Is c>winger argument overrated?

[Nithoniniel]

The reason that centers are generally more valuable than wingers is because they generally play a role that is more involved than the wingers in all three zones. But on the individual level, that does not have to be true. If you put Mark Stone on a line, he pretty much take the lion's share of rush defense, transition play, and generating offense for his line. He's likely as involved in the play as any center. But the same wouldn't be true of someone like Kessel. If you have a center with close to the same kind of offense, his overall impact is probably much greater.

 

[SotasicA]

In junior hockey the best players are often put to (or they themselves want to) play the center position. To have the puck a lot and to give their team the best chance of winning.

Only the best get picked/drafted when moving up age groups. Then as kids grow up and there's less and less available spots at the highest level, a lot of those centers are moved to wing. Thus, it makes sense top line centers are considered the most important to their teams even in the NHL.

Which is of course false, because in absolute terms goalie is the most important position. They have the biggest say in the result of a hockey game.

Comparing positions and roles is futile. In reality the most important player, the one who wins the game, is the one who outplays their opponent/counterpart on the other team in the most tangible, meaningful way. If a D-man plays 30 minutes of a game at a high level, and the other team has no answer to him, he might just be the best and most impactful player.

 

[sadpanda]

Yes

 

[Bounces R Way]

I believe it is. Centers have more opportunity to influence the game offensively and defensively but there seems to exist this belief in a static dichotomy of C>W no matter what that doesn't make sense to me. 4 of the top 5 scorers in the NHL right now are wingers, are they not having a big impact on games?

 

[JaegerDice]

It may be overrated, but it's not wholly inaccurate.

Generally speaking if you have two players of equal skill, one a C and one a W, the C will have greater impact on the game by virtue of his position.

But if you have a W that's significantly better than the C, then the C is not better simply because of his position.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

I believe it is. Centers have more opportunity to influence the game offensively and defensively but there seems to exist this belief in a static dichotomy of C>W no matter what that doesn't make sense to me. 4 of the top 5 scorers in the NHL right now are wingers, are they not having a big impact on games?

Just because 4 of the top 5 scorers are wingers doesn’t mean they are the best players. I would take Crosby over all of them. More than points make you the best player.

 

[LordZapp]

Yes, it is a very overrated and overused argument. Especially when people use it as a magical tiebreaker by assuming that the center provides more to his team defensively. While this is certainly true for some centers, people use it as a blanket statement. For example, I'm sure you can find numerous posts on this site (going back several years) of people claiming Stamkos is better than Kane because he is a center. When really, Stamkos does not provide anything defensively that Kane does not by virtue of being a center. If a player is capable of driving the offense from the winger position, he is as valuable as the guy that lines up at center offensively.

Stamkos is above average defensively. Kane is an elite one dimensional winger. Please stop.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Just because 4 of the top 5 scorers are wingers doesn’t mean they are the best players. I would take Crosby over all of them. More than points make you the best player.

And looking at more than what position a player plays should be included in evaluating them.

 

[JaegerDice]

Yes, it is a very overrated and overused argument. Especially when people use it as a magical tiebreaker by assuming that the center provides more to his team defensively. While this is certainly true for some centers, people use it as a blanket statement. For example, I'm sure you can find numerous posts on this site (going back several years) of people claiming Stamkos is better than Kane because he is a center. When really, Stamkos does not provide anything defensively that Kane does not by virtue of being a center. If a player is capable of driving the offense from the winger position, he is as valuable as the guy that lines up at center offensively.

Uh, Stamkos may not be Patrice Bergeron or anything, but he's worlds better defensively than Patrick Kane. There are nights Kane couldn't find his own end with a GPS.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

And looking at more than what position a player plays should be included in evaluating them.

All take the Center everytime. Winger is the least important position in hockey and anyone that has played the game knows that. Not saying some great players are not wingers but all time greats are Centers like Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, and McDavid. And the next tier is also better than any winger. All take a great Center over any winger.

 

[McDNicks17]

It isn't overrated when you're talking about equal players, but it's absolutely overrated when people say a 50-60 point center is better than a 70-80 point winger.

 

[Bounces R Way]

All take the Center everytime. Winger is the least important position in hockey and anyone that has played the game knows that. Not saying some great players are not wingers but all time greats are Centers like Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, and McDavid. And the next tier is also better than any winger. All take a great Center over any winger.

I don't. Backstrom is a great center, find me someone who thinks he's better than Ovechkin.

 

[Deluded Puck]

No because historically it’s been proven that Elite C’s can win without elite wingers, but an Elite winger needs a more complete team to win a cup.

 

[McDNicks17]

No because historically it’s been proven that Elite C’s can win without elite wingers, but an Elite winger needs a more complete team to win a cup.

