Player Discussion: Josh Bailey

[Bones45]

That would place Bailey as a borderline 3rd liner.

Spelling corrected -- but yes, I agree that is exactly what Bailey is.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Being a 40 point winger who is good defensively isn't doing "a lot". There's plenty of those types of players around the league. Like I said, we already have one in Nielsen. They aren't rare players that can't be replaced unless they have a great all around game (which Bailey doesn't).

There aren't 90 first liners and 90 second liners. There are 90 playing on each line, but not every player playing on those lines are legitimate first or second liners. You're not talking into account teams that are at the bottom playing players who would play on the third line of a middle of the pack team. It's very inaccurate to say there are 90 first and second liners.

If we say there are 60 legitimate first and second liners (which I think is generous), giving each team two legitimate players on each line (which again, I'd say is generous), that would be 120 players. That would place Bailey as a boarderline 3rd liner.

Okay, so your definition of first liner is not "guys who play on the first line"?

is first liner, in your opinion, a subjective term of players that YOU personally believe are good enough to play on the first line?

What are the leagues fourth liners? Are they really just fifth and sixth liners?

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Just a word to the wise,

If your hatred of Josh Bailey requires the mental gymnastics to deny that their are 30 teams with 3 first liners then you probably need to have a drink and rethink your life decisions.

This may be about more than Josh Bailey.

 

[WangMustGo]

Being a 40 point winger who is good defensively isn't doing "a lot". There's plenty of those types of players around the league. Like I said, we already have one in Nielsen. They aren't rare players that can't be replaced unless they have a great all around game (which Bailey doesn't).

There aren't 90 first liners and 90 second liners. There are 90 playing on each line, but not every player playing on those lines are legitimate first or second liners. You're not talking into account teams that are at the bottom playing players who would play on the third line of a middle of the pack team. It's very inaccurate to say there are 90 first and second liners.

If we say there are 60 legitimate first and second liners (which I think is generous), giving each team two legitimate players on each line (which again, I'd say is generous), that would be 120 players. That would place Bailey as a boarderline 3rd liner.

This is so off base. All you guys arguing Bailey sucks is a joke. He is the whipping boy on this team but he is a good player.

There are not many teams in the league that have 40 point 3rd liners that are very good defensively, and no team has 3 of them.

Bailey has been fine, he is what he is at this point a middle 6 winger that can chip in offense and play sound defensively. He isn't supposed to be a guy that puts up 80 points a year, he isn't paid to do that. The offense should fall on the hands of JT, KO, Frans, Lee, Nelson, Strome, and Grabovski.

We aren't scoring as many goals this year because 4 of those 7 are not producing like they need to.

 

[rikker]

i don't understand how people can arbitrarily choose how many 1st liners there are in the league.

fact: there are 90. of course some are better than others, but since there are no statistical targets and tolerances designated in stone, there has to be 90.

Bailey is a very versatile, 1st - 3rd line player. there is no reason to to completely trash him, just as there is no reason to expect him to put up a point a game.

i think there are some that want more grit and consistency out of him, and that is reasonable. i would also like to see more out of Lee, Nelson, JT, KO, Nielsen, Kulemin, Grabovski, Strome, yet they don't take a ****-kicking like Josh does.

we can upgrade, but we can do worse too.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

i don't understand how people can arbitrarily choose how many 1st liners there are in the league.

fact: there are 90. of course some are better than others, but since there are no statistical targets and tolerances designated in stone, there has to be 90

So far I think only one person claims to hold the secret to subjectively defining first liners.

There are 90 first liners. I can't believe this is controversial in any way to anyone.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

That would place Bailey as a boarderline 3rd liner.

This is easily the best part of that masterpiece of a post. You are pretending as through there is some math involved and you're just reporting the data, instead of simply inventing the numbers that place Josh Bailey as a third liner, the desired objective.

This is the intelligent design of posts.

And just like intelligent design, it isn't very intelligent. It is designed though, an explanation designed to achieve an outcome: that Bailey is a third liner.

 

[Abe Vukota]

i don't understand how people can arbitrarily choose how many 1st liners there are in the league.

fact: there are 90. of course some are better than others, but since there are no statistical targets and tolerances designated in stone, there has to be 90.

