EagleMorph wrote:
Staal and Sid have played North American hockey their entire lives. They know the increase in physical play. They've adjusted their games accordingly.
Malkin played in the Super League. The whole reason why Aleksey Morozov is over in the RSL is because of the lack of physical play and the wider ice. That's all Malkin has been used to for 19 years. In his 20th year, he has something completely different thrown at him, and he wore down in the final months.
He'll be even better next year.
Excellent point. This cannot be overstated enough, and yet people continue to ignore it.
then what was the point of Malkin stayng in the RBL last season...
I don't know, ask him.
I already posted the answer to this question....his agents advised him to stay there so he could cherry pick his way to the Calder.....tells you a lot about his competitive attititude.....
No, they really didn't. If that's what you got from that quote, well, I guess that's par for the course for you.
edog wrote:don't jump the gun pitts, you may wish to read my response....
I honestly don't think very many people are reading any responses, not nearly the number of ones that add their ever insightful wisdom stating "edog ur dum, get back to stillernation".
they're not gig, which is why I am having a good time with this thread....
I'll say it again, since you missed it the first time.
Staal and Sid have played North American hockey their entire lives. They know the increase in physical play. They've adjusted their games accordingly.
Malkin played in the Super League. The whole reason why Aleksey Morozov is over in the RSL is because of the lack of physical play and the wider ice. That's all Malkin has been used to for 19 years. In his 20th year, he has something completely different thrown at him, and he wore down in the final months.
He'll be even better next year.
which playoffs were you watching? For the first two games, the team had a collective deer-in-the-headlights look....none of them were ready for the intensity of the playoffs....
think about this....given that Geno had Olympic experience & World Championship experience in the past 12 months, he should have known to turn his game up accordingly. He didn't....
then what was the point of Malkin stayng in the RBL last season...
I don't know, ask him.
I already posted the answer to this question....his agents advised him to stay there so he could cherry pick his way to the Calder.....tells you a lot about his competitive attititude.....
No, they really didn't. If that's what you got from that quote, well, I guess that's par for the course for you.
Please point me to the part of the quote where he said that his agents told him to stay in Russia so that he can win the Calder and that's why he stayed.
edog wrote:
which playoffs were you watching? For the first two games, the team had a collective deer-in-the-headlights look....none of them were ready for the intensity of the playoffs....
think about this....given that Geno had Olympic experience & World Championship experience in the past 12 months, he should have known to turn his game up accordingly. He didn't....
You conveniently avoided the central point of my post. My point was that the ENTIRE SEASON and his involvement in the league was something that Malkin was not used to. He was not used to being battered every other night from October to April. The Super League does not last that long nor is it as physically demanding, both in terms of actual physical punishment over a period of time or the style of play.
Staal and Crosby have adjusted for the entire lives to North American hockey. Malkin was introduced to it for the first time this year, thrown into the deep end. He still scored 85 points. He still had 30+ goals. He'll have 100 points next year and he'll be better conditioned.
Please point me to the part of the quote where he said that his agents told him to stay in Russia so that he can win the Calder and that's why he stayed.
But my agents told me that it’d be easier to win the trophy in a year... My dream, as any other player, is to participate in Olympics. I think, it’d be harder to get in the Olympic national team from the NHL than from Russia....I hope Pittsburgh will respect and understand my decision. I already made a decision, so we’ll come back to this conversation in a year...
actually, I am mistaken....not only was it the Calder, but even better, the Olympics took priority over starting his NHL career.....real dedication there....
Staal played well in both zones. And let's face it, Geno lived off of Sid all season...how many points do you think he would have put up without Sid feeding him? I would say no more than 50.....
Malkin had 47 points (assuming I counted correctly) this year that didn't involve Crosby also getting a point. If you want to argue that if you replace Crosby with an average player in every other scoring situation, Malkin doesn't get 3 points, go right ahead. I'm not buying it. The argument cuts both ways- Crosby doesn't win the scoring title without Malkin.
Please point me to the part of the quote where he said that his agents told him to stay in Russia so that he can win the Calder and that's why he stayed.
