OT: Memorial Cup - May 16-25 at Budweiser Gardens in London, ON

[torlev*]

Why not? If a player brings _decent_ 2nd line scoring and a high end all around game, in my books that makes the player am excellent 2C. Look at the guys who scored around 45 pts last year and tell me they aren't 2C's either ... Hodgson, Vermette, hell Kesler is right in there. So much value can be found beyond goals and assists that it is ridiculous to define the quality of a player by whether they score +5 or -5 points of some arbitrary number.

Put it this way, Colorado has three centres that scored more, plus RoR who played wing, but is a natural centre. Anaheim had two that scored more, and a third that would have if he'd played a full season. Boston had three. LA had two, and their third line centre wasn't far off. They've got a fourth that'll pass that next year.

On the better teams in the league, that kind of production doesn't belong in the top 6. Not even close.

 

[Lundface*]

As I said, offensively it's lower than average for a second line centre. If a player is going to be above average, for a position, I'd personally say he'd better be at the very least average both offensively and defensively. Below average offensively, and above average defensively, would lead me to think of an average player at that position.

Other players that scored at a similar pace include guys like Matt Stajan, Tyler Johnson, Mikael Backlund. I also don't consider guys like Hodgson or Vermette ABOVE average, or "excellent". Not even Kesler was year.

A 45 point player that is EXCELLENT two way is a top notch third line centre or average second line, as far as I'm concerned.

You're quite far off.

45 points actually happens to be almost exactly average for a 2nd line center. NHL.com shows 45 points being 46th in scoring amongst centers...30 are first line, plus half of the 2nd line centers.

Within 5 points of that mark, you have:
Jeff Carter (19 minutes of ice time)
Kadri
Bozak ( 21 minutes of ice time)
Zajac (20 minutes of ice time)
Ribiero
Vermette (19 mins of ice time)
Dubinsky (19 mins of ice time)
Kesler (22 minutes of ice time)

The ice time is there to show you most of these guys are actually getting 1st line ice time.

If Horvat is able to put up 45 points and be elite defensively he'll be a good 2nd line center. To me he is a guy who has a 60 point ceiling, but that's if he's flanked by good wingers and given prime offensive minutes. He'll most likely be in the 40-50 point range while doing the heavy lifting.

 

[Baby Pettersson]

Put it this way, Colorado has three centres that scored more, plus RoR who played wing, but is a natural centre. Anaheim had two that scored more, and a third that would have if he'd played a full season. Boston had three. LA had two, and their third line centre wasn't far off. They've got a fourth that'll pass that next year.

On the better teams in the league, that kind of production doesn't belong in the top 6. Not even close.

Then lucky for you Horvat hasn't played a season where he only scored 45 points. We don't know how much he is going to score. Could be less or could be much more. Your writing as if he already scored that much.

 

[torlev*]

You're quite far off.

45 points actually happens to be almost exactly average for a 2nd line center. NHL.com shows 45 points being 46th in scoring amongst centers...30 are first line, plus half of the 2nd line centers.

Within 5 points of that mark, you have:
Jeff Carter (19 minutes of ice time)
Kadri
Bozak ( 21 minutes of ice time)
Zajac (20 minutes of ice time)
Ribiero
Vermette (19 mins of ice time)
Dubinsky (19 mins of ice time)
Kesler (22 minutes of ice time)

The ice time is there to show you most of these guys are actually getting 1st line ice time.

If Horvat is able to put up 45 points and be elite defensively he'll be a good 2nd line center. To me he is a guy who has a 60 point ceiling, but that's if he's flanked by good wingers and given prime offensive minutes. He'll most likely be in the 40-50 point range while doing the heavy lifting.

I said by pace. 45 point pace is about .55 points per game.

 

[torlev*]

Then lucky for you Horvat hasn't played a season where he only scored 45 points. We don't know how much he is going to score. Could be less or could be much more. Your writing as if he already scored that much.

I wasn't really referring to Horvat at all. Just the idea that 45 points is good for a two way second line centre. It's not.

 

[Baby Pettersson]

I wasn't really referring to Horvat at all. Just the idea that 45 points is good for a two way second line centre. It's not.

But the previous poster just proved that it's smack in the middle of what a 2nd line centre should produce. And you say it's bad? I don't get it.

 

[torlev*]

But the previous poster just proved that it's smack in the middle of what a 2nd line centre should produce. And you say it's bad? I don't get it.

A .55 point pace was just outside the top 60 this year. Yes, some second line Centres may have gotten injured and scored less. That's going to happen to most players throughout their career at least a few times.

 

[arttk]

A .55 point pace was just outside the top 60 this year. Yes, some second line Centres may have gotten injured and scored less. That's going to happen to most players throughout their career at least a few times.