I feel like this gets overstated.

What team is winning right now without an elite winger?

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

I don't. Backstrom is a great center, find me someone who thinks he's better than Ovechkin.

He is not in the same class so try and make a better argument. Best all time players are all Centers and then Defenseman. Not any winger that I would put in the top 10 all time. Even the 2nd tier of Centers is better than any winger all time. First tier Centers I have Gretzky, Lemieux, and Crosby. McDavid is on his way to being in that tier. But even players like Forsberg who had a great 200 foot game I would take over any winger all time and Forsberg is most likely some place in the 8-12th best Center all time. Players like Kane would be behind the top 20 Centers and AO behind the top 10.

 

[Bounces R Way]

He is not in the same class so try and make a better argument. Best all time players are all Centers and then Defenseman. Not any winger that I would put in the top 10 all time. Even the 2nd tier of Centers is better than any winger all time. First tier Centers I have Gretzky, Lemieux, and Crosby. McDavid is on his way to being in that tier. But even players like Forsberg who had a great 200 foot game I would take over any winger all time and Forsberg is most likely some place in the 8-12th best Center all time. Players like Kane would be behind the top 20 Centers and AO behind the top 10.

So Jagr doesn't deserve to mentioned in the same breath as guys like Yzerman or Sakic because of he played wing? He's 2nd all time in points scored. Has had a massive impact on the game internationally. This is the exact dichotomy I was talking about, and I find it to be lazy analysis.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Centers are more valuable because they tend to have more responsibility with faceoffs and being more involved on the defensive side of things. Then you also have to factor in that good centers tend to make people they play with better (this is not exclusive to wingers).

Cs are not better. Just more important when comparing two players of equal value.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Centers are responsible for board battles in the entire dzone. Wingers, just their quadrant.

In a board battle, Wingers have to know where their 1 guy is, who is usually a dman. Centers have to be aware of any open guy and adjust accordingly.

Wingers flee the dzone first and the ozone last, centers are often the opposite.

Centers cover dmen, centers, other forwards.

Offensively, centers have free reign to play the entire ozone, while wingers are somewhat pressured to stay on their side, though this doesn't apply as much to skilled wingers.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

So Jagr doesn't deserve to mentioned in the same breath as guys like Yzerman or Sakic because of he played wing? He's 2nd all time in points scored. Has had a massive impact on the game internationally. This is the exact dichotomy I was talking about, and I find it to be lazy analysis.

He is in that same league but if he makes top 10 all time it would most likely be 8-10. People could make a case for him against those players you mentioned even though he really never led his teams to Championships like Gretzky, Lemieux, and Crosby. Jagr is probably the best winger of all time and he can be argued in bottom of top 10. If you took the top 20 players of all time most would be Centers and Defenseman.

 

[Gsus]

I actually think Mallon might be the best of 'em. Even though his name doesn't get thrown around like ever.

 

[Lolaimbot]

He is not in the same class so try and make a better argument. Best all time players are all Centers and then Defenseman. Not any winger that I would put in the top 10 all time. Even the 2nd tier of Centers is better than any winger all time. First tier Centers I have Gretzky, Lemieux, and Crosby. McDavid is on his way to being in that tier. But even players like Forsberg who had a great 200 foot game I would take over any winger all time and Forsberg is most likely some place in the 8-12th best Center all time. Players like Kane would be behind the top 20 Centers and AO behind the top 10.

You have heard of Gordie Howe?

 

[Stand Witness]

While it isn't the best argument for center over wingers, it is worth noting that there are 2 wingers for every 1 center. That alone leads to it being 'more rare' that a center is elite, whereas there is the potential for double the star wingers.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

outside of generational players (mcdavid, Crosby and Mallon) the best players have been wingers. Kane and kucherov. Upcoming guys like gaudreau is making his case. Marner and rantanen are both out producing the #1 c on their teams.

Please articulate the exact argument that you'd like us to opine upon with respect to it being overrated.

It's really hard to discuss otherwise.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

While it isn't the best argument for center over wingers, it is worth noting that there are 2 wingers for every 1 center. That alone leads to it being 'more rare' that a center is elite, whereas there is the potential for double the star wingers.

Make your list if you believe that. I will list some Centers but not in exact order.

Gretzky
Lemieux
Crosby
Esposito
McDavid
Dionne
Stastny
Forsberg
Lindros
Sakic
Yzerman
Malkin
Messier
Trottier

This is just off the top of my head and I am sure I am missing some great ones. I will say the list of top Centers is by far better and bigger than wingers even with twice as many wingers playing.

 

[HockeySniper]

Yes. I mean the most dominant player of this generation has been a winger.