That would place Bailey as a borderline 3rd liner.
Spelling corrected -- but yes, I agree that is exactly what Bailey is.
That would place Bailey as a borderline 3rd liner.
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.
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.
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
That would place Bailey as a boarderline 3rd liner.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.