or defencive zones. His plus minus matters in that he is by far the worst on his team in that category.
IF he were one of many on his team that were close to the same then you could blame it on several team related reasons. Since it is him alone, it shows a lack of skill. Granted, he is a lad and only to get better but, that same arguement is usefull with Frolov.
Frolov is 21. Last year he had 31 points (rookie year) and was +10 (memory) amoung rookies recieving NO PP time and little time until the end of the season with any skilled forwards. In fact, a few of the dogs he were forced to play with are either out of the game or on other teams and struggling there as well. He starts this season on the Kings "energy" line playing with the off and on Eric Bellanger (-13) leading all Kings at this point until he went down with injury (eb) and other "energy" types. He saw less then 15:30 mins a game (atoi) yet still was doing grand. He is and has been all season his teams PK top option. (supporting the fact that he should have a worse +/- if anything). His two way play is stellar, not just good, but amoung the best of the forwards in the game. Have a look.
He has 40 points. He is +15. He plays loads of PK time. He is the anchor of his line and becoming a very highly spoken of two way player.
Nash has a star quality that IF he can develope (no evidence yet) his defencive game will make him one of the best players in the league. Frolov looks to be a more all around player who will give you solid play in both ends. Nash will always be flashy and maybe more. Frolov will be the exact same thing yet only in less glamourus areas.
Who is the best all around player right now? FROLOV, without a doubt. Nash DOESN'T play anywhere well other than in the offencive zone. He has one more point than Frolov. He is minus 22 (or whatever it is today). Who is the best goal scorer? NASH without a doubt. Frolov has 20 goals, Nash has 31 (or more, last I checked) at least and is a constant threat to score them. Frolov tends to score more of the work hard and a goal is scored goals where Nash is a brute that uses his skill size and the rest to burry his chances.
The reason I rambled on so is to show how some of us just look at one thing and entitle a player as the greatest thing ever when it isn't so. 66 and 99 had a quality that neither Nash or Frolov have developed yet, they made thier team mates go from dog to glory in several instances. Messier and Stevie Y can Capt and score and set up and play tough. The list goes on. Of the two of these young talented kids, Frolov is the better all around player by far, to date. Nash is the better goal scorer and I feel, (not a fact, simply an opinion) that Nash has a quality to his game that IF he can develope the rest of it, could be a legendary talent where Frolov will probably become a very good top talent that is just a hair below superstar quality.
I would take Nash easily. Just the fact he is leading the league in goals says something. Yeah, he has like 10 assists. Whatever. Who else on the Blue Jackets scores? No one.
The Mighty Duck Man
R-E-L-A-X
Nash is the better player. Don't get me wrong, Frolov can score too, but Frolov has more skill to pass to. The BJs just get points by giving Nash the puck while he makes practically nothing into a goal. It's not far off, but Nash is indeed the better of the two.
Opinion is always valid. Nash was taken first overall and can dominate a game (in one end) and should only get even better. As a Kings fan and a Frolov fan I too would take Nash if I were looking for a pure goal scorer. In fact, would probably take him today. (maybe) Since the question is which is best overall player though, I still feel it is hands down Frolov. Like I said though, if it were who is the best goal scorer it would be Nash without a doubt.
Rattrick
Registered User
I have always thought that one of the most commonly overlooked aspects when comparing players is the team around them. Nash has NOTHING and that is why he has no assists. His +/- is worse than it is because he is on a horrible team (no offense Jacket fans -- I know where you're coming from). He is relied on to score goals for the team and he is pretty much all they have scoring-wise.
Frolov on the other hand is playing on a team who is flirting with a playoff spot. Granted, they have been decimated by injuries, but there is still way more talent all around.
Nash will turn into a complete player in time.
Frolov on the other hand is playing on a team who is flirting with a playoff spot. Granted, they have been decimated by injuries, but there is still way more talent all around.
Nash will turn into a complete player in time.
Tell me who he has that is any better than Nash does. Zherdev is WAY better than Rosa or Stumpel will EVER be. The idea that Frolov has more talent around him is silly. Who is it? Frolov has had Stumpel for less than 14 games to be his center and has had Scott Barney, Pavel Rosa and Trent Klatt (for a short time) as his other wings. Who does he have that is better than Zherdev or better still, have a look at who the two play with and then tell me who is the better all around player.
Rattrick
Registered User
punchy1 said:
If you honestly think that the Blue Jackets have better forwards than the Kings, you might want to get your eyes checked. Zherdev is skilled yes, but is not a real good player yet. I think he will be, but he is still young.
So, your answer is to have a piss at me. Thanks for proving my point mate. It doesn't bloody matter how many more marginal players the Kings have over the bj's, what matters is who they play with. (unless you have figured out some magical way for them to score from the bench). Frolov has played the majourity of his season with Klatt and Belanger and recently, within the last 14 games, has begun playing limited PP time and with Josef Stumpel. Period. How does having Luc or Armstrong make his situation better?
Truly mate. Dazzle me with this. Of course, you cant as you have proven but I would truly like to know why you feel Frolov is getting better chances because he has a couple of better forwards who play on other lines than him on his team.
Hows this then, Nash has 22 points on the PP meaning he plays with his teams best players and is his teams go to guy on the PP. Frolov didn't see any time of note until Palffy went out on the PP and Andy Murray doesn't use a unit based PP. He lets his lines roll on through, meaning that Frolov, when he is actually givne PP time which in a recent thing, is playing with his usual (Stumpel and ever so talented Barney and Rosa) line mates. Making it impossible for him to get any special time with any of the players that would make him score more or effect his stats in any way. Again proving your theory wrong.
Or, we could simply go with the idea that this is about who is the better all around player and not the better scoring forward again, disproving your theory. Frolov has one less point than Nash and plays with a rookie who isn't near as talented as Zherdev, yet, tell me how your theory works then?
Truly mate. Dazzle me with this. Of course, you cant as you have proven but I would truly like to know why you feel Frolov is getting better chances because he has a couple of better forwards who play on other lines than him on his team.
Hows this then, Nash has 22 points on the PP meaning he plays with his teams best players and is his teams go to guy on the PP. Frolov didn't see any time of note until Palffy went out on the PP and Andy Murray doesn't use a unit based PP. He lets his lines roll on through, meaning that Frolov, when he is actually givne PP time which in a recent thing, is playing with his usual (Stumpel and ever so talented Barney and Rosa) line mates. Making it impossible for him to get any special time with any of the players that would make him score more or effect his stats in any way. Again proving your theory wrong.
Or, we could simply go with the idea that this is about who is the better all around player and not the better scoring forward again, disproving your theory. Frolov has one less point than Nash and plays with a rookie who isn't near as talented as Zherdev, yet, tell me how your theory works then?
Rattrick
Registered User
punchy1 said:
I am not trying to piss you off, but you seem to be in that mode already. IMO, you can't even compare these two. Compare them when Nash is a little older and playing on a better team.
I am not pissed mate but when you tell me I need my eyes checked what are you trying to say then?
Also, I have asked again what you base this opinion on. Do you have any reason for it or is it just the way you feel about things in general. Most people feel Nash is the better of the two in scoring but what is of debate is who is the better overall player.
You are arguing that Nash is and that it is unfair to judge him against Frolov because Frolov has better players. I asked you who they are and how they effect his game. Nothing back from you yet mate. I am truly curious. I don't see it and wanted to know where your opinion came from. I am not pissed at all, I am a bit defencive though when someone tells me to get my eyes checked and then doesn't give any support of thier position as to why. See what I mean?
Also, I have asked again what you base this opinion on. Do you have any reason for it or is it just the way you feel about things in general. Most people feel Nash is the better of the two in scoring but what is of debate is who is the better overall player.
You are arguing that Nash is and that it is unfair to judge him against Frolov because Frolov has better players. I asked you who they are and how they effect his game. Nothing back from you yet mate. I am truly curious. I don't see it and wanted to know where your opinion came from. I am not pissed at all, I am a bit defencive though when someone tells me to get my eyes checked and then doesn't give any support of thier position as to why. See what I mean?
I would also assume then that you would trade straight up the following.
Letowski for Armstrong or Stumpel
Vrborny for Belanger or Barney or Rosa
Sanderson for lappy.
Here is another way of looking at it.
You have Nash with 41 points and -25
We have Frolov with 40 points and +15
You have Vrborny with 36 points and -19
We have Luc with 36 points and +7
You have Marchant with 28 points -12
We have Klatt with 32 points +7
You have Sanderson with 25 points -5
We have Stumpel with 30 +10
You have Letowski with 20 points -9
We have Bellanger with 24 points -12
You have Zherdev with 16 points -7
Do I have to continue? I know that the bj might not be your team but, your arguement isn't supported talent wise enough to make it so. Sure I like the players that the Kings have but to say that they are significantly better than what the bj have isn't true. They are significantly better coached and are certainly more ready to play but I think that you are well under rating the players that the bj have on thier team. I would love to have Letowski or Sanderson or Zherdev on my team.
Thats all i were getting on about.
Letowski for Armstrong or Stumpel
Vrborny for Belanger or Barney or Rosa
Sanderson for lappy.
Here is another way of looking at it.
You have Nash with 41 points and -25
We have Frolov with 40 points and +15
You have Vrborny with 36 points and -19
We have Luc with 36 points and +7
You have Marchant with 28 points -12
We have Klatt with 32 points +7
You have Sanderson with 25 points -5
We have Stumpel with 30 +10
You have Letowski with 20 points -9
We have Bellanger with 24 points -12
You have Zherdev with 16 points -7
Do I have to continue? I know that the bj might not be your team but, your arguement isn't supported talent wise enough to make it so. Sure I like the players that the Kings have but to say that they are significantly better than what the bj have isn't true. They are significantly better coached and are certainly more ready to play but I think that you are well under rating the players that the bj have on thier team. I would love to have Letowski or Sanderson or Zherdev on my team.
Thats all i were getting on about.
CSKA
Registered User
Oh come on if Frolov had 30 Goals and -25 everybody would kill him because he is a european who cant play defence and hell yeah he is another Pavel Bure ...........
remember the Kovalchuk threads ...............
remember the Kovalchuk threads ...............
- Status
