Phil Kessel skates down the wing and Shoots...

TheDoubleDion87

Registered User
Jan 14, 2013
215
0
Truculence Nation
Wrong again. You sure are getting desperate now. My point was that Kessel is not "useless" when someone says "useless" it generally means, no, actually means is good for nothing. When Kessel is not scoring he is playmaking, causing rebounds, playing his pokecheck or using his speed to rush the puck out of our zone. So yes, I strongly believe Kessel is not entirely "useless" outside of scoring. Perhaps the term "useless" should have been used in better context, no?

I think we was exaggerrating.
 

Bomber0104

Registered User
Apr 8, 2007
15,086
6,951
Burlington
Wrong again. You sure are getting desperate now. My point was that Kessel is not "useless" when someone says "useless" it generally means, no, actually means is good for nothing. When Kessel is not scoring he is playmaking, causing rebounds, playing his pokecheck or using his speed to rush the puck out of our zone. So yes, I strongly believe Kessel is not entirely "useless" outside of scoring. Perhaps the term "useless" should have been used in better context, no?

He specifically stated if he isn't scoring he is useless.

And here you just list more of the same. Basically if he isn't generating assists and being fast and pokechecking (rarely happens).

He gives up WAY more turnovers than he takesaway.

Not even close.

If he isn't scoring he's useless to this roster.

So here's what he said because it seems you forgot.

Hence my original point as to why he is not "useless" as Dave seems to think.

Rip it apart all you want but I have no doubt many will agree with me.

And here's how you spun it.

Nice try and all, but it's pretty obvious what the point was.

Kessel is easily one of the worst defensive players in the league. And for further clarification that means all aspects not involved with offence.

Believe it or not but there exists times in hockey when a player doesn't have the puck on his or his teams stick and Kessel is basically useless as a player in engaging players.

He avoids contact, corners, board battles, cherry picks, and doesn't really go through much trouble to work hard.

Here's another thread btw.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1253577
 

4evaBlue

Bottle of Lightning
Jan 9, 2011
4,834
5
Wrong again. You sure are getting desperate now. My point was that Kessel is not "useless" when someone says "useless" it generally means, no, actually means is good for nothing. When Kessel is not scoring he is playmaking, causing rebounds, playing his pokecheck or using his speed to rush the puck out of our zone. So yes, I strongly believe Kessel is not entirely "useless" outside of scoring. Perhaps the term "useless" should have been used in better context, no?

Not to mention drawing the toughest defensive matchups away form the other lines, giving them a better chance to produce against lesser competition. Honestly, though, just put him on ignore, and stop quoting him, so the rest of us don't have to read that nonsense. No amount of arguments will change his mind.
 

Bomber0104

Registered User
Apr 8, 2007
15,086
6,951
Burlington
Kessel gets way too much heat, he's a star in the NHL, period. He's not a poor defensive player, he just doesn't hit or play physical, that's not his game. His game is speed and skill and he's as good as any player at creating offense off the rush,usually on his own. Very few players can do this, especially with Bozak and MacArthur.

C'mon. Some perspective.

You have to really stretch to find fault with Kessel in a 7-4 loss where the defense was horrid and the goaltending not much better.

And Lucic? Seriously? If he wasn't in Boston he might be be Matt Martin. And he won't be an Olympian anytime soon, not on this planet.

I have a hard time thinking of players as soft and poor defensively as Phil Kessel.

If there are any, there aren't many at all...

I guess being extremely poor without the puck is not of value to NHL teams?
 

Bomber0104

Registered User
Apr 8, 2007
15,086
6,951
Burlington
Not to mention drawing the toughest defensive matchups away form the other lines, giving them a better chance to produce against lesser competition. Honestly, though, just put him on ignore, and stop quoting him, so the rest of us don't have to read that nonsense. No amount of arguments will change his mind.

Secondary scoring was a huge problem too in addition to Kessel's line being the worst defensive first line in the league so that argument doesnt really stand up too well to reality either.
 

RealisticLeaf55

Win it clean for J.T
Sep 28, 2010
4,327
1,451
A place
Not to mention drawing the toughest defensive matchups away form the other lines, giving them a better chance to produce against lesser competition. Honestly, though, just put him on ignore, and stop quoting him, so the rest of us don't have to read that nonsense. No amount of arguments will change his mind.

I could not agree more and apologize for the inconvenience. I am ignoring him now. Regardless I am out for the night. Take care HF!
 

TheDoubleDion87

Registered User
Jan 14, 2013
215
0
Truculence Nation
I have a hard time thinking of players as soft and poor defensively as Phil Kessel.

If there are any, there aren't many at all...

I guess being extremely poor without the puck is not of value to NHL teams?

Semin and Kovalev just off the top of my head. He's certainly not as bad as those guys, I'm sure there are quite a few who are worse than him.

But yeah, he's not good without the puck. In the right circumstances I could see him being a 100 point guy, unfortunately we never made that a possibility for him.
 

DaveT83*

Guest
What we are all witnessing Ladies and Gentlemen is the final Death Rattle of Phil Kessels career as a Toronto Maple Leaf. It won't be long until this organization can finally move on.
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
I have a hard time thinking of players as soft and poor defensively as Phil Kessel.

If there are any, there aren't many at all...

I guess being extremely poor without the puck is not of value to NHL teams?

Semin
Gaborik
Vanek?
Patrick Kane?
Havlet

are some names that pop to mind.
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
c'mon fellas ... You all damn well know he could score, it's not even a question.





Never said he could not score, look at that goal and tell me if you can even recall him driving to the net like that, all i ask is 5 clips in all these years. Drive to the net and score.
 

DaveT83*

Guest
Is Phil Kessel a Great player? yes
Is Phil Kessel the right player for this team? No.

No need for everyone to get so sensitive.
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
Is Phil Kessel a Great player? yes
Is Phil Kessel the right player for this team? No.

No need for everyone to get so sensitive.

No sensitivity here, I'm not a PK apologist, i see him for exactly what he is.

That dawg don't hunt but he plays fetch pretty good.:naughty:
 

Faltorvo

Registered User
Feb 18, 2008
21,067
1,941
So lucky to have Kessel.

For the cost?

Hell, i'm not sure i wanna use lucky and PK in any sentence.

Oh my bad, yes, i can think of one, "lucky he turned out to be something after the price we paid".
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad