Imaginary? Get a clue pal.Dooger said:
You are saying someone improves the same between 25 and 27 as 18 and 20?
Jaded fan is correct in his assessment.
Should Crosby Still be #1?
- Thread starter WhiskeyYerTheDevils
- Start date
- Status
You are saying someone improves the same between 25 and 27 as 18 and 20?
Jaded fan is correct in his assessment.
Ok, I'll say Ovechkin moreso because I think he brings more of a complete game. He seems to just have fun playing hockey even when 9 times out of 10 his team doesn't even have a shot at winning. Crosby has been rattled at times during the year, and while he is younger I wonder about that. The same thing happened in the Memorial Cup final against the London Knights last year when he got shut down...he got rattled. That seems to be a weak point in his game and something that Ovechkin hasn't really had an issue with.
18-20 is the big jump in talent because of the age. You gain a significant amount of strength between those ages...even without gaining muscle mass. Crosby could pull ahead, but right now I would rather have Ovechkin, and personally I would rather build a team around him.
18-20 is the big jump in talent because of the age. You gain a significant amount of strength between those ages...even without gaining muscle mass. Crosby could pull ahead, but right now I would rather have Ovechkin, and personally I would rather build a team around him.
You "get a clue pal". Every player is different. For every guy you show me who broke out at 20, I'll show you 2 that broke out at between 22-27. How about we talk about (just off the top of my head) Lemieux, Gretzky, Bertuzzi, Jagr, Iginla, Bondra, Allison, Doan, Jokinen....Shall I go on?wealthmanager said:Imaginary? Get a clue pal.
You are saying someone improves the same between 25 and 27 as 18 and 20?
Jaded fan is correct in his assessment.
You people keep talking about this magical 18-20 development thing, but the numbers don't support it. Let's see it in numbers or stop talking about it.
I am not going to waist another post on you.Dooger said:
I can't believe someone would come on here and say that people improve the same from 25-27 as 18-20.
Your body changes and you get stronger during that period. I'm sure even the most ardent Ovechkin homer realises this.
What about those guys you mentioned? You are saying they didn't improve a great deal between 18-20.
I don't have time for this.
Yeah, okay. I love hearing from you guys:wealthmanager said:I am not going to waist another post on you.
I can't believe someone would come on here and say that people improve the same from 25-27 as 18-20.
Your body changes and you get stronger during that period. I'm sure even the most ardent Ovechkin homer realises this.
What about those guys you mentioned? You are saying they didn't improve a great deal between 18-20.
I don't have time for this.
"My way of thinking is right. I can't tell you why, and I have no evidence to back up my ideas, but you are crazy for not agreeing with me."
I'm not saying players don't improve a huge amount between 18-20, but stats show they improved more at a later age.
There is simply no evidence to back up Jaded's earlier claim that the "averge player achieves a "much bigger vertical incline upward between 18 and 20."
Show it to me and I will gladly admit that I am wrong.
Look perhaps I was a little hard on you and I apologize.Dooger said:Yeah, okay. I love hearing from you guys:
"My way of thinking is right. I can't tell you why, and I have no evidence to back up my ideas, but you are crazy for not agreeing with me."
I'm not saying players don't improve a huge amount between 18-20, but stats show they improved more at a later age.
There is simply no evidence to back up Jaded's earlier claim that the "averge player achieves a "much bigger vertical incline upward between 18 and 20."
Show it to me and I will gladly admit that I am wrong.
But how many 18 year olds are even good enough to play in the NHL and then look how many 20 year olds there are. The gap is huge.
Now kindly admit that you are wrong.
shealy04
Registered User
Polska said:Ya, I mean all he can do is hit anyone, score from anywhere, feather passes anywhere, and unlike crosby is a plus player (and they both play on ****** teams so that't not a factor in the +/-). Ya, that's one dimension
I don't buy +/- as being a great indicator of a player's performance...
yes, it is a fairly important stat, but the moment Marek Malik had the best +/- over the run of the season, it lost a lot of credibility in my mind...
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
Dooger said:
Eric Staal:
18 to 19 year old season: 2003-04 Carolina Hurricanes NHL 81 11 20 31 40
20 to 21 year old season: 2005-06 Carolina Hurricanes NHL 57 36 39 75 46
Rick Nash:
18 to 19 year old season: 2002-03 Columbus Blue Jackets NHL 74 17 22 39 78
19 to 20 year old season: 2003-04 Columbus Blue Jackets NHL 80 41 16 57 87
Dany Heatley:
19 to 20 year old season: 2001-02 Atlanta Thrashers NHL 82 26 41 67 56
20 to 21 year old season: 2002-03 Atlanta Thrashers NHL 77 41 48 89 58
These are just a few players recently who have made big strides in their game in that age group. Staal in specific from an 18 year old player to a 20 year old player, made HUGE strides in his development.