Bailey is a very versatile, 1st - 3rd line player. there is no reason to to completely trash him, just as there is no reason to expect him to put up a point a game.

i think there are some that want more grit and consistency out of him, and that is reasonable. i would also like to see more out of Lee, Nelson, JT, KO, Nielsen, Kulemin, Grabovski, Strome, yet they don't take a ****-kicking like Josh does.

we can upgrade, but we can do worse too.

Well, I recently learned that opinions can't ever be wrong. So it's my opinion that there is only one 1st liner in the league, but you have to say his name into a mirror three times to make him appear.

Proof me wrong, nerds.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Well, I recently learned that opinions can't ever be wrong. So it's my opinion that there is only one 1st liner in the league, but you have to say his name into a mirror three times to make him appear.

Proof me wrong, nerds.

Math checks out here folks.

 

[LeapOnOver]

So far I think only one person claims to hold the secret to subjectively defining first liners.

There are 90 first liners. I can't believe this is controversial in any way to anyone.

Gotta love how he ignores the other end of the spectrum. Teams with two legitimate first line centers yet one plays on the second line (ahem, Malkin and or Crosby). Even if his theory held some validity he completely leaves that little gem out of the equation.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Gotta love how he ignores the other end of the spectrum. Teams with two legitimate first line centers yet one plays on the second line (ahem, Malkin and or Crosby). Even if his theory held some validity he completely leaves that little gem out of the equation.

His theory has zero legitimacy from its inception. It is the perfect example of the wrong opinion. Factually wrong.

It is indefensible.

 

[PK Cronin]

So far I think only one person claims to hold the secret to subjectively defining first liners.

There are 90 first liners. I can't believe this is controversial in any way to anyone.

There are a lot of people who follow that belief. It's pretty amazing actually. It's why I believe there are different tiers at each position, within that 90. The guys at the bottom are obviously more interchangeable, whereas Tavares and Benn are not.

 

[ScaredStreit]

Okay, so your definition of first liner is not "guys who play on the first line"?

is first liner, in your opinion, a subjective term of players that YOU personally believe are good enough to play on the first line?

What are the leagues fourth liners? Are they really just fifth and sixth liners?

While I agree with you in general (For the record I think Bailey is suited as a 2nd line player), there can be exceptions to this rule. Nobody in their right mind would say that one of Gretzky/Messier or Crosby/Malkin are/were merely 2nd liners. Just like if Frans Nielsen played on the 1st line next game for one day, he wouldn't magically be a 1st liner for a day.

 

[Abe Vukota]

While I agree with you in general (For the record I think Bailey is suited as a 2nd line player), there can be exceptions to this rule. Nobody in their right mind would say that one of Gretzky/Messier or Crosby/Malkin are/were merely 2nd liners. Just like if Frans Nielsen played on the 1st line next game for one day, he wouldn't magically be a 1st liner for a day.

Line placement is being incorrectly used as a designator of skill, rather than a position, which is the source of the confusion. A player who plays on the 1st line is by definition a 1st liner, but there are 1st liners of different skill levels.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Line placement is being incorrectly used as a designator of skill, rather than a position, which is the source of the confusion. A player who plays on the 1st line is by definition a 1st liner, but there are 1st liners of different skill levels.

Exactly. And there are 90 guys who should be first liners.

 

[islesfan3913]

Okay, so your definition of first liner is not "guys who play on the first line"?

is first liner, in your opinion, a subjective term of players that YOU personally believe are good enough to play on the first line?

What are the leagues fourth liners? Are they really just fifth and sixth liners?

No, that's not my definition because not everyone who plays on the first line are legitimate first liners. Yes, it is subjective. But I'm fairly certain that, if given a list all players playing on the first line, a large amount of people would pick out the same player who are deemed to be inadequate. It really isn't hard to understand if you choose not to look at things in a vacuum. Are players like Jannik Hansen and Brett Connolly first liners? What about someone like Cam Atkinson? Or how about Colorado's Andreas Martinsen? There's way too many variables to accurately say there are 90 first liners. Saying that means you're only looking at things on the surface. Players change lines and players perform at different levels. This was a big discussion with players like Paul Stastny and Ryan O'Reily. There were quite a few people (and still are) who believed that neither were legitimate first liners but would be great second liners. Do those tweener players really deserve to be on the same level as every first liner?

Just a word to the wise,

If your hatred of Josh Bailey requires the mental gymnastics to deny that their are 30 teams with 3 first liners then you probably need to have a drink and rethink your life decisions.

This may be about more than Josh Bailey.

Again, another incorrect assumption made by you. I've never had hatred for him. If you've followed what I've said (which you obviously haven't), I've always been of the belief that Bailey is a solid third line player. But I absolutely don't think he should be playing in the top six, especially on the first line.

This is easily the best part of that masterpiece of a post. You are pretending as through there is some math involved and you're just reporting the data, instead of simply inventing the numbers that place Josh Bailey as a third liner, the desired objective.

This is the intelligent design of posts.

And just like intelligent design, it isn't very intelligent. It is designed though, an explanation designed to achieve an outcome: that Bailey is a third liner.

His theory has zero legitimacy from its inception. It is the perfect example of the wrong opinion. Factually wrong.

It is indefensible.

Ah yes, I forgot. The only posts that are intelligent and accurate are the ones who agree with what you have to say. Let's all look at thinks on the surface and say "hey, everything is alright!"

This is so off base. All you guys arguing Bailey sucks is a joke. He is the whipping boy on this team but he is a good player.

There are not many teams in the league that have 40 point 3rd liners that are very good defensively, and no team has 3 of them.

Bailey has been fine, he is what he is at this point a middle 6 winger that can chip in offense and play sound defensively. He isn't supposed to be a guy that puts up 80 points a year, he isn't paid to do that. The offense should fall on the hands of JT, KO, Frans, Lee, Nelson, Strome, and Grabovski.

We aren't scoring as many goals this year because 4 of those 7 are not producing like they need to.

Again, I'm not saying Bailey sucks or that he's a joke. I've never said this. My stance has always been that he is a great third line player, maybe second liner in a pinch. But I don't think he should be playing on the top line at all. I'm not sure why you said it's off base when my entire point is what you said exactly.

Gotta love how he ignores the other end of the spectrum. Teams with two legitimate first line centers yet one plays on the second line (ahem, Malkin and or Crosby). Even if his theory held some validity he completely leaves that little gem out of the equation.

I'm not exactly sure what this means. Is it supposed to prove me wrong? Because if anything, it 100% proves my entire point. Just because a player plays in a certain position, it doesn't mean that's what they are. It also proves that every teams situation is different and not every team can have legitimate first liners.

If we go with the theory that you guys want to go with, then Malkin isn't a first line player. Can you guys seriously not see how crazy that sounds? Or are you going to say he is and a) go against what you're saying and b) subjectively say what a first liner is which is exactly what I'm being blamed for? Which one is it?

 

[Abe Vukota]

If we go with the theory that you guys want to go with, then Malkin isn't a first line player. Can you guys seriously not see how crazy that sounds? Or are you going to say he is and a) go against what you're saying and b) subjectively say what a first liner is which is exactly what I'm being blamed for? Which one is it?

I get what you're saying, but think of it this way:
An NFL team signs seven cornerbacks and has only one legitimate safety. One of the CBs plays safety, is listed as a safety on the depth chart, and serves all the functions of a safety. Therefore he is a safety on that team at that moment in time. Next year, he is signed by another team and reverts to cornerback. He was still a safety the year before. When Stamkos goes back to playing C, he still played wing for some of the year. He was a winger, even though he's "truly" a center.

Whether or not you think a player deserves it, if he plays on the 1st line, he's a first liner. You're using "1st line player" as an indicator of something else, whether that something else is points, WAR, etc, I don't know. Is the 1st liner elite? I don't know. A top tier 1st liner? Maybe, maybe not. But for the time that he's playing on the 1st line, he is without question a 1st liner. That's the position he occupies, whether deservingly so or not.

To use your example, Malkin is a 2nd liner. He's an elite talent and one of the best players in the game, but when he's playing on the 2nd line, he's a 2nd liner.

 

[Seph]

No, that's not my definition because not everyone who plays on the first line are legitimate first liners. Yes, it is subjective. But I'm fairly certain that, if given a list all players playing on the first line, a large amount of people would pick out the same player who are deemed to be inadequate. It really isn't hard to understand if you choose not to look at things in a vacuum. Are players like Jannik Hansen and Brett Connolly first liners? What about someone like Cam Atkinson? Or how about Colorado's Andreas Martinsen? There's way too many variables to accurately say there are 90 first liners. Saying that means you're only looking at things on the surface. Players change lines and players perform at different levels. This was a big discussion with players like Paul Stastny and Ryan O'Reily. There were quite a few people (and still are) who believed that neither were legitimate first liners but would be great second liners. Do those tweener players really deserve to be on the same level as every first liner?

Personally, I agree that it's hard to call 90 players in the league legitimate first liners. The definition I like to use for legit first liners is the top ~45. With an average of 90 forwards playing on first lines at any given time, if you rank in the top half of that, I don't see how someone can say you're not a legit first liner, unless you're just that bad defensively.

When it comes to 2nd liners, same thing, with the difference that I don't see the point in including PP points in the total. On average, 2nd liners should be getting 2nd unit PP time, and depending on how that time is split up and overall quality of what's left to put on the PP, the quality of those minutes will vary greatly. But moreover, the 2nd line is an ES designation, so your legitimacy on a 2nd line should be defined by your play at ES, and not on special teams.

If you look at Bailey's ES point totals, he's in the top 80 of all NHL forwards from 2012-13 to the present. The same is true if you go 11-12, 13-14 or 14-15 to present as well. IMO, this places him well within the top half of the ~180 forwards playing in the top 6 around the league, and his production within the expectations of a 2nd line player. If he was poor defensively, I could see the case that he's not a legitimate 2nd liner, but most seem to be in agreement that he is above average defensively as well.

 

[Frankie41987]

His theory has zero legitimacy from its inception. It is the perfect example of the wrong opinion. Factually wrong.

It is indefensible.

Am I misreading these posts or are you suggesting that we do not often colloquially speak about "Top pairing defenders" or "First line centers" in reference to a level of skill? Yes, it is true that there are 90 players that play on Line 1 in the NHL. That obviously isn't what he is arguing against. In the literal sense, Dan Girardi is a 1st pairing defender. But when people talking about acquiring a top pairing Dman, no one is talking about Dan Girardi. Whether you do or not, It's fairly obvious that a lot of people on these boards use the term to interchangeably refer to either position (objective) or skill (subjective). Thus it wouldn't sound unreasonable nor would it be fair to act flabbergasted at a statement like, "Malkin plays on the 2nd line but is a 1st line center." Seemingly contradictory but I think we all understand what it means.

That said, I think he is completely wrong about Bailey.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Am I misreading these posts or are you suggesting that we do not often colloquially speak about "Top pairing defenders" or "First line centers" in reference to a level of skill? Yes, it is true that there are 90 players that play on Line 1 in the NHL. That obviously isn't what he is arguing against. In the literal sense, Dan Girardi is a 1st pairing defender. But when people talking about acquiring a top pairing Dman, no one is talking about Dan Girardi. Whether you do or not, It's fairly obvious that a lot of people on these boards use the term to interchangeably refer to either position (objective) or skill (subjective). Thus it wouldn't sound unreasonable nor would it be fair to act flabbergasted at a statement like, "Malkin plays on the 2nd line but is a 1st line center." Seemingly contradictory but I think we all understand what it means.

That said, I think he is completely wrong about Bailey.

Let me make it simple.

There are 90 jobs in the NHL for first liners.

The 90 best players should have those jobs.

If you are one of the 90 best players you SHOULD be a first liner. That's the colloquial "first liner".

There are 90 guys in the NHL who should be playing first line hockey. They are the 90 best players in the NHL.

The 1st guy is better than the 90th guy. That doesn't change the fact that the 90 jobs are out there.

The opinion of which guys are in that 90 is certainly one ripe for lively debate. To deny that there are 90 just makes you ridiculous. Like saying there are only 60 first liners in the NHL.

 

[PROMputt]

This is so off base. All you guys arguing Bailey sucks is a joke. He is the whipping boy on this team but he is a good player.

There are not many teams in the league that have 40 point 3rd liners that are very good defensively, and no team has 3 of them.

Bailey has been fine, he is what he is at this point a middle 6 winger that can chip in offense and play sound defensively. He isn't supposed to be a guy that puts up 80 points a year, he isn't paid to do that. The offense should fall on the hands of JT, KO, Frans, Lee, Nelson, Strome, and Grabovski.

We aren't scoring as many goals this year because 4 of those 7 are not producing like they need to.

Bailey has scored 40 points ONE time in his career(yes he could have done it more and was on pace to do it more times- BUT HE DIDN'T).
And most don't think Bailey sucks as all he fan boys love to write, he is just not as good as you think he is. He is a 3rd line player. And I really hope I do not hear one more time how Islander management ruined his development. The guy NEVER had a high compete level and has show nothing to prove he would be a solid 2nd line player or better. He is what he is. A talented 3rd liner who could be more but just isn't.

 

[ScaredStreit]

Let me make it simple.

There are 90 jobs in the NHL for first liners.

The 90 best players should have those jobs.

If you are one of the 90 best players you SHOULD be a first liner. That's the colloquial "first liner".

There are 90 guys in the NHL who should be playing first line hockey. They are the 90 best players in the NHL.

The 1st guy is better than the 90th guy. That doesn't change the fact that the 90 jobs are out there.

The opinion of which guys are in that 90 is certainly one ripe for lively debate. To deny that there are 90 just makes you ridiculous. Like saying there are only 60 first liners in the NHL.

There are 90 1st liners in the nhl, however they're not necessarily equally dispersed. In other words Pittsburgh could have 4, and we could have 2. Without looking at a list I'm pretty confident I could 90 NHL forwards better than Bailey, but to name 180? That I'm not too sure of.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

There are 90 1st liners in the nhl, however they're not necessarily equally dispersed. In other words Pittsburgh could have 4, and we could have 2.

Absolutely. There are 90 jobs. The guys who have the jobs may not be the guys who should.

 

[Seph]

Being a 40 point winger who is good defensively isn't doing "a lot". There's plenty of those types of players around the league. Like I said, we already have one in Nielsen. They aren't rare players that can't be replaced unless they have a great all around game (which Bailey doesn't).

There aren't 90 first liners and 90 second liners. There are 90 playing on each line, but not every player playing on those lines are legitimate first or second liners. You're not talking into account teams that are at the bottom playing players who would play on the third line of a middle of the pack team. It's very inaccurate to say there are 90 first and second liners.

If we say there are 60 legitimate first and second liners (which I think is generous), giving each team two legitimate players on each line (which again, I'd say is generous), that would be 120 players. That would place Bailey as a boarderline 3rd liner.

From 12-13 to present, Bailey is in the top 100 of all NHL forwards for total points. Same for 13-14 to present. 14-15 to present, he's tied for 110th. By your own definition, he's a 2nd liner.

 

[Frankie41987]

Let me make it simple.

There are 90 jobs in the NHL for first liners.

The 90 best players should have those jobs.

If you are one of the 90 best players you SHOULD be a first liner. That's the colloquial "first liner".

There are 90 guys in the NHL who should be playing first line hockey. They are the 90 best players in the NHL.

The 1st guy is better than the 90th guy. That doesn't change the fact that the 90 jobs are out there.

The opinion of which guys are in that 90 is certainly one ripe for lively debate. To deny that there are 90 just makes you ridiculous. Like saying there are only 60 first liners in the NHL.

Well I don't see where anyone is denying that there are 90 players playing on the first line in the NHL. If anyone is making an argument about someone not being a 1st line player, then clearly they must be doing so not in the literal sense. And you are correct, implicitly he is suggesting that Bailey shouldn't be playing on the first line. In the same vain, someone calling Malkin a 1st line center is implying that Malkin would be playing on a 1st line if he was on another team. The fact of the matter is that enough posters talk about "top paring Dmen" and "1st line centers" in the sense of skill tiers that a statement like "Bailey is not a first line wing" makes sense in that I understand what he is suggesting. If you are truly suggesting that he is claiming there aren't 90 players in the league playing on a first line then I think you are being ignorant for the sake of argument.