Malkin or Phaneuf?

[Claypool_*]

Oh no you don't. No more top picks for Pittsburgh.

it's already pre-ordered

 

[Sixty Six]

You'd probably trade Malkin for Chris McAllister if you had the chance.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

it's already pre-ordered

I like it . . .

 

[clay]

I actually think this would benefit both sides immensely. Sinse Pittsburgh has no defensive depth and Calgary has too much of it and too little depth up front, this would even out quite nicely.

 

[WVP]

From a Pittsburgh standpoint, I'd make this trade in a second, only because we have Crosby. If we didn't, this would be much harder.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

i think the prospect of having two elite centers would be too tempting for pitt to give one of them up.

 

[tom_servo]

From a Pittsburgh standpoint, I'd make this trade in a second, only because we have Crosby. If we didn't, this would be much harder.

I wouldn't do it if it weren't for Crosby. Take away both of them, and our top-six depth becomes very thin.

i think the prospect of having two elite centers would be too tempting for pitt to give one of them up.

I think I would be more intrigued by a young, dynamic defensive corps led by Phaneuf, and settle for Crosby/Christensen down the middle.

 

[CertifiedPublicGuin]

Defense was the reason this league was slowed to a hault... I'm all for a forward over any d-man... Malkin

 

[FlyersGuy69]

Phaneuf

I'll take the franchise type of defenseman over the franchise forward any day.

 

[Legionnaire]

Phaneuf

I'll take the franchise type of defenseman over the franchise forward any day.

What Stu said-wit a booyaaaaah!

 

[tom_servo]

Defense was the reason this league was slowed to a hault...

Uh, no. It was clutching and grabbing. That's not necessarily synonymous with the concept of good defense, which is still required to win in today's NHL.

 

[gars59]

PHANEUF

defence > offence

 

[Roughneck]

This is a trade both sides would and wouldn't want to do IMO.

Both like their own guys, but would love to have the other guy as well, it was similar to the "would you trade Phaneuf for Suter straight up" talks a while ago.

Personally I think Malkin is the much better prospect, but I still would be very reluctant to trade Phaneuf for him. Because as somebody said, it could end up being the best defenseman for the best forward in 10 years.

 

[octopi]

This is a trade both sides would and wouldn't want to do IMO.

Both like their own guys, but would love to have the other guy as well, it was similar to the "would you trade Phaneuf for Suter straight up" talks a while ago.

Personally I think Malkin is the much better prospect, but I still would be very reluctant to trade Phaneuf for him. Because as somebody said, it could end up being the best defenseman for the best forward in 10 years.

Not that ten years matters as they will both be UFA long before then.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

Well, if you take Ovechkin or Crosby over Phaneuf, then you should take Malkin over Phaneuf as well. Malkin is supposed to be that good, so id take Malkin based on that.

 

[Pens1566]

I usually agree with a lot of your posts but seriously, Whitney is not in the same level has Phaneuf at all. Phaneuf provides just as much offense as Whitney but has a better shot. Once Phaneuf gets that cannon on net more often he will be a 20-25 goal defensman in the league.

So you're going on record as saying he'll be the highest scoring defenseman in the league? I don't think so.

 

[daikan]

At first I read it as "Malik or Phaneuf?".

EDIT: Anyways, I don't know a lot about Malkin so I'd have to go with Phaneuf. But I dunno.

 

[jmelm]

I am not trying to devalue the importance of a great defensemen, but ultimately to win in the NHL you need to score goals. Malkin will have the ability to dominate offensively and will be one of the few players that will be able to exploit guys like Phaneuf, Pitkanen, etc.

And not only will Malkin be dominant offensively, but he will be dominant all over the ice, so he is not merely a one-way or one-dimensional hockey player. I would choose him based on this.

Just ask yourself this: think about the best 2 or 3 forwards over the last 20 years versus the best 2 or 3 defensemen: I would choose Gretzky, Lemieux or even Messier or Jagr over any one of Bourque, McInnis, Lidstrom, Pronger or Stevens.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

For me, it would be Phaneuf. Very simple. Franchise defensemen don't come along as frequently as franchise forwards. This guy looks like Scott Stevens with an offensive game and those kind of defensemen just don't grow on trees. You win games with players like Malkin, but you win Stanley Cups with players like Phaneuf.

 

[jmelm]

For me, it would be Phaneuf. Very simple. Franchise defensemen don't come along as frequently as franchise forwards. This guy looks like Scott Stevens with an offensive game and those kind of defensemen just don't grow on trees. You win games with players like Malkin, but you win Stanley Cups with players like Phaneuf.

No offense, but that statement -- and all the other similar ones made by other posters -- don't really make sense.

Malkin, Ovechkin and Crosby aren't franchise forwards that come around as "frequently" as you suggest. They are (supposed to be) generational talents that will be among the best players at their position, EVER. Obviously we will see what actually happens when Malkin gets here, but we are still talking about Malkin's potential vs. Phaneuf's potential.

Malkin has the potential to be one of the best forwards to ever play this game. And I will choose a forward like that over probably everybody else in terms of great historical players with the exception of a defensemen like Bobby Orr.

 

[alecfromtherock]

Dion is in the NHL and has had great success as a premier D-man for Calgary.

Not to say that Dion could replace the Pens entire D corps, but we have all seen the Pens D

Depending on how the lawsuit goes against AO it could diversely effect Malkin entering the NHL next season.

If the club loses its case then you can be assured that the RSL will not allow Malkin to enter the NHL. 2 years remain on Malkin’s contract in the RSL after this season, a signed contract stands a great chance of being upheld in any court(American, Russian or International).

If upheld release concessions will be made under the terms of the RSL team that currently has Malkin’s contract, not the NHL or the Pens.

By demanding X million dollars(say $6 million to make it unreasonable and highly unlikely that the wealthy Pens have that kind of money to pay out) the RSL could be greatly aiding their own player: Malkin could choose where he plays as after next season that would be 2 years in another league under the current CBA, not sure if the rookie salary cap would still apply.

RSL gets millions or has their player choose where he starts his NHL career, win-win.

I know Malkin was drafted under the old CBA but unless the Pens have a signed contract with their draft choice it might become an unknown legality(back to the courts).


Back to the question at hand: while it does make a lot of sense to considerably strengthen the Pens D with a straight-up trade of Malkin for Dion it does have its drawbacks.

Crosby currently does not have the FO% to become a #1 centre, by trading Malkin you are losing a natural first line centre.

Crosby Malkin Palffy would be a good first line(Philly and Ottawa will still have the best line) but I am not sure Crosby and Malkin centring the first 2 lines would be effective.

If Malkin has a NHL FO% resembling Crosby’s , the Pens are weak on the FO if they plan on using both/either players as centres.

Dion is physically intimating, throws hard hits and checks, plays fundamental D and has a cannon of a shot that lacks consistent accuracy(a work in progress if you may) and would be my choice between the 2.

 

[Jester]

I'd love to see how well Phaneuf would do in Pittsburgh. Whitney has been their best defensemen. Plus it depends what you want. Whitney will give you offense, Phaneuf will give you more physical play. Clearly Phaneuf is the best rookie defensemen in the NHL, but to suggest Phaneuf is 10X (or so) better than Whitney is crazy talk.

he's a LOT better than Whitney...

 

[Legionnaire]

No offense, but that statement -- and all the other similar ones made by other posters -- don't really make sense.

Malkin, Ovechkin and Crosby aren't franchise forwards that come around as "frequently" as you suggest. They are (supposed to be) generational talents that will be among the best players at their position, EVER. Obviously we will see what actually happens when Malkin gets here, but we are still talking about Malkin's potential vs. Phaneuf's potential.

Malkin has the potential to be one of the best forwards to ever play this game. And I will choose a forward like that over probably everybody else in terms of great historical players with the exception of a defensemen like Bobby Orr.

I think you're going a bit overboard with the Malkin hype. Gretzky, Lemiuex ect ect. The guys not even close to being as good as those guys were.

 

[FLYLine27*]

So you're going on record as saying he'll be the highest scoring defenseman in the league? I don't think so.

Yes GOAL scoring. If you think that idea is really that far fetched then you havn't watched him enough.

 

[Pens1566]

Yes GOAL scoring. If you think that idea is really that far fetched then you havn't watched him enough.

I've actually seen him play quite a few times. He's nowhere near Pikanen, or McCabe.