Who is Brule?

[Crosbyfan]

You dont ignore anything completly, but you also dont base anything on it. In the Brule vs. Crosby debate you brought up how Crosby had a better +/- like it was important when they are both 16

So now this USELESS and GARBAGE statistic(your words) becomes important when you reach the age of 17?

 

[Crosbyfan]

That is my point Crosbyfan. You liked to give Crosby kudos because of his good +/- but you fail to mention that he has that +/- because his line filled the net. That is all it proves.

+/- honestly has nothing to do with a players defensive ability. How does scoring a goal, which gives you a plus, translate into a good defensive player??

You wont be able to convince me otherwise.

First of all I have said in other threads that Sid's scoring was driving his +/-. When you said "You always bring up +/-", I assumed you knew that.

My point is that he is defensively solid or he would not have lead the Q in +/- (per game basis) even with his scoring. Certainly not on a marginal +/- team, a team that would in fact be a clear minus without him.

Second, I don't think you "honestly" believe that +/- has nothing to do with defensive ability. How does scoring a goal, giving you a plus, translate into a good defensive player? Outside of most unassisted goals, penalty killing goals etc it really doesn't. These things are of minor signficance. The minus side of the +/- has EVERYTHING to do with defensive ability. Too bad it's not normally listed separately. It was at the last WJC's. The only two "perfect" scores were Crosby and the much maligned Jeff Tambellini. (And yes, i know this had a lot to do with the limited icetime they got). My point is that they were defensively solid not that they were defensive specialists.

I usually bring up the +/- when I hear claims that Brule is "a better 2 way player than Crosby". I'm skeptical. 50 + points in plus/minus on similar plus/minus teams is a huge gap. A lot of it could be explained. Maybe Brule's linemates really do suck. I don't know. Maybe if Brule had double the icetime he would be a +50 instead of a -2. My guess not knowing anything would be a -4. I know this is very good for a 17 year old. Very few rookies are strong in this statistic the way Crosby and Latendresse (especially relative to his teammates) were this year.

I'm looking forward to seeing Brule play.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

So now this USELESS and GARBAGE statistic(your words) becomes important when you reach the age of 17?

I dont see your point there?

 

[LaLaLaprise]

First of all I have said in other threads that Sid's scoring was driving his +/-. When you said "You always bring up +/-", I assumed you knew that.

My point is that he is defensively solid or he would not have lead the Q in +/- (per game basis) even with his scoring. Certainly not on a marginal +/- team, a team that would in fact be a clear minus without him.

Second, I don't think you "honestly" believe that +/- has nothing to do with defensive ability. How does scoring a goal, giving you a plus, translate into a good defensive player? Outside of most unassisted goals, penalty killing goals etc it really doesn't. These things are of minor signficance. The minus side of the +/- has EVERYTHING to do with defensive ability. Too bad it's not normally listed separately. It was at the last WJC's. The only two "perfect" scores were Crosby and the much maligned Jeff Tambellini. (And yes, i know this had a lot to do with the limited icetime they got). My point is that they were defensively solid not that they were defensive specialists.

I usually bring up the +/- when I hear claims that Brule is "a better 2 way player than Crosby". I'm skeptical. 50 + points in plus/minus on similar plus/minus teams is a huge gap. A lot of it could be explained. Maybe Brule's linemates really do suck. I don't know. Maybe if Brule had double the icetime he would be a +50 instead of a -2. My guess not knowing anything would be a -4. I know this is very good for a 17 year old. Very few rookies are strong in this statistic the way Crosby and Latendresse (especially relative to his teammates) were this year.

I'm looking forward to seeing Brule play.

What if your linemate misses his assignment and the puck goes in...does that have EVERYTHING to do with you (the guy who didnt miss the assignment) being a bad defensive player??

There are WAY too many variables to take the statistic seriously.

And about the Brule vs. Crosby.

OK so they had similar +/- teams but Crosby put up 135 points, BRule had 60. Crosby was on the ice for 75 more goals!!!! That plays into +/-

 

[Stiffler's Mom]

Brule is #1

In my books. Proved that he was the best 16 yr old at the World U17's and in the Western Hockey League. He is probably about 5'11" and 180 - 185 lbs. Should be able to prove at the World U18's that he is the dominant player. I would bet that at the World U18, a) he will fill the net, b)he will launch at least one player over the boards with one of his thunderous body checks, c)he will be the on ice leader of Canada's National U18 team, d)prove to everyone that he has more desire and guts than anyone on the ice, e)he will do anything to bring home the gold, f) he will bring home the gold.

 

[Mizral]

Yet another thing to mention that I notice you don't quite add into your equation there, La-la-Laprise:

Brule was a third line centre with the Giants and a second-unit powerplay for the majority of the season (a large majority). Crosby was a first line player on Rimouski mostly due to how PATHETIC they were (also because Pouliot didn't show a lot when he was healthy, and when he wasn't, well, he wasn't playing).

Next season I would say that almost certainly Brule will be the first line centre on the Giants. I think the statistics next year will be much, much closer.

