We need to clear one thing

[Fazkovsky]

Is gallagher a top 6 winger?

In my opinion I would say we dont know yet but in an honest world i would say no.

The thing is I see gallagher making good rushes where he shoots the puck and scores if he keeps doing stuff like that he will be able to score 25-30 which will make him a top 6 winger. He is doing stuff in the nhl more more and when he was a vancouver giant despite his lack of size which is still a question mark for his top 6 status or not. He is still very young and if his production of goals increases this year or next than maybe. If he doesnt pot 25-30 a season it wont help him with his lack of vision. But 20 goals is it enough?

On the other side I could still see gally being a third liner with top 6 filler in case of injuries. Being small and feisty he can be a really good thirdl iner for years to come

His work ethic is definitely excellent and he isnt afraid of anything which makes him a NHLer down the road since day 1

Stop defending him and be honest.

Click to read more...

 

[groovejuice]

Is gallagher a top 6 winger?

In my opinion I would say we dont know yet but in an honest world i would say no.

The thing is I see gallagher making good rushes where he shoots the puck and scores if he keeps doing stuff like that he will be able to score 25-30 which will make him a top 6 winger. He is doing stuff in the nhl more more and when he was a vancouver giant despite his lack of size which is still a question mark for his top 6 status or not. He is still very young and if his production of goals increases this year or next than maybe.

On the other side I could still see gally being a third liner with top 6 filler in case of injuries. Being small and feisty he can be a really good thirdl iner for years to come

His work ethic is definitely excellent and he isnt afraid of anything which makes him a NHLer down the road since day 1

Stop defending him and be honest.

You ask for an opinion and then say, "don't defend him?"

Just tell me what you want me to say, please.

 

[Fazkovsky]

You ask for an opinion and then say, "don't defend him?"

Just tell me what you want me to say, please.

We keep denying if he is a top 6 forward or not. He gets plenty of time in the top 6 but he has his shortcomings. Gallagher while being a decent young player has his weaknesses and does have some flaws that make me question if he is a top 6 forward or not. He just signed a 4m long term contract and was wondering if he can pull a Gionta (comparable) and score 40 and get the big paycheck but guess he will be a reliable 20-15 or 20-20 guy a year. But is that enough as a top 6 player? Sometimes I can swear we won't trade him for Conor Mcdavid.

I just wanted a fair assessment.

 

[ThaDevilGirl]

You're way past bed time Faz.

 

[groovejuice]

You're way past bed time Faz.

I'm concerned that it's paralyzers and not tequila shots.

I'm well into a bottle of vodka and only feel happiness and warmth.

Well maybe a need for a BLT also.

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

Gally is tied for 64th in goals and 129th in pts for forwards

My math tells me there's 180 'Top 6' players in the NHL so I'm going to say he's either a below average goal scoring 1st liner or an above average all around 2nd liner but no doubt a Top 6 especially with the intangibles he brings with his energy and going hard to the net and being responsible defensively

Having said that I'd like to see Sekac tried with Chucky as he has more skill and Gally moved back with Pleks

 

[ThaDevilGirl]

I'm concerned that it's paralyzers and not tequila shots.

I'm well into a bottle of vodka and only feel happiness and warmth.

Well maybe a need for a BLT also.

You need to share man.

 

[groovejuice]

You need to share man.

I'm very social and extremely generous.

May I send you a sandwich and cocktail by UPS?

 

[Kairi Zaide]

He's a middle 6 forward.

Boom.

 

[groovejuice]

He's a middle 6 forward.

Boom.

Yeah. Hardly a difficult conclusion. He has top line attitude and second line skills, and third line size.

Speaking emotionally only, he's my favorite player.

Speaking rationally, he's just in the top six.

 

[Nicko999]

He's a good second liner so yeah, he is a top 6 forward.

 

[Binary Code]

He's not a top liner but he is definitely a top 6 player.

 

[Corncob]

if he keeps doing stuff like that he will be able to score 25-30 which will make him a top 6 winger..... But 20 goals is it enough?

Problem is that your premise is incorrect. Only 55 wingers got 20 goals or more last season. So, yes, 20 goals is more than adequate to make a player a 'top six winger'.

