Why is center > winger?

[Legion34]

I think Kessel doesn't really fit the criteria of a true franchise winger. Sure he's had his moments and been crazy in the playoffs since traded to Pens. Also as for there being twice more winger than centers, I don't really think the numbers make any difference in terms of what we're discussing. From the recent years I can't think of only so many wingers who would fit the criteria of being absolute top end rainmakers. If we take a peak into the short dynasty of the Hawks, Kane was absolutely instrumental bringing home those trophies and I would even argue he was more important than Toews (who nowadays is barely a shadow of his prime). He was the key piece who changed the course of the franchise and eventually became a face of it. Now when you think about it, I truly cannot think of all that many wingers who were made of the same (or even higher) caliper from the recent past or from this century. Jagr (okay he's an artefact but still refusing to retire), Ovechkin and maybe Kovalchuk - the list grows pretty thin which brings us back to the "amount of wingers vs centers", because the number doesn't matter, it's about what these guys can do on the ice and that is what truly determines their value (and naturally salary). Of course not all of them have necessarily even have Stanley cup rings. Hockey is a team sport and what kind of organizations some of these guys have had or have, it's almost entirely out of their hands. For instance, Ovy has never held the trophy, but has he had the kind of support cast needed to go deep? That can be argued.

In the end, whether you are a center or a winger, the merits go depending what you achieve. As for center taking face offs and having more responsibilities behind own blue line, that is true, but wingers don't get any get-out-of-jail-cards either and I can remember certain Jere Lehtinen who was the best defensive forward in the league for quite some time. I think we've seen a bit of transformation in terms of responsibilities over the course of time and today even the soon to be superstars are made to learn and adapt responsibilities at both zones and floating just doesn't get overlooked as much as it did in the past, goal scoring wingers included.

Anyhow, as I stated earlier I would rather have the BPA than make a pick based on position. Of course that's only my personal opinion. In the NHL the organizations are obliged to look even deeper, consider the needs and take everything else into account when they make draft picks for instance.

While reading what you said I started to wonder that perhaps it's the Canadian hockey culture that had something to do with the most talented kids being coached to become centers instead of wingers or do you think there's a connection? Thinking about Gretzky, Lemieux and even some "lesser" greats like Sakic, Yzerman, Messier, the list just gets pretty damn long and I'd guess there are more of these "legends" who played C instead of W or possibly just my mind and memory playing tricks and forgetting about all the names from the past.

It could be a cultural thing... the best players are almost always C. Here. They may not be in Europe. I would say the Canadian “c” dominant way is the way it works in the nhl and has been pretty successful internationally. When canada picks Olympic teams, it’s like 8 c. And 4 w. It is never the other way around.

C is the most valuable position. But that doesn’t mean that every c is better than every winger. Wingers tend to be more dependant on the quality of C then vice versa. Unless you are an ovy or bure who just went 1 on 5 for the first 10 years

 

[Rorschach]

Of similar, offense-first skill sets, maybe you take the better player. For two-way play, you take the center. Overall, you take the two-way center over any winger.

 

[BRUINS since 1995]

I think, center obssession is a Canadian thing. Look at the list of franchise wingers: Kane, Jonny Hockey, Ovechkin, Kucherov, Panarin... Laine will join this company in a couple of years or even sooner. And you know what, they are all non-Canadians. Out of Canadians, only Hall and Marchand can be added to the list. And there are way more Canadians in the league, than all other nationalities combined.

Disagree. It is not a Canadian affair .. center is a pivot player both in O zone and D zone. Wingers can be franchise players but centers will control a 200 feet ice. Maybe if Russia had more Datsuk center style and less wingers they could have won more on the international playground in recent years... for the exception of this year playing against junior and old timer olympique games. As for Sweden they also have great centers going with their talented wingers. Same with Finland. As for Canada, no problem, centers will go on wings if needed.

 

[FrankGallagher]

As teams play in the offensive zone with their defencemen more involved in the play now wingers can also have a major defensive impact. Also some like Ehlers, Marner, Kane, and many others are their teams drivers through the neutral zone with freedom to carry the puck all over. As the game changes the gap in value is getting smaller

 

[Rorschach]

As teams play in the offensive zone with their defencemen more involved in the play now wingers can also have a major defensive impact. Also some like Ehlers, Marner, Kane, and many others are their teams drivers through the neutral zone with freedom to carry the puck all over. As the game changes the gap in value is getting smaller

They may have some impact but the gap is not getting smaller.

They may drive random plays in the regular season but in the playoffs it's not that easy.

 

[Viqsi]

I think the entire center >> winger invention is mostly just a result of a great generation of centers entering the game. Just from the recent years we have guys like McDavid, Eichel, Barkov, Mackinnon and Matthews, who all are expected to lead their teams to great days of glory.

Don't be absurd. The concept of C>W precedes those players' existence, let alone their NHL careers.

It doesn't mean wingers cannot take over games just as well and be leading players in their respective teams. Just look at a team like Nashville who's best center is Johansson. They are doing more than just fine without being strong in the middle.

Three things:
1) Nashville is very strong down the middle - Johansen, Turris, Bonino, Sissons. Last year they didn't have those middle two, but Fischer was still effective and Jarnkrok was just fine. What they aren't is elite at that position.
2) Nashville didn't accomplish much of anything until they traded for Johansen.
3) Nashville gets away with not being elite down the middle partly because the blueline is one of the best in the NHL.

You can win Cups with your best forward being a winger - hell, Chicago won three with Kane. But you still have to be strong down the middle. Elite is nice if you can get it, but you'd better have a heck of a foundation there minimum.