But my agents told me that it’d be easier to win the trophy in a year... My dream, as any other player, is to participate in Olympics. I think, it’d be harder to get in the Olympic national team from the NHL than from Russia....I hope Pittsburgh will respect and understand my decision. I already made a decision, so we’ll come back to this conversation in a year...
actually, I am mistaken....not only was it the Calder, but even better, the Olympics took priority over starting his NHL career.....real dedication there....
It would be easier to win the Calder if it wasn't for Crosby and Ovechkin. Doesn't mention that it was part of his decision or that's what his agents told him to do.
I'm not sure why you're down on him thinking the Olympics are most important to him.
actually, I am mistaken....not only was it the Calder, but even better, the Olympics took priority over starting his NHL career.....real dedication there....
It's not that uncommon for European players to put a greater weight on the Olympics or World Championships than the Stanley Cup. Those titles are often held up as the gold standard.
edog wrote:
which playoffs were you watching? For the first two games, the team had a collective deer-in-the-headlights look....none of them were ready for the intensity of the playoffs....
think about this....given that Geno had Olympic experience & World Championship experience in the past 12 months, he should have known to turn his game up accordingly. He didn't....
I can't wait until 2 or 3 years down the road when Malkin proves just how very wrong you are about him. We'll all be laughing at you even more than we are now! He deserved at least a "C" grade for this year, anything less and you're just doing it to argue - so obviously you got what you wanted (are you happ yet?). If you want to give him a "D" for the playoffs, then fine, but make it clearer in your posts what you're awarding for. And since most half of the team deserved a "D" or lower in the playoffs it really isn't that big of a deal.
Ogie wrote:But, he didn't play his role, unless his role was to be a icon in the press box, this guy played how many games in the last 30?
Will you please stop wasting bandwidth with these inane questions? I gave the reasons why I feel he deserved an A-. Your constant response is "He was benched". I know he was, and you still haven't told me how he hasn't played his role well.
penscup wrote:I can't wait until 2 or 3 years down the road when Malkin proves just how very wrong you are about him. We'll all be laughing at you even more than we are now! He deserved at least a "C" grade for this year, anything less and you're just doing it to argue - so obviously you got what you wanted (are you happ yet?). If you want to give him a "D" for the playoffs, then fine, but make it clearer in your posts what you're awarding for. And since most half of the team deserved a "D" or lower in the playoffs it really isn't that big of a deal.
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the grades are for this year only, not 2 or 3 years down the road.
penscup wrote:I can't wait until 2 or 3 years down the road when Malkin proves just how very wrong you are about him. We'll all be laughing at you even more than we are now! He deserved at least a "C" grade for this year, anything less and you're just doing it to argue - so obviously you got what you wanted (are you happ yet?). If you want to give him a "D" for the playoffs, then fine, but make it clearer in your posts what you're awarding for. And since most half of the team deserved a "D" or lower in the playoffs it really isn't that big of a deal.
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the grades are for this year only, not 2 or 3 years down the road.
He stated that Malkin should be traded in this offseason. That's what I'm referring to. Something that would be a huge mistake, and is quite an ignorant opinion considering he's going to be rookie of the year most probably. And who knows really what he's grading, thats part of what makes his analysis so confusing and ridiculous. You've got to seperate the postseason from the regular season.
So let's end it - Evgeni Malkin had the SECOND BEST POINT PRODUCTIVITY among the 20-year old No. 2 draft picks (more specifically, the second-highest drafted forwards in Top 3) IN THE LAST 20+ FRICKIN' YEARS (and probably more, but I gave up after going to 1983).
The only player who beat him was Jimmy Carson (drafted in 1986)
The control group of players Malkin outperformed includes, for example:
Horton, Spezza, Gaborik, D. Sedin, Legwand, Marleau, Gratton, Nedved, Linden, Shanahan (by 13), C. Simpson, Kirk Muller, Sylvain Turgeon
If that productivity doesn't earn him A++, I don't know what would.
And questioning his dedication because he allegedly picked Olympics over the start in a professional league is just dumb beyond belief (and believe my, I consider myself the least patriotic person I know).