People focus way too much on labels. Especially these days where on many teams (including Montreal) the difference between a 2nd and 3rd line player is a few seconds of even strength ice time per game. Gallagher is capable of playing a role on any line in the top nine.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Gally is tied for 64th in goals and 129th in pts for forwards

My math tells me there's 180 'Top 6' players in the NHL so I'm going to say he's either a below average goal scoring 1st liner or an above average all around 2nd liner but no doubt a Top 6 especially with the intangibles he brings with his energy and going hard to the net and being responsible defensively

Having said that I'd like to see Sekac tried with Chucky as he has more skill and Gally moved back with Pleks

Never was a fan of this type of "math" because it is absolutely wrong. While it is true that there are a total of 180 total "top six" positions in the league there are not 180 players cemented in a top six position. There are also many players who play in the top six regalarly for their respective teams but wouldn't do so for most of the other teams..

IMO the only way to determine whether or not a player is a top six forward is if he would be a consensus top six on16 NHL teams. This would guarantee that he would be a top six forward on at least two playoff teams as well.

I always laugh at people who say that because a center is 30 th in scoring amongst all centermen he is a legitimate #1 center. By that flawed logic they are implying hat just because he is good enough to play for only 1 team in this capacity that he is a #1 center even though he would not be #1 on 29 other teams. Obviously that logic is flawed from the start because offensive output isn't the only determining factor in a players place in the lineup. The fact is there may be teams where he wouldn't even be #3 center.

Back to Gallagher though........he is a legitimate top 6 forward, there shouldn't even be a debate on this. Look at rosters around the league, see the facts and close this silly thread!

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

Never was a fan of this type of "math" because it is absolutely wrong. While it is true that there are a total of 180 total "top six" positions in the league there are not 180 players cemented in a top six position. There are also many players who play in the top six regalarly for their respective teams but wouldn't do so for most of the other teams..

IMO the only way to determine whether or not a player is a top six forward is if he would be a consensus top six on16 NHL teams. This would guarantee that he would be a top six forward on at least two playoff teams as well.

I always laugh at people who say that because a center is 30 th in scoring amongst all centermen he is a legitimate #1 center. By that flawed logic they are implying hat just because he is good enough to play for only 1 team in this capacity that he is a #1 center even though he would not be #1 on 29 other teams. Obviously that logic is flawed from the start because offensive output isn't the only determining factor in a players place in the lineup. The fact is there may be teams where he wouldn't even be #3 center.

Back to Gallagher though........he is a legitimate top 6 forward, there shouldn't even be a debate on this. Look at rosters around the league, see the facts and close this silly thread!

There's no system - yours included - that is perfect for labeling 'Top 6' but seeing as the Top 2 lines are the main offense contributors looking at where a player ranks amongst his peers is a valid comparison and is the least bias way to see what range would be considered successful for 1st and 2nd line contributions

 

[Bacchus1]

I hate these ambiguous titles that are meant to encourage people to click. Try something like, "Is Gallagher at Top-6 forward?"

Yes, he is ... He would be better on the 2nd line, and clearly we need a first line winger so that he can be bumped down. There are numerous posts about this in other threads.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Never was a fan of this type of "math" because it is absolutely wrong. While it is true that there are a total of 180 total "top six" positions in the league there are not 180 players cemented in a top six position. There are also many players who play in the top six regalarly for their respective teams but wouldn't do so for most of the other teams..

IMO the only way to determine whether or not a player is a top six forward is if he would be a consensus top six on16 NHL teams. This would guarantee that he would be a top six forward on at least two playoff teams as well.

I always laugh at people who say that because a center is 30 th in scoring amongst all centermen he is a legitimate #1 center. By that flawed logic they are implying hat just because he is good enough to play for only 1 team in this capacity that he is a #1 center even though he would not be #1 on 29 other teams. Obviously that logic is flawed from the start because offensive output isn't the only determining factor in a players place in the lineup. The fact is there may be teams where he wouldn't even be #3 center.

Back to Gallagher though........he is a legitimate top 6 forward, there shouldn't even be a debate on this. Look at rosters around the league, see the facts and close this silly thread!

get what you,re saying, but in this particular case it doesnt apply, Gallagher isnt 180/180 in goals or 180/180 in points... just to follow on your example, asking if Gallagher is a top 6 F would by like asking the 14th C in points is a top line C...

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

There's no system - yours included - that is perfect for labeling 'Top 6' but seeing as the Top 2 lines are the main offense contributors looking at where a player ranks amongst his peers is a valid comparison and is the least bias way to see what range would be considered successful for 1st and 2nd line contributions

The fact is that my system is a far better way to answer this question. I clearly pointed out the enormous flaws in your sysrem. Perhaps you would like to refute the points that I made instead of arbitrarily dismissing them without any supporting facts whatsoever.

It is a fact that if you are not good enough to hold a position on more than half of the teams in the league that you are simply in a position by default. The further you stray from the 16 th team the more polarized the the individuals relative ranking becomes. Gallagher is a top 6 forward on possibly every team in the league, go ahead and take a look at every teams roster and try and find more than 6 that are even debatable. This is the best and only way to answer the question that has been posed to us in this thread. You are clearly confusing the reality of the quality of top 6 forwards with your personal ideal for a top six forward. The Ducks have the best record in the league and there is no doubt that he would be in their top six. The only three teams that come to mind where he might not be in the top six are St.Louis, Los Angeles and San Jose but even on those teams lines are constantly being juggled and he would certainly see significant time on a scoring line. There is no doubt that he would be in the top six on Eastern leaders such as Tampa, Pittsburgh as well as perennial contender Boston.

Now feel free to demonstrate why this is not a valid method of determining a player's validity in his respective place in an NHL depth chart.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

get what you,re saying, but in this particular case it doesnt apply, Gallagher isnt 180/180 in goals or 180/180 in points... just to follow on your example, asking if Gallagher is a top 6 F would by like asking the 14th C in points is a top line C...

I think you have misconstrued some of my post. It is completely irrespective of a players point total and simply asks the question of whether that player is good enough to hold that position on a majority of teams. Your example solidifies and supports my theory that the stat/math method is grossly flawed.

 

[Wats]

2nd/3rd line complementary RW. Hoping he develops into something like Callahan.

 

[ECWHSWI]

I think you have misconstrued some of my post. It is completely irrespective of a players point total and simply asks the question of whether that player is good enough to hold that position on a majority of teams. Your example solidifies and supports my theory that the stat/math method is grossly flawed.

chances that the 5th, 10th or 15th C in points not being a 1st line C ?

very small, simply because at some point, no matter how good you are in other aspects of the game you are, if you dont get enough points, you wont play in the top 3 or top 6 on most teams...

so yeah, the 30th C in points may not really be a 1st line C, cause chances are that guys at 31, 32 or 33 bring much more to the game... but the 10th or 15th ? no chances the guy at 31, 32 or 33 is good enough in other aspects to surpass him on the depth chart of any team...

so yeah, your theory is great, as long as you're talking about 30/31st 1st line C, 179th or 180th top 6 players and so on... otherwise, it's worth nothing.

5th in points for C ? Getzlaf, 10th in points for C ? Ryan Johanssen, 15th ? Jonathan Toews

on how many teams they're not good enough for #1 C ?


you can make a case for Soderberg though (29), Lethera (30), Nelson (28)... your theory work on them. Maybe Hudler too at 12th, but being close to PPG, MANY teams would give him plenty of icetime and opportunities (PP time, ozone starts, etc). You can also make a case for those having a career year.

But that's about it.

 

[Treb]

20 goals is not enough for the second line?

He's a 2nd liner.

 

[ECWHSWI]

2nd/3rd line complementary RW. Hoping he develops into something like Callahan.

if the kid is a permanent 3rd liner on the Habs it would mean our team is so great, opponents will forfeit to avoid humiliation... you know.

 

[ECWHSWI]

20 goals is not enough for the second line?

He's a 2nd liner.

most think every team has 3 70+ pts players on their team's 1st line

 

[JLP]

"Enlarged Gnarl Hab" is an anagram for Brendan Gallagher