Birko19
Registered User
Should Crosby be #1 on the prospect list? no he should'nt, Ovechkin deserves that spot at the moment.
Having said that, a lot of people are giving way too much credit to Malkin and pushuing him ahead of Crosby, let's face the reality please, Malkin is a great prospect indeed and chances are he'll be a great one in the NHL, but let's look at Crosby for a second, here's an 18 year old playing in the NHL (Best league in the world) and he's on a pace for 90+ points, when was the last time you saw an 18 year old play this well?
The vision of Crosby is unreal, once this kid matures and keeps on developing he'll be racking points left and right among the best of them, so it's quite an easy choice at this moment, Malkin is great, but Crosby is greater, in fact Malkin would probably be #4 or #5 on my list, Ovechkin, Crosby, and Phaneuf are all clearly ahead of him at this point, and I would also make a case for Lundqvist maybe.
By next year if Malkin lives up to his hype with the big boys then we can start talking, in the meantime Crosby > Malkin.
Having said that, a lot of people are giving way too much credit to Malkin and pushuing him ahead of Crosby, let's face the reality please, Malkin is a great prospect indeed and chances are he'll be a great one in the NHL, but let's look at Crosby for a second, here's an 18 year old playing in the NHL (Best league in the world) and he's on a pace for 90+ points, when was the last time you saw an 18 year old play this well?
The vision of Crosby is unreal, once this kid matures and keeps on developing he'll be racking points left and right among the best of them, so it's quite an easy choice at this moment, Malkin is great, but Crosby is greater, in fact Malkin would probably be #4 or #5 on my list, Ovechkin, Crosby, and Phaneuf are all clearly ahead of him at this point, and I would also make a case for Lundqvist maybe.
By next year if Malkin lives up to his hype with the big boys then we can start talking, in the meantime Crosby > Malkin.
We are not talking the race for the Calder, we are talking prospects, and if Crosby is not #1 on the HF list I will cease to post here.Birko19 said:
I will loose all respect for this site and it's staff.
Ovechkin's 20 year old season is not nearly as impressive as Crosby's 18 year old season.
Rico Fatastic
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2002
- 2,979
- 0
Let me rephrase this a little:wealthmanager said:
Ovechkin's 20 year old season is probably not nearly as impressive as Crosby's 20 year old season will be, and Ovechkin's 18 year old season (13+10 in 53 RSL games) was not as impressive as Crosby's 18 year old season (28+37 in 58 NHL games). Now if anyone would like to nit-pick, then no, I did not see Ovechkin play 2 years ago. So feel free to argue this point if you'd like, but I wouldn't expect a whole lot of support on this one.
asab said:
The RSL doesn't = the NHL. The Russians put way too much emphasis on seniority and it's a defensive league. Obscure players win scoring titles every year. Ovechkin was voted best LW in the RSL at 18 and scored for his national team at the World Cup playing 4th line minutes. It's not "nit-picking" to call you out for making statements based on flat stats, either.
If Crosby's 20 yr old season is statistically significantly better than Ovechkin's, I'll eat crow.
Dooger said:
The numbers are supporting this.
The gap is huge and much bigger than between 20-22 for example.
Take a COMPLETE drafting list for the nhl and take a look at all 18 years old that were taken. Then remake the list of how they should have been ranked in your opinion 2 years after and do it 4 years after, and so on if you wish. Obviously, as you go later in time, the list will be better and better. BUT the biggest improvement in your list WILL be in the first 2 years, you will still missed some late bloomers, you will still missed on the early surprises that will faded but ultimately your list of 2nd to 4-5 th rounders (which are the definition of the "standard prospect") will be a lot better and clearer. I promise.
_________________________
It's not about who breaks in the nhl. It's about the normal progression of the human body for an athlete of 18 years old. I really dont understand why you would argue that if you are older than 20, think again of how strong you became at 20 compare to 18, how different your thinking was, etc... The guy is definitly right and the best example was when he did talks about Football draft, the list usually ends up a LOT more accurate because the players are olders when drafted.
_________________________
I'm not sure it will apply to Crosby and Ovechkin because they are really special talents. But Crosby have never failed, he was supposed to be "ok" in his first year in the Q, he was arguably the best 16 years old player ever. Go dig the pre-season threads about Crosby, you will find more posts about him looking at a 40-60 pts season and people thinking he would not hold his own against older opposition for the calder (i'm talking about the boards here, not the crazy medias), yet he's on pace for 90+ pts and is still in the calder race (even if he's not in the lead, it's very impressive).
It doesnt mean Crosby will ends up the better player when all is said and done (i think he will but that's another story), but it does makes him the better prospect right now.
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
Dooger said:Yeah, okay. I love hearing from you guys:
"My way of thinking is right. I can't tell you why, and I have no evidence to back up my ideas, but you are crazy for not agreeing with me."
I'm not saying players don't improve a huge amount between 18-20, but stats show they improved more at a later age.
There is simply no evidence to back up Jaded's earlier claim that the "averge player achieves a "much bigger vertical incline upward between 18 and 20."
Show it to me and I will gladly admit that I am wrong.
By the count of Nick Saban, coach of the co-national champion Louisiana State, 35 underclassmen were selected in the N.F.L. draft last year, 12 in the first two rounds.
"I don't think you can keep someone from making a living by law," Saban said of yesterday's ruling. But, he noted, football is a game that requires tremendous physical development, and players get dramatically stronger between ages 18 and 23.
"My big concern is that a lot more guys with less maturity and less development are going to be put in a position of making a decision of whether they should go for the draft," Saban said.
This would be potentially dangerous for younger athletes who would be competing against players five or 10 years older in the N.F.L., said Dick Beck, coach of North Penn High in Landsdale, Pa., the Pennsylvania Class AAAA state football champion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/06/s...600&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=all&position=
Actually the above is just common sense if you remember what you were like as a senior in high school as opposed to when you were in your second and third year in college. Huge difference in filling out for us all. Or observing athletes across the board turn from kids to men as they progress in their college careers (or Pro in the NBA). But you had to have a quote to prove what we all knew, so have at it.
Last edited:
All 3 are big power forwards, so you wouldn't have expected them to come in as 18 year olds and be able to push men around right away like they can now. I am almost certain Nash and Staal have put on a lot more muscle since their rookie years.Caniacforever said:
If you look at the 2 centers out in San Jose, you will see that Marleau was putting up better numbers than Thronton at age 18-19, but Thronton has been far better since age 20 once Jumbo Joe grew into his frame.
Crosby isn't your prototypical power forward and even so, he is well known to be very strong for someone his size not to mention age group. Those of you expecting a power forward type performance jump are probably expecting more of an improvement than what you will actually get.
Captain Conservative
Registered User
Jaded-Fan said:
First off, football is dramatically more physical than hockey. The difference between an 18 yr old and 23 year old NFL player is immense. The NHL not only minimizes that difference it compartmentalizes it depending on the player's skill set. How many speedy, rail-thin snipers have thrived under 200 lbs in this league?
Moreover, Ovechkin is not 23, he's 20. He's slightly less than two years older than Crosby. He was a teenager in training camp. Crosby will be 19 before Ovechkin is 21. If you factor in the rate at which power forward types (Ovechkin partially fits this bill) mature in the NHL, the whole age becomes less of an issue.
The age gap is also less of a factor considering Ovechkin's lack of any legit top 6 offensive player or offensive defenseman.
Bullseye! said:
Heatley is hardly what I'd call a power forward. He's got great size for a hockey player, but his game is hardly predicated on physicality. However you are right in saying he has bulked up. I think he's put on around 15 pounds since his draft year. But that's pretty much what every player goes through.
I really think the 18-21ish is a crucial stage in developement and not only to power forwards, as you seemed to be suggesting. (If I misread that, my bad, but that's the sense I got out it) It is true that power forwards usually take longer to develop, (Bertuzzi as a prime example.) but some do also show dramatic improvement between 18-20. However, I look at a guy like Kovalchuck who is a bigger guy (6'2) but hardly a power forward. If you look at his first 3 seasons in the league, he showed steady improvement in his PPG every year.
Other talented guys like Jaromir Jagr, who showed the same kind of improvement in his first 3 seasons. Marian Hossa showed great improvement as well from 19-21. Lindros, one of the ultimate power forwards, also showed a steady PPG increase his first 3 years. But so has a more cerebral guy like Patice Bergeron, whose all around game has shown steady improvement in the 18-20 period.
