Stastny vs. Latendresse

SPARTAKUS*

Guest
Paul Stastny is a very good player. He can play on the PP and kill penalties. He can play in traffic no probleme. He's a great playmaker. Bottom line is Stastny has the better upsides I'll take him on my team any time over Latendress.
 

Mr. Hab

Registered User
Nov 17, 2004
6,704
0
Montreal
Paul Stastny is a very good player. He can play on the PP and kill penalties. He can play in traffic no probleme. He's a great playmaker. Bottom line is Stastny has the better upsides I'll take him on my team any time over Latendress.

IMO, Latendresse is what the Habs need now and for the future...(not comparing him, but the Habs haven't had a top 6 PowerForward since John LeClair...).
So, it works out well for both Colorado and Montreal (they should both have good careers + Stastny is 21, Latendresse is 19...).

Stastny is replacing Pierre Turgeon, and doing a good job of it.
Not easy to find, but the Habs need a grittier center-man...a la healthy Forsberg wouldn't hurt ;).


BTW, would YOU trade Vermette for Stastny and a 2nd Round? (just curious!).
Also, I'm a Vermette fan...
 

Bryzga lol*

Guest
Really hard to decide with all the Avs and Habs fans bickering back and forth. It would be awesome to have a few unbiased opinions :help:
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
The one thing to consider is they are different ages. One is 19, the other 21 and a lot of development can take place in years. At the same age Stastny was averaging a point per game in the NCAA. Doesn't mean Lats is going to be better by any stretch, just something to help put their respective play in context.
 

SPARTAKUS*

Guest
IMO, Latendresse is what the Habs need now and for the future...(not comparing him, but the Habs haven't had a top 6 PowerForward since John LeClair...).
So, it works out well for both Colorado and Montreal (they should both have good careers + Stastny is 21, Latendresse is 19...).

Stastny is replacing Pierre Turgeon, and doing a good job of it.
Not easy to find, but the Habs need a grittier center-man...a la healthy Forsberg wouldn't hurt ;).


BTW, would YOU trade Vermette for Stastny and a 2nd Round? (just curious!).
Also, I'm a Vermette fan...

Wow that's a very difficult question to anwser. But for Stastny and a 2nd Round I would have to say yes even though I like Vermette very much.
 

LesCanadiens

Hardcore Curmudgeon
Feb 27, 2002
3,665
1,548
West Kelowna
The one thing to consider is they are different ages. One is 19, the other 21 and a lot of development can take place in years. At the same age Stastny was averaging a point per game in the NCAA. Doesn't mean Lats is going to be better by any stretch, just something to help put their respective play in context.

Winner of the most sensible post award. :handclap:
 

Shabutie

Registered User
Jul 26, 2004
16,086
79
Ottawa
I agree , Lats is a very good playmaker , he mades tremendous passes , he is underestimated in that case IMO .

Id still take Stastny over him thought
I dunno...I'd keep Lats, cuz I think Higgins and Plekanec are similar to Stastny. Although Higgs and Pleks are not as good of playmakers, they are better goal scorers (imo). As far as 2 way game, heart and work ethic, they're very similar imo.
 

shortcat1

Registered User
Jan 25, 2005
898
2
Downtown Palau, ON
Many heads are better than one

All I can add here is that, according to hockeysfuture.com, Statsny is rated a 7.5B and Latendresse an 8.5C.

So, Statsny's potential is to be a better than average second line player (players not quite good enough to play on the top line on a regular basis, but still possessing enough talent to contribute offensively. Think Andrew Cassels, Jason Arnott.)

Whereas, Latendresse's potential is considered to be a better than average first line player (players with definite skill that might be just a cut below elite status, but still possessing All-Star potential. Think Patrik Elias, Keith Tkachuk).

Whatever I may think about the talent and abilities of different players isn't really all that relevant to the proper evaluation of the players in question. By that, I mean that I may watch these players on the ice but I'm not a trained hockey observer/expert. I don't have the 'eye' for all the fine points of skill level evaluation.

Therefore, when it comes to evaluating or rating players, I defer to sites like hockeysfuture.com and other sites like tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players, red line report and others of that kind. These sites include trained observers, scouts, etc that contribute corporately to the evaluation of hockey players. This is much better than one potentially biased opinion like mine and like many of you. But, more importantly, it tends to be more accurate because there's a concensus that is achieved through the interaction of 'more heads' than one.
 

Squeaky

Registered User
Jul 8, 2004
3,196
0
Toronto
All I can add here is that, according to hockeysfuture.com, Statsny is rated a 7.5B and Latendresse an 8.5C.

So, Statsny's potential is to be a better than average second line player (players not quite good enough to play on the top line on a regular basis, but still possessing enough talent to contribute offensively. Think Andrew Cassels, Jason Arnott.)

Whereas, Latendresse's potential is considered to be a better than average first line player (players with definite skill that might be just a cut below elite status, but still possessing All-Star potential. Think Patrik Elias, Keith Tkachuk).

Whatever I may think about the talent and abilities of different players isn't really all that relevant to the proper evaluation of the players in question. By that, I mean that I may watch these players on the ice but I'm not a trained hockey observer/expert. I don't have the 'eye' for all the fine points of skill level evaluation.

Therefore, when it comes to evaluating or rating players, I defer to sites like hockeysfuture.com and other sites like tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players, red line report and others of that kind. These sites include trained observers, scouts, etc that contribute corporately to the evaluation of hockey players. This is much better than one potentially biased opinion like mine and like many of you. But, more importantly, it tends to be more accurate because there's a concensus that is achieved through the interaction of 'more heads' than one.

The player ratings actually aren't made by consensus. The top 50 and org. ranking lists are done by committe, but as far as I know that's it. This of course leads to a lot of variation in how generous the different teams are with their numberical player rankings, and I really don't think it's fair to compare prospects from different teams based on them.
 

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
89,205
36,197
Wished we stop those Habs vs the World comparisons.....What has the style of Latendresse has anything to do versus Stastny's style anyway? Your team needs a power-forward go with one, need an all-around guy, go with the other....
 

Kaizer

Registered User
Apr 26, 2003
4,574
428
Berlin, Germany
All I can add here is that, according to hockeysfuture.com, Statsny is rated a 7.5B and Latendresse an 8.5C.

So, Statsny's potential is to be a better than average second line player (players not quite good enough to play on the top line on a regular basis, but still possessing enough talent to contribute offensively. Think Andrew Cassels, Jason Arnott.)

Whereas, Latendresse's potential is considered to be a better than average first line player (players with definite skill that might be just a cut below elite status, but still possessing All-Star potential. Think Patrik Elias, Keith Tkachuk).

Liles had rating 3. And your point ?
 

Hasbro

Family Friend
Sponsor
Apr 1, 2004
52,415
16,383
South Rectangle
All I can add here is that, according to hockeysfuture.com, Statsny is rated a 7.5B and Latendresse an 8.5C.

So, Statsny's potential is to be a better than average second line player (players not quite good enough to play on the top line on a regular basis, but still possessing enough talent to contribute offensively. Think Andrew Cassels, Jason Arnott.)

Whereas, Latendresse's potential is considered to be a better than average first line player (players with definite skill that might be just a cut below elite status, but still possessing All-Star potential. Think Patrik Elias, Keith Tkachuk).

Whatever I may think about the talent and abilities of different players isn't really all that relevant to the proper evaluation of the players in question. By that, I mean that I may watch these players on the ice but I'm not a trained hockey observer/expert. I don't have the 'eye' for all the fine points of skill level evaluation.

Therefore, when it comes to evaluating or rating players, I defer to sites like hockeysfuture.com and other sites like tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players, red line report and others of that kind. These sites include trained observers, scouts, etc that contribute corporately to the evaluation of hockey players. This is much better than one potentially biased opinion like mine and like many of you. But, more importantly, it tends to be more accurate because there's a concensus that is achieved through the interaction of 'more heads' than one.
Keep in mind most avs fans were upset at the team for signing Paul because we believed he'd be in the AHL this season and would have rather had him at Denver.
 

shortcat1

Registered User
Jan 25, 2005
898
2
Downtown Palau, ON
Liles had rating 3. And your point ?

And Ryder had a poor rating (5.5, I think), I know... but nevertheless, I still believe that these 'organized' rankings/evaluations/ratings are superior, on the whole, to what we can do from our sofas and our limited perspectives and biases.
 

Qubax

Registered User
Oct 25, 2002
3,280
126
Visit site
I think one thing to consider is that Latendresse is much more raw...

Age doesn't always mean much....but with Lats it does. He's big, mangy and gangly. And inspite of all this he's a contributing important NHL cog in his rookie year...which is impressive...

Stastny just turned 21 before the end of 2006...so he's a little older...but he's still young....I just think Stastny is a lot more polished....more of a finished product...

Stastny's best NHL season compared to this season will be a much closer gap then this year for Lats and his best season.

Stastny remarkably has 40 points in 50 games...so he might get like 65 points-70 points...his upside may only be 90 (only..hehe)

whereas Lats may only get 35 points this year but garner similar upside production wise...