Ogie wrote:But, he didn't play his role, unless his role was to be a icon in the press box, this guy played how many games in the last 30?
Will you please stop wasting bandwidth with these inane questions? I gave the reasons why I feel he deserved an A-. Your constant response is "He was benched". I know he was, and you still haven't told me how he hasn't played his role well.
So by your role analogy, Cairns should be given a A+, he played his role perfectly. Roberts should be given a F. Veteran leadership that was provided?
I am wasting bandwith, your the one who gives a player who couldn't even make the lineup in the last 2 months a A and the rookie of the year a D.
You're being ridiculous now. Cairns' role wasn't to take a roster spot and get paid. I don't even know what you're saying about Roberts. Again, please follow this part of my post, I am judging them based on their player specific roles. Not on point production. Not on making the lineup. Just their specific roles. And still, you've failed to tell me how he hasn't played his role.
Ogie wrote:But, he didn't play his role, unless his role was to be a icon in the press box, this guy played how many games in the last 30?
Will you please stop wasting bandwidth with these inane questions? I gave the reasons why I feel he deserved an A-. Your constant response is "He was benched". I know he was, and you still haven't told me how he hasn't played his role well.
So by your role analogy, Cairns should be given a A+, he played his role perfectly. Roberts should be given a F. Veteran leadership that was provided?
I am wasting bandwith, your the one who gives a player who couldn't even make the lineup in the last 2 months a A and the rookie of the year a D.
You're being ridiculous now. Cairns' role wasn't to take a roster spot and get paid. I don't even know what you're saying about Roberts. Again, please follow this part of my post, I am judging them based on their player specific roles. Not on point production. Not on making the lineup. Just their specific roles. And still, you've failed to tell me how he hasn't played his role.
We may be talking about the same thing, but I like saying we grade them on what we expect from them. I expected Cairns to be our sixth or seventh defenseman, and play an enforcer role. He wasn't able to do that. I don't think you can even give the guy a grade for the season, but I don't know where edog is getting an A+ from.
I expected Roberts to provide leadership, forecheck hard, and contribute in the playoffs. He did all three. I don't see where the F comes from.
Location: A parallel universe called New Pittsburgh
Postby 71Aj66ax87 »
edog wrote:
pfim wrote:
edog wrote:
pfim wrote:
How so? He was never a defensive presence in college & he hasn't been here, even though some believe he is Norris Trophy worthy....on top of that, some believe him to have taken great leaps & bounds, yet I saw nothing to support that claim....therefore, if we excuse him for injury his sophomore season, what was his excuse for getting owned by Comrie this series?
How would you know he wasn't a presense in college? You get your info from wikipedia for crying out loud, which was the point.
re-read any scouting reports & you will note he wasn't a defensive defensemen....that's my point.....
So he gets an F for living up to everyone's expectations? I think we've come full circle here.
What else has Wiki told you?
He didn't live up to any expectations. He is supposed to be this offensive guru, but had only 14 goals (9 of which were on the PP---or should I say, 9 of which were his one-dimensional back door pass from Sid). That leaves only 5 even strength goals...that's hardly going to make anyone forget Paul Coffey around here....in fact, that only puts him one ahead of Joel Kwiatkowski....
Actually his 14 goals is tied for 10th most in a single season in Penguins history,thats tied with doug bodger in the 1987,88 season.
he also had 45 assists,59 points and was +9.Why are you so against Whitney.
Last edited by 71Aj66ax87 on Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
edog wrote:You think either Whitney or Gonchar is better than Lindstrom....
Malkin has a whole other level he rarely went to this season....that's why I graded him the way I did....
It's Lidstrom.
Even though I agree that Malkin has another level in him, you gotta give the guy some time. You can't expect everyone to develop as quickly as Crosby. And 85 points IS great for a rookie season. Actually, for most players it would qualify as a career year. D+? No way. At least a B.
The Whitney grade is laughable also. One of the best young offensive defenseman in the league, if not the best. And that's mostly coming from people outside of Pittsburgh.