 

[member 297479]

I don't remember which Jets poster was arguing about this on our board a month or two ago but imo the poster made a good point: a great line is more than the sum of its parts. It doesent do you much good if you have a top centre without good wingers and it doesent do you much good if you have top end wingers without a centre; not to speak of the chemistry players do or do not form. I argue that therefor it is kind of useless to discuss unless you view all players in a vacuum, such as possibly the draft (if teams truly draft BPA). A team might be swayed to pick a centre over winger when things are considered equal. On the other hand there are more wingers and dmen than centers, and only a handful of starting goaltenders. This "comparative deflation" probably also explains why the center position is a more desired position for teams, since it is harder to find top-end centers due to a smaller population than for other positions (except goaltenders, which according to many is a crapshoot)

 

[kelsier]

It could be a cultural thing... the best players are almost always C. Here. They may not be in Europe. I would say the Canadian “c” dominant way is the way it works in the nhl and has been pretty successful internationally. When canada picks Olympic teams, it’s like 8 c. And 4 w. It is never the other way around.

C is the most valuable position. But that doesn’t mean that every c is better than every winger. Wingers tend to be more dependant on the quality of C then vice versa. Unless you are an ovy or bure who just went 1 on 5 for the first 10 years

Yeah it seems as if majority of the best Canadian forwards tend to be centers. It just cannot be a coincidence which is why I brought it up. Maybe there is a connection to jr coaching, that is at least if the coaches have any say of who plays where. Then at the same time, some of the best ever wingers throughout the history of the NHL have come from Europe. It's of course easier to convert from C to W than vice versa, although Wheelers for instance was able to do the "unusual" quite well this year. A country wants it's best players in the team and Canada just happens to have more great centers than wingers. Makes perfect sense.

I think for once we are more or less on a same frequency (where's the world spinning to, ha). The top wingers in the game (past and present) have been able to drive the game and make a difference on their own. However when placed next to a elite center, the results can get even more astounding. There are several examples that every hockey fan knows, such as Lemieux and Jagr to Gretzky and Kurri. Jagr was so good he won Art Ross even without Lemieux.

Don't be absurd. The concept of C>W precedes those players' existence, let alone their NHL careers.

Think you missed the point. I used the ">>" as a reference to the impact that a single player can make. If the centers were THAT much more valuable, there would not be even a handful of wingers being drafted in the top 10 annually. As for the concept itself, sure it's been there but at the same time the idea has been quite drastically promoted in the last few years compared to the past due to the very reasons I just explained.

Three things:
1) Nashville is very strong down the middle - Johansen, Turris, Bonino, Sissons. Last year they didn't have those middle two, but Fischer was still effective and Jarnkrok was just fine. What they aren't is elite at that position.
2) Nashville didn't accomplish much of anything until they traded for Johansen.
3) Nashville gets away with not being elite down the middle partly because the blueline is one of the best in the NHL.

You can win Cups with your best forward being a winger - hell, Chicago won three with Kane. But you still have to be strong down the middle. Elite is nice if you can get it, but you'd better have a heck of a foundation there minimum.

Very strong at the middle? Gimme a break. I would not say they are strong compared to most other teams that made the playoffs this year alone. Johansen scored 54 points and we are talking about the Preds' first line center. The best player in the league scored 108 points. His point totals would equal exactly half of that so no, I don't think he makes a great first line center. Turris is great second line center though and it evens up things but doesn't really tip the scale to enforce the argument. Pretty average at best and goes to show that you don't necessarily need a franchise center to be in the competition if your team is strong in other positions.

While the Jackets won the trade I wouldn't necessarily say the Preds lost it. They had to fill the void somehow and when you go into the market as the buyer, you better be prepared to pay the price. Perhaps Turris could have been that guy and they could've kept Jones but what's done is done. Was Ryan Johanssen the difference maker? Perhaps, or perhaps they would've found another plug in order to achieve the same without giving up future franchise D. We'll never know for certain but no one will sulk in the past as long as the team is winning. As for the final point, I agree, Nashville does indeed get away with not being elite down the middle due to the strength in the blue line especially. They are one of the contenders no doubt about it.

No offence intended to Preds who are a fine franchise, one that I've kept an eye closely and will do so even more in the future just to follow up the progress of Tolvanen, who I think will be truly special player in the near future.

 

[Mr Positive]

Centers are more important.

But yes, someone like Kane was more important to Chicago's success than Toews was.

I don't think of it like overcoming a handicap either. I think of it as elite talent being held back when the team is constructed poorly. Once your D and centers are in place, your team will pass the eye test. Even if they don't make the playoffs, they will be a team that people like to watch. The team will function and flow, and will gain a reputation as hard working. To take it to the next level you need elite talents, and those can be in any position, and it doesn't matter if it is center or winger or defense. However, centers are generally more valuable because they do both things at once. They help the team become constructed properly to pass the eye test (by the importance of their position), and then they help the team push to high playoff seeds once that is achieved (by their elite playing ability).

But yes, you could have a "passable" center next to an elite winger, and that set up could win the cup, however cup winners will have at least several elite players so chances are one will be a center.

 

[maacoshark]

This rule looks like an axiom in modern hockey. But I was rising on Soviet hockey, where it was mostly just the other way around: great wingers carried lines (Firsov, Kharlamov, Makarov), while centers had mostly supportive roles. And look at some modern wingers like Ovechkin, Kane, Panarin, Kovalchuk in his best NHL seasons.

Columbus fans say, Panarin is a special player, because he makes players around him better. I think, Kane was the most important Chicago player in their 3 Cup wins. Yeah, people should change their minds about the idea, that a winger can't be a franchise cornerstone.

Wingers are usually known for scoring goals. Centers are usually know for setting up the offense. They also have more defensive responsibilities than wingers. Centers are usually better playmakers but in today's game their are quite can few good playmaking wingers.