Andrei79
Registered User
- Jan 25, 2013
- 15,378
- 27,544
lol... you didnt watch Serge play, it's obvious. While Mete is a slightly better skater, Serge moves the puck just fine. He's a slightly better passer than Mete, but has far superior offensive IQ. Saying "every player has their strenght" is just you using a generalization to put them on even footing, which is just wrong. If you watched him instead of just checking the stats collumn, you would have realized that he clearly has all the tools and offensive upside to be a top pairing D. Mete, whom I like very much, has some really great qualities, but also some huge shortcomings that makes one wonder if he'll ever be able to be a top pairing D. Few have those doubts about Serge.
Stop using that excuse. Serge (o,50) had FOUR times the PPG ratio Mete had (0,14). That's not just because of their different teamates, especially since Serge finished SECOND among Tampa's Ds.
SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN. SECOND AMONG TAMPA DMEN.
Maybe if I repeat it often enough you'll get it. He finished ahead of Girardi by a whopping 22 points, ahead of Stralman, Coburn and any other D not named Hedman on the team. If it were so easy to get points on the TB squad, howcome Kunitz finished with 11 points less than Serge. Even Ryan McDonagh, who is usually a 0,50 ppg player, was unable to muster more than 3 points in 14 games, which is not even 0,25 ppg.
If your pet theory was right McD, even on the second PP line should've been able to rack up points, no? But McD's stint had him finish with not even half of Serge's ppg ratio.
What this shows is that Serge has really good offensive upside, and you'd see that if you actually watched him play. And don't give a lie about seeing play. The fact you equate him to Mete makes it clear as day that you didn't watch Serge.
And then you compare to Mete, who wasn't able to outscore a ragtag group of dmen. He finished 7th among dmen and 21st on the team. Mike Rielly was able to get a point more than Mete in 30 games less. If it was so bad in Montreal and Mete was as good as Serge, Mete would've been able to do better than at least half of the Ds on the team. You can see this, not by looking at his points, but where he finished. Despite playing 50 games, he finished 7th among Ds and 21st on the team
Yes, it's about needing a LHPMD more than we needed a winger. Funny how someone who supports a dumbass move by our dumbass GM has the same blindspot when it comes to the importance of filling that LHPMD spot.
Drouin isn't better at his position than Serge. Serge had 13 points less, as a rookie, than Drouin's best season with the same offensive powerhouse. Even worst for Drouin, two ROOKIES had better seasons than Drouin had on the same team, and not as a rookie for the latter (Gourde and Point both had more than 10 points than Drouin's best season).
Serge will be a top pairing D. Not sure Drouin will even be a top line winger. We've had two top line wingers on our team the season before, two wingers who are undeniably better than Drouin, and some people actually doubt they are top line wingers, so imagine where that puts Drouin compared to them. Drouin, for now, is NOT top line material.
You said we lack vision which is pretty ironic since it's clear as day you didn't watch Serge.
I agree with most of this. I brought up many of these points to show why I thought Sergachev had the trajectory you want to see for a future top pairing D.
Like you, I also think his offensive skill is that much greater than Mete. Where I'd add nuance is whether his stats were inflated or not. That's where, despite his fellow D's not doing very well, I tend to think they were. Tampa was on a tear the first 30 or so games and, during that time, he had a 60 point pace. Of those points, 50% were assisted/scored by either Stamkos or Kucherov. During the rest of the year, that number came down to 1 out 17 points in 47 games (6%). Mete had 55% O zone starts to Sergachev's 70%, both with similar ice time -> Mete with slightly more ES time, Sergachev slightly more PP time.
If we look strickly at team stats, Tampa Bay scored 83 more goals than Montreal, but what's interesting is both had similar pp% (23.9% vs 21.2%) and Mete scored more than half his points on the PP (Mete 57% Sergachev 40%). In terms of absolute goals (which is really what influences total points and not PP percentages) it was 66 TB to 52 MTL (27% more). In terms of ES situations where both could realistically be used (5 on 5, 4 on 4, 3 on 3, 6 on 5/4), Tampa scored 207 to Montreals pathetic 142 (2.52 vs 1.73 gpg).
So, it's not so surprising considering usage and circumstances how lopsided the point totals were. That doesn't mean Mete would have scored 40 in Tampa. He wouldn't have. But, I think he could've been Tampa's second highest scoring D too, just not at the level of separation Sergachev was. Because, as you said, he's just not as good offensively.
Anyways, carry on. I just wanted to add this since I thought it was interesting.