How much worse would the team really be without Kessel or Phaneuf?
If we remove their names, paycheques, or anything that elevates what they should bring to the team in our minds and simply look at what they do on the ice, how would our team perform without them?
Player A: will produce points at around a point-per-game pace, many of them on the powerplay and not as many at even strength. However, he does not put any effort into playing defence. His line is often easy to play against because he plays a ‘scared’ style of play and his line often concedes at least one goal per game while on the ice.
Player B: has the stamina and fitness level to play a lot of minutes on the blueline. Performs adequately at defending in most situations but is often beat due to lack of effort and mobility. Produce few points that wholly engineered by him (cannot hit net with shot, most assists come from completing a short pass to more offensive-minded player, etc.).
If player A were replaced by an average NHL forward (45-points, works hard) and Player B were replaced by an average NHL defender (plays 20 minutes, produces a few points and has the size to defend to an adequate standard), would our team be in much worse of a position?
I pose the question because I wonder how much the shortcomings of our stars cancel out the positive aspects of their play. I don’t have a vendetta with this thread and I’m not trying to say who should or shouldn’t be traded. I’m just interested to hear people’s opinions.
If we remove their names, paycheques, or anything that elevates what they should bring to the team in our minds and simply look at what they do on the ice, how would our team perform without them?
Player A: will produce points at around a point-per-game pace, many of them on the powerplay and not as many at even strength. However, he does not put any effort into playing defence. His line is often easy to play against because he plays a ‘scared’ style of play and his line often concedes at least one goal per game while on the ice.
Player B: has the stamina and fitness level to play a lot of minutes on the blueline. Performs adequately at defending in most situations but is often beat due to lack of effort and mobility. Produce few points that wholly engineered by him (cannot hit net with shot, most assists come from completing a short pass to more offensive-minded player, etc.).
If player A were replaced by an average NHL forward (45-points, works hard) and Player B were replaced by an average NHL defender (plays 20 minutes, produces a few points and has the size to defend to an adequate standard), would our team be in much worse of a position?
I pose the question because I wonder how much the shortcomings of our stars cancel out the positive aspects of their play. I don’t have a vendetta with this thread and I’m not trying to say who should or shouldn’t be traded. I’m just interested to hear people’s opinions.
