Do you consider playoff production a legitimate statistic?

[LyricalLyricist]

I agree, but the question is who would you take between a 30 years old Getzlaf or a 30 years old Thornton ? or even a 25 years old Getzlaf or a 25 years old Thornton ?

Getzlaf obviously but just meant Thornton gets shat on a lot but I'd still take a prime Thornton!

In fact I'd take him now in DD's place no problem.

 

[LastWordArmy]

I agree, but the question is who would you take between a 30 years old Getzlaf or a 30 years old Thornton ? or even a 25 years old Getzlaf or a 25 years old Thornton ?

For all the Getzlaf love, he won a cup as basically a rookie on a team where he was on the second line... kunitz-mcdonald-selanne was the first line.

Since 2008, Getzlaf and Thornton's playoff success/failures are very, very similar.

Tasked with beign the Man, they've basically fared the same.

That said... I don't put the blame on either guy. Hockey is a team sport, sometimes your number 1 centre can do well and you lose cause of another part of the team.

 

[habsfanatics*]

Almost entirely irrelevant imo. Some players may elevate their game a small amount, but not really. It's almost entirely circumstantial and luck.

Anyone who has made it to the NHL is reasonably motivated and has a strong desire to win, or they wouldn't have made it there in the first place. Guys get hot and it happens to coincide with the playoffs and people think hey "what a playoff player", there's no such thing imo. People remember the heroics, and forget all the playoffs where the player stunk.

It's like batting average with runners in scoring position, a completely bogus stat.

 

[Forsead]

Getzlaf obviously but just meant Thornton gets shat on a lot but I'd still take a prime Thornton!

In fact I'd take him now in DD's place no problem.

I have no problem admitting that he's better than what we got, I'm just saying that the playoffs stats are meaningful.

For all the Getzlaf love, he won a cup as basically a rookie on a team where he was on the second line... kunitz-mcdonald-selanne was the first line.

Since 2008, Getzlaf and Thornton's playoff success/failures are very, very similar.

Tasked with beign the Man, they've basically fared the same.

That said... I don't put the blame on either guy. Hockey is a team sport, sometimes your number 1 centre can do well and you lose cause of another part of the team.

I don't see how it's similar...

Thornton, since 2007-2008 : 62 pts in 75 gp for 0.83 PPG

Getzlaf, since 2007-2008 : 70 pts in 60 gp for 1.17 PPG

That's the difference between a 68 pts season (less than Thornton average) and a 96 pts season (more than getzlaf average).

 

[Mrb1p]

I have no problem admitting that he's better than what we got, I'm just saying that the playoffs stats are meaningful.



I don't see how it's similar...

Thornton, since 2007-2008 : 62 pts in 75 gp for 0.83 PPG

Getzlaf, since 2007-2008 : 70 pts in 60 gp for 1.17 PPG

That's the difference between a 68 pts season (less than Thornton average) and a 96 pts season (more than getzlaf average).

Yet they have similar win/lose ratios etc. They're not much different.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

I have no problem admitting that he's better than what we got, I'm just saying that the playoffs stats are meaningful.

Understood. I think I was just talking to talk really. I feel JT is often criticized but he's a fairly good player and I'd take him for a playoff run anyway. Getzlaf is obviously the younger and more complete player at this point.

 

[Ginu]

A lot is made of the fact that Desharnais is an anemic playoff producer, whereas players like Bourque, Smith-Pelley, Briere, etc are amazing playoff players.

Do you think that these numbers suggest an authentic and meaningful player attribute, or just flukes from small sample size, etc.

There are structural differences. 5on5 matters more in the playoffs, and you can't run the score against crappy teams, the crappy teams are gone.

Yes, regular season means nothing as long as you get in. Just look at Crosby vs Toews. I know who I want for a scoring title and who I want leading my team to a Cup. It's why the Kings are the Kings in the playoffs, why Duncan Keith becomes a God in the post season and why Desharnais will never get us anywhere no matter what he does with Pacioretty in the regular season.

 

[Lehkonen4Calder]

Yes, regular season means nothing as long as you get in. Just look at Crosby vs Toews. I know who I want for a scoring title and who I want leading my team to a Cup. It's why the Kings are the Kings in the playoffs, why Duncan Keith becomes a God in the post season and why Desharnais will never get us anywhere no matter what he does with Pacioretty in the regular season.

He does what during the regular season?

 

[Rapala]

Almost entirely irrelevant imo. Some players may elevate their game a small amount, but not really. It's almost entirely circumstantial and luck.

Anyone who has made it to the NHL is reasonably motivated and has a strong desire to win, or they wouldn't have made it there in the first place. Guys get hot and it happens to coincide with the playoffs and people think hey "what a playoff player", there's no such thing imo. People remember the heroics, and forget all the playoffs where the player stunk.

It's like batting average with runners in scoring position, a completely bogus stat.

To choke or not to choke that is the question.
Every Sport has Big Game Players and Big Game Chokers.
It is totally relevant.

 

[Deluded Puck]

It's not solely about production (Claude Lemieux), it's the eye test.

Some players seem to get it straight away (Subban, Gallagher, Eller)

Others will need time to grow into the role (Price, Paciotretty, Galchenyuk)

And a few will have big problems rising to the increased intensity (Desharnais, Plekanec)

 

[LaP]

Over one season and under 30 games no.

But over a career and over 40 games yes definitely.