 

[moosefan]

Yet another thing to mention that I notice you don't quite add into your equation there, La-la-Laprise:

Brule was a third line centre with the Giants and a second-unit powerplay for the majority of the season (a large majority). Crosby was a first line player on Rimouski mostly due to how PATHETIC they were (also because Pouliot didn't show a lot when he was healthy, and when he wasn't, well, he wasn't playing).

Next season I would say that almost certainly Brule will be the first line centre on the Giants. I think the statistics next year will be much, much closer.

IMO I don't think they will even be close. You really have to see Crosby play to understand how much offensive talent he has, and watching him on TV does not do him justice at all. I have seen both play and Brule is not even in Crosbys class of play he is a step or two below.

I will expect Brule to put up over 100 points next year I am expecting about a 100 to 110 points for him next year becaue I think he has super star talent. But I am expecting Crosby to be putting up around 160 to 180 points next year, as I think he has special talent.

For those of you that are going to say Richards put that up as well and Daniel Briere all I can say is that the QMJHL has took a major change in the last two years and the league is more trap hockey and more defensive minded than what it was before so to do this now would have been like puting up around 230 points in Richards year.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

Yet another thing to mention that I notice you don't quite add into your equation there, La-la-Laprise:

Brule was a third line centre with the Giants and a second-unit powerplay for the majority of the season (a large majority). Crosby was a first line player on Rimouski mostly due to how PATHETIC they were (also because Pouliot didn't show a lot when he was healthy, and when he wasn't, well, he wasn't playing).

Next season I would say that almost certainly Brule will be the first line centre on the Giants. I think the statistics next year will be much, much closer.

I think Crosby is light years ahead, but when Crosbyfan was using +/- to compare them i had to argue about it.

Well Rimouski had good depth, its not like they sucked big time and Crosby was annointed #1 center. If Brule was as good as you say he would have stolen the #1 center spot away.

 

[Stiffler's Mom]

Lets's put Brule's poetry on ice into music

Simply the Best! Better than all the rest! Tina Turner

 

[Stiffler's Mom]

Giants coach was probably let go because he didn't play Brule enough. In the WHL, 16 yr olds are slowly broken in. Brule never could have been #1 center on the Giants as the veterans got preferential treatment, as they should. The coachs let the veterans get the major ice time. That's the way it is. The QMJHL is a perfect league for offensive players like Crosby etc. No checking. Or if there is, certain players complain that they will not play if the checking is to rough (Crosby). Boo Hoo. Both players are excellent. It's a matter of personal preference and each has his own style. Crosby(floater) Brule(all around). Very simple.

It'll be interesting if Crosby's floating skills will be interpreted as "see's the ice like Gretzky" at higher levels. My guess is that the coaches will send him to the minors or park his ass on the bench until he learns the defensive side of the game. Something he will never learn in the QMJHL. His Q team might have to pull him out of a few games if they have to force him to learn defense.

 

[stockwizard*]

Crosby(floater) Brule(all around). Very simple.

You can't be this dumb, so I am assuming you are joking.

 

[Vincent_TheGreat]

http://www.whl.ca/stats/player.php?id=23802

You'll hear some gibberish about him being the #1 pick for 2005, but that's nonsense.

Nothing is nonsense when your talking about the entry draft, you should no that, but maybe you haven't been watching hockey or the process of drafting very long so I'll let it slide.

 

[Stiffler's Mom]

Brule is Western Canada's top 87 born player. Has the shot, the moves, leadership, great attitude and works hard.

 

[Roughneck]

Brule is Western Canada's top 87 born player. Has the shot, the moves, leadership, great attitude and works hard.

Doesn't make him better than Crosby. Who is the best junior player in the country (regardless of age).

 

[Mizral]

Dean Eveson (former Giants coach) was a puzzling firing. Honestly, I could not give you good reasons for why he was fired. He really did not do anything wrong.

The reason he was fired, for better or for worse, was because the Giants GM got a new contract & wanted to bring in an old buddy of his, Don Hay. I believe Hay is the winningest WHL coach of all time actually.

 

[little a from da bx]

I wouldn't exactly say a poor mans Yzerman, Brule has the potential to be a superstar player as he is one of those special talents that comes around every so many years.

well at 5' 10" - 165 lbs, he better be something special or he will be playing his carreer in the ahl.... the boy needs to beef up to atleast 190-195, thats strictly muscle, todays nhl is big and tough and at his height and weight if he isnt special he will be , like i said an ahl'er for life

 

[Stiffler's Mom]

well at 5' 10" - 165 lbs, he better be something special or he will be playing his carreer in the ahl.... the boy needs to beef up to atleast 190-195, thats strictly muscle, todays nhl is big and tough and at his height and weight if he isnt special he will be , like i said an ahl'er for life

I think Brule has grown to 5'11" and is now 180 lbs. Those stats you have were probably copied from the BCHL website using his 15 yr old data and onto the WHL and Giants website 2 years ago. 5'10" and 165 lbs. is definitely old data. Brule is still growing.