Basically what it comes down to, to me, is that when I look at very talented young players who entered the league at 18-19, regardless of size, position, playing style etc...you usually see a pretty dramatic improvement in their game in those next 2-3 years.
*I guess I have to put a little disclaimer here because Crosby threads usually turn into a joke real fast: I like both Crosby and Ovechkin and find them both to be exciting young players who will be great for the league for years to come. I hold no bias towards either of them, although I will admit I have watched Crosby since his days in the Q and have only started following Ovechkin this year. So as for the age gap having issue between Crosby/Ovechkin, I think it might play somewhat of a role. I would expect to see Crosby's overall game mature considerably over the next few seasons. Although to say Ovechkin will stop improving at 21 is nonsensical, we should see him continue to develop as well. I guess the bottom line is we won't know for sure what the "age gap" meant until we see Crosby play at 20.
No, Crosby shouldn't have even been drafted. He's definitely a bust. I mean, good god, he isn't even anywhere near close to breaking Gretzky's single season scoring record of 215. What a disappointment.
Bullseye! said:
Good point - I've also been saying this for a while. Different sized players follow different development curves.
Crosby is very NHL ready at a young age. However, due to his physical make up, he's closer to his peak than a lot of other players are at 18. Even though Sid is gonna be one of the best (if not the best) players in the league, I would not expect a Staal, Thornton or Spezza type point increase ratio out of Crosby. Bigger players take longer to develop. These guys didn't start hitting their stride until 20, and even then, they were/are far from their peak. I think Ovechkin sort of falls into their category.
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
EroCaps said:
............ and how many skinny/short/etc. wide recievers have thrived in the NFL? But neither your point or that fact matter much when it comes to Crosby, does it? So I am not sure why you brought it up. His game is as gritty as it comes, and in equal parts with his vision is a Jagr like lower body strength to protect the puck as well as taking the body to other players. So any potential growth and increase in strength gained between 18 and early 20's would be relevant to this discussion.
Once more I am not guarenteeing that Crosby is automatically going to grow that much more than Ovechkin, I have said often in this thread he may be that freak of nature who has peaked at 18. He is a point out of the top ten in scoring already so I could live with that. But forgive me for doubting that he has reached his peak though.
Now that I have repeated again that I am not guarenteeing that the two year age difference will be a factor, to say the opposite as many here are doing, that the age gap, especially for one in his late teens, is definately not a potential factor in evaluating and projecting the two though is pretty idiotic. You all asked for a quote and I gave one. Football is that much more physical than hockey is all that you can offer up in response? I beg to differ. Football does involve tackling so slightly more contact but the violence of each sport is pretty intense compared to others like the NBA or MLB. Both sports involve contact and lots of injuries because of that contact. So the comments I quoted I think have bearing.
Skk82
Registered User
Caniacforever said:
all of those guys had a power game and needed to fill out their frames to maximize their potential....crosby came into the league at 5'11 and 190, already built for the NHL. IMO he's closer to his ceiling upon draftng then even rick nash.
crosby's stats might improve in the next couple years, but so (hopefully) will the caliber of players that he will have to work with.
to answer the original question, i don't think crosby or ovechkin or dion phaneuf should be considered in the debate for #1 prospect, because all of them have clearly arrived at the top level and are arguable already the best players on their respective teams (apologies to iginla).
malkin has got to be leading the pack as the #1 prospect in the world. several others are close and maybe not as pedigreed so it'll have to wait until they turn professional (jack johnson, bobby ryan and even kessel)
asab said:
that may be true but on the other foot it will have been crosby's 3rd yr in the nhl compared to ovechkin's first yr. all the talk about 18 yrs compared to 20 yrs olds than you can't campare crosby's 20 yrs old season to ovechkin 20 yrs old season where it's 1st yr to 3rd yr playing. totally unfair and in crosby's favor.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
Legendary broadcaster Bob Cole passes away at 90- Latest: Non Player Canadiens
-
Proposal: First 3 moves you would do as the new CBJ GM ?
- Latest: Iwishihadaspacebar
-
-
Upcoming events
-
-
Victoriaville Tigres @ Drummondville Voltigeurs - Game 1Wagers: 1Staked: $25.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Belleville Senators @ Toronto Marlies -Belleville Senators leads series 1-0Wagers: 2Staked: $40.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Game 1 W-B/Scranton Penguins @ Lehigh Valley Phantoms - Lehigh Valley Phantoms leads series 1-0Wagers: 4Staked: $180.00Event closes
- Updated: