Is c>winger argument overrated?

[LamorielloAndSon]

Centers are more important

 

[LamorielloAndSon]

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

And couldn’t take his team all the way until kuznetsov developed into a legitimate threat of a center and Carlson had a Norris quality season

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

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

That is opinion and most would disagree. I personally would take the player with the 200 foot game that has a career points per 82 games of 39 goals and 106 points over the player with 50 goals and 91 points per 82 games. Outproducing a player by 15 points per 82 games is dominating. I would put Malkin over Ovechkin also. Malkin has averaged the second most points per game of his generation with 96 points per 82 games.

 

[Panthaz89]

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 was absolutely better in his prime before he was injured.

 

[HockeySniper]

And couldn’t take his team all the way until kuznetsov developed into a legitimate threat of a center and Carlson had a Norris quality season

Doesn’t change the fact the he is still the most dominant lol

 

[HockeySniper]

That is opinion and most would disagree. I personally would take the player with the 200 foot game that has a career points per 82 games of 39 goals and 106 points over the player with 50 goals and 91 points per 82 games. Outproducing a player by 15 points per 82 games is dominating. I would put Malkin over Ovechkin also. Malkin has averaged the second most points per game of his generation with 96 points per 82 games.

Opinions don’t matter. Awards and domination matter. I doesn’t matter who you think is the better player. He is in fact the most dominant player of this generation wether anyone likes it not.

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Opinions don’t matter. Awards and domination matter. I doesn’t matter who you think is the better player. He is in fact the most dominant player of this generation wether anyone likes it not.

That’s not fact. That’s an opinion. You don’t seem to understand that fact.

 

[authentic]

Marner and Matthews have the same ppg and Matthews does significantly more in the defensive end than Marner. Not sure what you mean by "out producing ".

Lol, not sure what games you've been watching this season, totally false. At best he's done roughly the same amount at ES but Marner PKs regularly while Matthews doesn't.

 

[HockeySniper]

That’s not fact. That’s an opinion. You don’t seem to understand that fact.

Number of individual awards is not opinion. It is a fact. Lol

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Opinions don’t matter. Awards and domination matter. I doesn’t matter who you think is the better player. He is in fact the most dominant player of this generation wether anyone likes it not.

The bolded is opinion. Not fact. It doesn’t matter WHETHER people like it or not. It’s an opinion.

 

[MrThomas]

If W is better than C then W is better and if C is better than W then C is better.

 

[KevinRedkey]

That is opinion and most would disagree. I personally would take the player with the 200 foot game that has a career points per 82 games of 39 goals and 106 points over the player with 50 goals and 91 points per 82 games. Outproducing a player by 15 points per 82 games is dominating. I would put Malkin over Ovechkin also. Malkin has averaged the second most points per game of his generation with 96 points per 82 games.

Crosby has played 14 seasons and has hit 106 points, and 39 goals only twice in his entire career. Using his "82 game pace" is a rubbish argument/stat and you know it.

Just like me saying the following is crap (even though it's true):
I'd rather have the guy who entered the league at the same time and amassed the same number of points, but has almost 50% more goals than the other.

Note:
I'm just shooting a hole in your argument because it's crap. Whether I think Ovie or Crosby has been more dominant is irrelevant.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

Cs just have more impact in general- more defensive and breakout responsibilities. Doesn't mean any given C is better than any given W, just means that were he to play his position perfectly he'd have more value than the winger.

Just an example- I played C and LW. I was alright at C, but there were guys who could do it better. At LW I just got to rip shots and set up fast breaks.. I looked better at LW. My game was simpler. Both take skill, but the scope of what I was responsible for was smaller at LW.

 

[Dirty Dog]

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

Mcdavid
Crosby
Mallon
Mallon
Mallon
Marner

 

[MessierII]

I think it’s just easier for a center to play wing than for a winger to play center.

 

[Big Cactus]

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.

Generational Pittsburgh centre Water Mallon?

 

[TDotMassive]

A winger can easily be a better scorer than a center, but the centerman is the more important position. They take the draws and have critical defensive responsibilities wingers don't have.

If scoring between two players is equal, than a good center > than a good winger, and a great center > great winger because they provide greater overall value to the game. This assuming all scoring equal, there is more to hockey than just point production. So to answer the question, no... it's not overrated, there's a very good reason why strength down the middle wins cups.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

Crosby has played 14 seasons and has hit 106 points, and 39 goals only twice in his entire career. Using his "82 game pace" is a rubbish argument/stat and you know it.

Just like me saying the following is crap (even though it's true):
I'd rather have the guy who entered the league at the same time and amassed the same number of points, but has almost 50% more goals than the other.

Note:
I'm just shooting a hole in your argument because it's crap. Whether I think Ovie or Crosby has been more dominant is irrelevant.

How is that rubbish. That is his Career pace per 82 games. Crosby’s PPG pace is the 6th best all time and the only current player in the top 10. Malkin is 14th all time and Ovechkin is 19th. Next closest player is Kane who is 40th. So when Crosby is on the ice he scores points at a higher rate than anyone of his generation and by double digits. Simply put Crosby is the most dominant player of his generation and one of the top 5 all time. I would not even have Ovechkin in the top 10 all time. So many players that are much better players that play a complete game. Even players like Forsberg who are not considered top 10 all time I would take on my team anyday over Ovechkin.

 

[drewjenks]

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.

1. I can't deny Mallon's skills .... Mallon is top 5 all time .... right there with Cantaloupe.
2. Don't list 3 guys from the same generation & say they're all "once in a generation" C's.
3. Wingers "out producing" their centers has nothing to do with the center/winger debate.

Center's are more important because they have a larger role & more responsibility (defensive coverage, faceoffs, etc). That's what the debate is about.

If a winger & center have the exact same skill level .... the winger will get more points 9 times out of 10 .... because they can just chill at the hashmarks & wait for their center to give them an outlet pass.

 

[drewjenks]

Assume:

Two players.

Both equal in skill sets.

The center is worth more than the wing.

Example: Henrik Sedin is worth more than Danial Sedin.

They would request to be worth the same amount though.

 

[drewjenks]

Wrong, C get more points because of his position on the ice.

Like when he's behind his own net digging out pucks for the wingers ..... ?

 

[Boud]

It depends IMO because there are centers that play like wingers and wingers that play like centers. Some wingers lead and set up the play, I look at a guy like Stone he's a winger but whenever he's on the ice he plays like he was the C on that line, Duchene on the other hand plays a lot like a winger but is a C.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

If W and C have same numbers of points, W is better.

This is wrong for a list of reasons found in the next dozen or so posts. Not even a debate.

 

[ref19]

Wrong, C get more points because of his position on the ice.

Lol no

 

[Binister]

C > W makes me always laugh because it's usually used just to fit a certain agenda. It's true that centers have more responsibilities but it's been used as a sole reason from time to time. It's more like a meme here.

But as a long time defenceman, I can say easily that wingers have the least responsibilities.
Meaning that their mistakes have the least consequences.