And 95% of 2nd line centers don't provide air tight defense. So if Horvat can put up average 2nd line points and provide Malholtra like defense, that is huge. Seems like you are arguing that he would be a fail if he can't put up 1st line numbers with 2nd line role.

 

[Wilch]

I wasn't really referring to Horvat at all. Just the idea that 45 points is good for a two way second line centre. It's not.

60-70 points for a 2way center is in the Selke zone. It's prime Kopitar/Datysuk/Toews production.

50-60 points would comfortably put said player in a top first line 2 way center category; Bergeron, O'Reilly.

40-50 points would be good for a second line 2 way center; Kesler.

 

[torlev*]

And 95% of 2nd line centers don't provide air tight defense. So if Horvat can put up average 2nd line points and provide Malholtra like defense, that is huge. Seems like you are arguing that he would be a fail if he can't put up 1st line numbers with 2nd line role.

No. As I explained, I'm not referring to any player in particular. Just the idea that a centre who puts up 45 points (when he plays a full season), which IS below average for a second line Centre, would be "excellent", regardless of how good his defense is.

There are simply too many guys playing second line centre putting up more points by quite a bit and pretty solid defensively.

Someone below average offensively just simply can't be good enough defensively to compensate enough to make him tops at that overall.

 

[GPNuck]

How did Horvat Look? Was he slow? Did he win puck battles? How could they not win 1 game. Pretty disappointed they couldn't win one game

 

[arttk]

No. As I explained, I'm not referring to any player in particular. Just the idea that a centre who puts up 45 points (when he plays a full season), which IS below average for a second line Centre, would be "excellent", regardless of how good his defense is.

There are simply too many guys playing second line centre putting up more points by quite a bit and pretty solid defensively.

Someone below average offensively just simply can't be good enough defensively to compensate enough to make him tops at that overall.

Actually a shutdown center that can put up 45 points (with 2nd line minutes) when the primary role is to play against the other team's top line is pretty damn good. That's like Kesler, are you saying Kesler sucks?

 

[Baby Pettersson]

How did Horvat Look? Was he slow? Did he win puck battles? How could they not win 1 game. Pretty disappointed they couldn't win one game

Horvat was really good overall even though he didn't score. He was a -1 for the tournament which is really good since his team got blown out in 2 games. Plus the -1 came on the very last goal. He sure showed how good defensively he was. Like a rock out there. And did he even lose a face off!? Aside from scoring Horvat is everything I hoped for to see in the tourney. And frankly his entire team didn't score so I can't put much blame on him. Look forward to see him in training camp!

Also if it wasn't for a little rust for London they would have won against the French in the first game.

 

[CherryToke]

How did Horvat Look? Was he slow? Did he win puck battles? How could they not win 1 game. Pretty disappointed they couldn't win one game

Horvat disappoints me every time I see him play. this was no different. He's just so slow and meh.

at least he can win faceoffs?

 

[torlev*]

60-70 points for a 2way center is in the Selke zone. It's prime Kopitar/Datysuk/Toews production.

50-60 points would comfortably put said player in a top first line 2 way center category; Bergeron, O'Reilly.

40-50 points would be good for a second line 2 way center; Kesler.

The statement made was this:

Given everything else Horvat brings to the table, he would be an _excellent_ 2C if he produced in the range of 45+ points, which I certainly believe he is capable of hitting.

So I assume that means a 45 point two way player was getting compared to every second line centre. Given how low 45 points is for a second line centre, it's my opinion that no amount of defense can make a player scoring that little to make him one of the better second line centres in the league. Or "excellent" as was stated. I'd say you'll always find AT LEAST 10 second line centres that have more to offer, whatever combination of offense and defense that may be. And as I mentioned, many of the top teams, that doesn't make the top 6. In some cases, it's fourth or even further down the depth chart in terms of centre alone. Like Colorado, for example.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

But the previous poster just proved that it's smack in the middle of what a 2nd line centre should produce. And you say it's bad? I don't get it.

The "average" 2nd line centre is not the 2nd line centre you want when building a cup contender. You want the best you can get.

If you had a team consisting entirely of "average" players relative to their position, you'll end up with a playoff bubble team, which is obviously not the end goal here.

Additionally, when we're talking about the deepest draft since 2003, why shoot for a potential "average" 2C when drafting in the top-10?

 

[Mofletz]

Horvat disappoints me every time I see him play. this was no different. He's just so slow and meh.

at least he can win faceoffs?

I agree. but at least we didn't draft Domi. Very disappointing

 

[Ventana*]

Like I said before, Horvat needs another year in the OHL in a way bigger offensive role. He needs to develop his offense if we want a top 6 center out of this kid.

 

[torlev*]

Actually a shutdown center that can put up 45 points (with 2nd line minutes) when the primary role is to play against the other team's top line is pretty damn good. That's like Kesler, are you saying Kesler sucks?

That's like Kesler.... in his worst year since being a fricken youngster. Nor did I say that "sucks".

To turn that around on you, do you think Kesler was one of the best second line centres in the league, THIS YEAR? Not to mention, he had the highest TOI and PPTOI on the team.

 

[CanaFan]

Put it this way, Colorado has three centres that scored more, plus RoR who played wing, but is a natural centre. Anaheim had two that scored more, and a third that would have if he'd played a full season. Boston had three. LA had two, and their third line centre wasn't far off. They've got a fourth that'll pass that next year.

On the better teams in the league, that kind of production doesn't belong in the top 6. Not even close.

Colorado is fortunate to have drafted 3 and 1 overall to get two of those players, plus Mackinnon played a good chunk of the year on wing so I don't believe they played 3 centres with over 45 points.

As for LA, their 2C (Carter) had 50 points instead of 45, is that really the difference between them being a "better team in the league or not"? Or do you think it has a lot more to do with having strong production at the 1C (Kopitar) and 3C (Richards) as well?

To look myopically at a generic point total - 45 points - and decide that it is unacceptable for a top 6 centre but Jeff Carter w 50 points is what makes LA an outstanding team is a mistake. Horvat potentially brings more to the table than Carter in terms of face offs, defensive coverage, and board work that he could easily become a more valuable player at 45 points than Carter at 50.

It's a terrible idea to peg a player on points alone and ignore the rest of what goes on in a 60 minute game.

 

[CanaFan]

Someone below average offensively just simply can't be good enough defensively to compensate enough to make him tops at that overall.

Sure it can, depending on how far off they are offensively (5-10 points) vs how above-average they are in the rest of their game (not just defensively). It is a function of these swings rather than broad statements like you give above. You simply can't say if it makes him excellent or not until we have that information.

 

[Patchey*]

Like I said before, Horvat needs another year in the OHL in a way bigger offensive role. He needs to develop his offense if we want a top 6 center out of this kid.

100% agree. I don't want him to become another Brandon Sutter

 

[CherryToke]

That's like Kesler.... in his worst year since being a fricken youngster. Nor did I say that "sucks".

To turn that around on you, do you think Kesler was one of the best second line centres in the league, THIS YEAR? Not to mention, he had the highest TOI and PPTOI on the team.

yes he's easily one of the best 2nd line centers in the league this year or any healthy year. he does everything at a high level.

 

[torlev*]

Colorado is fortunate to have drafted 3 and 1 overall to get two of those players, plus Mackinnon played a good chunk of the year on wing so I don't believe they played 3 centres with over 45 points.

As for LA, their 2C (Carter) had 50 points instead of 45, is that really the difference between them being a "better team in the league or not"? Or do you think it has a lot more to do with having strong production at the 1C (Kopitar) and 3C (Richards) as well?

To look myopically at a generic point total - 45 points - and decide that it is unacceptable for a top 6 centre but Jeff Carter w 50 points is what makes LA an outstanding team is a mistake. Horvat potentially brings more to the table than Carter in terms of face offs, defensive coverage, and board work that he could easily become a more valuable player at 45 points than Carter at 50.

It's a terrible idea to peg a player on points alone and ignore the rest of what goes on in a 60 minute game.

No. A 45 point player would have a very hard time becoming more valuable than Jeff Carter who scored 50 in 72 games in one of the tightest defensive systems in the league. (He's also pretty good on faceoffs).

The guy you're describing is competing with mike Richards for third line Centre, and likely losing that competition, given that its about the same points, with Richards getting third line minutes and roles, in a tight defensive system not conducive to scoring. Also Richards is good on the dot. And physical.

The guy you're describing is mike Richards AT BEST. Playing third line there.

 

[Baby Pettersson]

The "average" 2nd line centre is not the 2nd line centre you want when building a cup contender. You want the best you can get.

If you had a team consisting entirely of "average" players relative to their position, you'll end up with a playoff bubble team, which is obviously not the end goal here.

Additionally, when we're talking about the deepest draft since 2003, why shoot for a potential "average" 2C when drafting in the top-10?

People seem to be ignoring the fact that Horvat is ELITE defensively. He is not your average centre even if he doesn't put up huge amount of points. If your going to grade him on his "undesirable" amount of scoring, surely you have the brains to see that he is great defensively. Therefore a 45 point centre that is Elite at defense and at face-offs is fine by me as a second line centre. One that I think a cup contender should have.