I have no clue on likely final standings for Pacific, and

[Coily]

No one is worse than Burns

*Main boards approved*

 

[stator]

Hamilton is a #3-4? You have to be kidding me. He was by far the best Bruins defenseman last year. And there's no way Burns is better than him.

Stats say something different. If you are looking for a stay at home, pure defenseman, Hamilton is probably better. But, if you are considering a defenseman with offensive bite, then Hamilton cannot compare to Burns.

Last season:

Hamilton
----------
GP= 72
G= 10
A= 32
P= 42
+/- = -3
PIM= 95
PPG= 9
SHG= 0
GWG= 2
S= 188
S%= 5.3

Burns
----------
GP= 82
G= 17
A= 43
PTS= 60
+- = -9
PIM= 65
PPG= 7
SHG= 0
GWG= 2
S= 245
S% = 6.9


There is a clear upswing in Hamilton's offensive stats but it comes at the expense of his defense. This was his first season with a negative +/-.

Burns is well over 33% more productive on the usual offensive stats (G,A,PTS), but Hamilton has about 33% more PIMs than Burns which I found somewhat surprising.

So basically, Hamilton's goal production comes only from PPG. There's no way I would have Hamilton being better than Burns, but I would say that Burns probably has the edge over Hamilton in the subjective who's better department.

 

[weastern bias]

Last season:

Hamilton
----------
+/- = -3

Burns
----------
+- = -9

-3 > -9

Hamilton > Burns

Prooved, with maths

 

[Juxtaposer]

Stats say something different. If you are looking for a stay at home, pure defenseman, Hamilton is probably better. But, if you are considering a defenseman with offensive bite, then Hamilton cannot compare to Burns.

Last season:

Hamilton
----------
GP= 72
G= 10
A= 32
P= 42
+/- = -3
PIM= 95
PPG= 9
SHG= 0
GWG= 2
S= 188
S%= 5.3

Burns
----------
GP= 82
G= 17
A= 43
PTS= 60
+- = -9
PIM= 65
PPG= 7
SHG= 0
GWG= 2
S= 245
S% = 6.9


There is a clear upswing in Hamilton's offensive stats but it comes at the expense of his defense. This was his first season with a negative +/-.

Burns scored 18 more points in 10 more games. If you pro-rate Hamilton's numbers, it gives him 48 points in 82 games.

My question is, do you consider Burns a #1D? If not, why? I don't, and that's because of his defense. I think he's a high-end #2, almost entirely due to his elite offense.

My second question would be, how bad defensively does a 22 year old 6'5", elite-skating RHD who can put up 48 points in a season on a non-playoff team have to be to not be considered a #1D? I think you'd have to be pretty damn bad. And Hamilton isn't.

Bruins fans have done a wonderful smear job on Hamilton's reputation to make themselves feel better about giving him away, just like they did Seguin... And look how Seguin turned out?

 

[Celly4Celebrini]

My question is, do you consider Burns a #1D? If not, why? I don't, and that's because of his defense. I think he's a high-end #2, almost entirely due to his elite offense.

My second question would be, how bad defensively does a 30 year old 6'6", elite-skating RHD who can put up 60 points in a season on a non-playoff team have to be to not be considered a #1D? I think you'd have to be pretty damn bad.

And I agree burns isn't a number 1 D

 

[SJSharksfan39]

I think the Pacific is up for grabs this year. You have the bottom feeders like Edmonton (Improved), Arizona, and Vancouver but the rest looks like a crapshoot. I decided not to do full out predictions this year (Even though I think I'm picking Tampa Bay to win the Cup) but for the Pacific:

Ducks
Sharks
Kings
Flames
Canucks
Oilers
Coyotes

 

[Gecklund]

Burns scored 18 more points in 10 more games. If you pro-rate Hamilton's numbers, it gives him 48 points in 82 games.

My question is, do you consider Burns a #1D? If not, why? I don't, and that's because of his defense. I think he's a high-end #2, almost entirely due to his elite offense.

My second question would be, how bad defensively does a 22 year old 6'5", elite-skating RHD who can put up 48 points in a season on a non-playoff team have to be to not be considered a #1D? I think you'd have to be pretty damn bad. And Hamilton isn't.

Bruins fans have done a wonderful smear job on Hamilton's reputation to make themselves feel better about giving him away, just like they did Seguin... And look how Seguin turned out?

Hamilton was not good defensively last year. I'm not saying that he CANT be. He can be but currently Burns>>Hamilton.

 

[stator]

Burns scored 18 more points in 10 more games. If you pro-rate Hamilton's numbers, it gives him 48 points in 82 games.

Yes, but as I pointed out all but one goal from Hamilton came from the power play. So in regular, 5 on 5 play, he's not much of a scoring threat from the blue line. Hard to call any defenseman a #1 today without some offensive prowess.

My question is, do you consider Burns a #1D? If not, why?

I do, yes, but not a top #1 but more like a bottom #1 in this league. He's uncontested a top #1 defenseman for offensive capability, but I consider him a high top #2 on defense, thus averaging to a bottom #1. Burns never had a top goalie to back him up on the Sharks though.

don't, and that's because of his defense. I think he's a high-end #2, almost entirely due to his elite offense.

Our differences come down to where we average out Burns. You're high #2 and I'm low #1. I can respect that, but its not much of a difference, imo.

second question would be, how bad defensively does a 22 year old 6'5", elite-skating RHD who can put up 48 points in a season on a non-playoff team have to be to not be considered a #1D? I think you'd have to be pretty damn bad. And Hamilton isn't.

Hamilton has never put up 48 points in his short NHL career. He had 25 points in the previous season. Sure Hamilton has upside and which could be a better career overall than Burns, but he's not had an NHL career yet.

Simply stated, his stats don't support elite defensemen numbers but his offensive numbers fall way short compared to Burns. If Hamilton can put up better offensive numbers while 5 on 5, then I will say he's an elite #1, but not yet.

Bruins fans have done a wonderful smear job on Hamilton's reputation to make themselves feel better about giving him away, just like they did Seguin... And look how Seguin turned out?

Let them smear away and hopefully some of those good, developing players will make their way to the Sharks in the future. I'm guess you're right there with me on this one.

 

[SactoShark]

Snorks
Kings
Ducks
Flames
Oilor
Nucks
Yote

I don't really care to back it up with incredibly disputable facts, cuz I really don't have any. I pick the Sharks to win the Pacific cuz they are my favorite ice hockey team. Kings next cuz I hate them and they will try to be mean to the Sharks and win too. Ducks 3rd just cuz I hate that everyone has them winning the division and I hate all their stupid faces. Flames 4th cuz their goat lending is shaky at best. Oilers up a bit because they finally have a reason and a means to play hockey. Nucks are crap. Coyotes are probably the worst team in the NHL.

 

[Bowie22]

No one is worse than Burns

Can a sharks fan at the game tomorrow confirm plz

 

[sharski]

it's been mathematically proven the Sharks will be the #1 seed in the west

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-western-conference-predictions-using-analytics/

Can't argue with math

 

[HydroF]

1. Ducks, wouldn't be surprised if they didn't finish first. The % of wins in one goal games won't repeat and I expect Sharks and Kings to have improved years. Their roster though is still strong enough I will go along with the crowd and predict they finish 1st.

2. Sharks, I'm buying that Jones is going to provide strong goaltending. Improved roster, bounce back year for a lot of guys.

3. Kings, bounce back year, I see kings and sharks being pretty interchangeable for 2 and 3.

4. Calgary, good last year, but have seen this type of situation before. Team predicted to do poorly, surprisingly does great, everyone buys them to be as good as they appear, following season they fall back to earth. They are still building, will squeak into playoffs as WC though.

5. Vancouver, pretty interchangeable with Calgary. Slowly declining.

6. Edmonton, I want to rank them higher. I want to say they will be in the mix challenging for a playoff spot. I can't though, because I have predicted they would prior to several previous seasons and every time they still end up in the basement and I promised myself I wouldn't do it again. I will believe they are improved when I see it.

7. Phoenix, they are terrible will be last. However they have a lot of legit prospects and will certainly get another in the 2016 draft. Going to be good in a couple years.

 

[CanadienShark]

Hamilton is a #3-4? You have to be kidding me. He was by far the best Bruins defenseman last year. And there's no way Burns is better than him.

I really disagree with the bolded. It's close, and Hamilton is trending upwards fast, but I don't think it's crazy to assert that Burns is currently better.

 

[KirbyDots]

I really disagree with the bolded. It's close, and Hamilton is trending upwards fast, but I don't think it's crazy to assert that Burns is currently better.

I watch a lot of Bruins games and I agree with this, though I think Hamilton will end up being much much better in a year or two.

 

[CanadienShark]

I watch a lot of Bruins games and I agree with this, though I think Hamilton will end up being much much better in a year or two.

I should make it clear (although it's obvious I implied it) that Hamilton is without a doubt at least a #2 right now.