I just think lats more raw, Stastny more finished...in the future...who knows...but Paul holds considerably less risk for a young player based on this formula
 

Blind Gardien

nexus of the crisis
Apr 2, 2004
20,537
0
Four Winds Bar
And Ryder had a poor rating (5.5, I think), I know... but nevertheless, I still believe that these 'organized' rankings/evaluations/ratings are superior, on the whole, to what we can do from our sofas and our limited perspectives and biases.
Not likely, since those ratings are made by others sitting on their own biased sofas with limited perspectives, just like us. Granted, they are based on mostly smarter and more objective perspectives than those of the average poster. But factor in outdatedness of the ratings, and you're still often going to get a better picture filtering and averaging the back-and-forth chatterings of the two biased sides than relying on two single possibly-outdated opinions.

Latendresse has consistently impressed me and won me over this year. I don't see Stastny enough to have too much of an opinion on his overall play, but he sure has great numbers for a rookie. I'd like to have both of them on my team. But I'm not going to try to pick between them. We have Latendresse in Montreal, we're really happy with how he has played and with what his future hopefully holds. Clearly Avs fans feel the same about Stastny, and well they should. Good jobs by both scouting staffs, I'd say. :handclap:
 

Roman Tanner

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
1,743
0
Mgmt. Excuseville
All I can add here is that, according to hockeysfuture.com, Statsny is rated a 7.5B and Latendresse an 8.5C.

So, Statsny's potential is to be a better than average second line player (players not quite good enough to play on the top line on a regular basis, but still possessing enough talent to contribute offensively. Think Andrew Cassels, Jason Arnott.)

Whereas, Latendresse's potential is considered to be a better than average first line player (players with definite skill that might be just a cut below elite status, but still possessing All-Star potential. Think Patrik Elias, Keith Tkachuk).

Whatever I may think about the talent and abilities of different players isn't really all that relevant to the proper evaluation of the players in question. By that, I mean that I may watch these players on the ice but I'm not a trained hockey observer/expert. I don't have the 'eye' for all the fine points of skill level evaluation.

Therefore, when it comes to evaluating or rating players, I defer to sites like hockeysfuture.com and other sites like tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players, red line report and others of that kind. These sites include trained observers, scouts, etc that contribute corporately to the evaluation of hockey players. This is much better than one potentially biased opinion like mine and like many of you. But, more importantly, it tends to be more accurate because there's a concensus that is achieved through the interaction of 'more heads' than one.

While I agree with you in theory, and having contributed to HF for a short while myself, I can assure you the process is typically debated quite a bit based on everyone's perception and more importantly first hand knowledge of the players, however, I will also add this:

It is a 'business' of projections.

The numbers and letters system is a projected value and can obviously be both exceeded or overstated.

I'm not sure anyone (myself included) expected Stastny to be this good, this soon. He has been an impact player on the Avalanche. There's a difference between being given icetime and earning icetime, and believe me, this kid earns it.

When someone is projected to be a good second line player for his career, and he steps into the NHL and is a good second line player as a rookie, then he may be slightly ahead of his development curve.

Some food for thought.
 

Rise from the Ashes

Price defies corsi
Sep 13, 2005
7,466
4
Pointe-Claire, QC
Latendresse is ranked 8.5C because of his upside. Put it this way: Latendresse had skating issues going into the NHL and still isnt that good but far better, he also is younger and very strong and large. This rating is based on if he does all he can to improve.

Stastny is already a very complete and somewhat experienced player. NO doubt he will improve and be a much greater player. Seems like a Chris Drury type, but its all based on potential. Stastny basically is living up to his rating right now as he is a well rounded player who is averaging 2nd line center points. But we will not know how many points he truly can rack up until/if he becomes a #1 center on the Avs.

Latendresse is not 20 yet and no doubt will have a far better season next year.
 

Bam Beet*

Guest
In 3 years:
Stastny: 15-55-70
Lats: 30-30-60

Peak:
Stastny: 25-60-85
Lats: 40-40-80

You seriously think Stastny will only have 15 goals in 3 years down the road. He has 14 already in his rookie season and will finish with around 20-25 THIS YEAR.
 

LesCanadiens

Hardcore Curmudgeon
Feb 27, 2002
3,665
1,548
West Kelowna
I haven't watched a lot of Stastny...but I do watch a lot of Lats. And one thing I notice with him, he often does those types of things that usually only the real special players do. He'll surprise the heck out of me with a soft, saucer pass over sticks and in between bodies right on a stick. He often catches his own teammates offguard with some of his plays. Not saying he's a sure-fire elite player, but he's one of these guys that has that natural ability to see the ice really well, and to make some special things look easy. I think he has a very high upside considering he's only 19.

And it's a very big bonus that he is hard to move with or without the puck, and he can bodycheck players through the boards. He lays some devastating hits.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->