Yep, that's why he didn't come over last year.He's the front runner for the Calder because he cherrypicked the year to come over....let me ask you something, does he win the Calder if he went up against Sid & Ovechkin last year?
I have to disagree. I think it was a good grading. Sure we'll all disagree about Malkin. He's looking at it from what Malkin is capable of vs what he did through very objective eyes, everyone else is looking at Malkin's point total and using the rookie reasoning. The other grades I found reasonable. I'd give Whitney a little higher grade (he isn't my favorite by far, but he seems to have progressed), as well as Orpik (he seemed to start playing better positionally towards the end of the year, NOT the playoffs though). I'd also give Thorburn an A- for the role he was expected to play, and filled in very well when given the chance.Henry Hank wrote:This is a bait thread plain and simple. edog is a troll and nobody should take him seriously.
I actually agree with you on Eaton. We are holding him way to high as our defensive pillar. He's a great depth guy at defense, but he should not be our top d-man. He would be great as a 2nd pairing with another strong d man.edog wrote:Skeletons of Quinto wrote:Malkin scored 85 points as a Rookie. He is the front runner for the Calder, all while playing a style of hockey that he had never played, and for longer than he had ever played.
He's the front runner for the Calder because he cherrypicked the year to come over....let me ask you something, does he win the Calder if he went up against Sid & Ovechkin last year?
Nasreddine was a fine 7th Defenseman. He performed admirably. I don't care if he was in the minors before this year.
If he was so fine, how come he couldn't crack the lineup for the playoffs?
The rap on Eaton isn't physicality. It's his sound positioning and defensive awareness. I'd be glad to have him back next year.
We probably will have him back. He's okay as a 4th or 5th defensemen, but right now, we have him pegged him #2. That's not where he needs to be.....
I'm not even going to bother continuing. You really have an axe to grind with Whitney. It's kind of sad.
Based upon his play & regression, yes I do..in case you didn't notice, he cost us Game 4 when he pussed out against Comrie behind the net....
Wow. Now I know why Crash thinks you are an idiot on the other site. You just don't know hockey do you? Malkin a "D+" and Whitney an "F"? Not everyone is going to progress as fast as Mario Lemieux and say Rob Blake. Whitney was fantastic, save for playoffs but I really believe he was battered and bruised and Malkin had 85 points his rookie year.edog wrote:My year-end rant.....grade for the entire team....
Centers:
1) Erik Christensen: C+. Highly effective on shootouts, good wrist shoot. Disappeared during playoffs.
2) Sidney Crosby: A+. Art Ross winner & probable Hart Trophy winner. Enough said
3) Evgeni Malkin: D+. Will win Calder, but did not come close to realizing full potential. Wasted year in RBL, called out by MT on numerous occasions. Needs to address attitude towards pro hockey & add upper body strength
4) Jordan Staal: A+. Set rookie record for SHG & put in Selke candidate season. Surprisingly made team out of Junior & had solid playoff.
5) Max Talbot: A+. Gritty 3rd/4th line center who gave solid efforts night in, night out.
6) Chris Thorburn: Not enough data to grade, though in limited performances, provided solid gritty play in the corners
Right Wings:
1) Colby Armstrong: B. Not a great year statistically, but made huge hits & elevated play in postseason.
2) Ryan Malone: D-. Aside from work on the PK, looked lost on the ice.
3) Michel Ouellet: C+. Slow starter, but picked up play down the stretch.
4) Ronald Petrovicky: B. Was healthy scratch many game nights, but played inspired gritty style when in. Had outstanding Game 4 in playoffs.
5) Mark Recchi: B. Had solid regular season with 24 goals, but no-show during playoffs.
Left Wings:
1) Nils Ekman: F. Was supposed to compliment Crosby on wing, played soft all season when healthy
2) Georges Laraque: D. Did not fill role assigned adequately after trade.
3) Gary Roberts: A+ Consummate warrior on the ice. Mentored Jordan Staal
4) Jarkko Ruutu: B+. Another solid, gritty 3rd/4th line player
Defensemen:
1) Eric Cairns: Was hurt almost all season.
2) Mark Eaton: C. Blocked shoots reasonably well, but never played physical style on defense
3) Sergei Gonchar: B. Solid regular season, horrible playoff
4) Joel Kwiatkowski: Not enough data to grade
5) Josef Melichar: F Terrible positioning & atrocious play in own zone
6) Alain Nasreddine: D-. Would be an “Fâ€￾ on any other team, but he probably was the best of a sorry bunch
7) Brooks Orpik: D-. Solid hitter, but ran around in own zone.
8) Rob Scuderi: F. see Melichar
9) Ryan Whitney: F. Terrible positioning & atrocious play in own zone. Offensively minded, but had only one play on the PP unit. Looked timid on the point.
Goalies
1) Marc-Andre Fleury: A+. Came off questionable year last year & put together 40 win season. Lived up to expectations for a former #1 overall pick
2) Jocelyn Thibault B. Solid backup netminder
Coaching: B+. A+ in regular season will merit MT Jack Adams consideration. Looked lost in postseason & got out coached by Bryan Murray
Keep: Christensen, Crosby, Staal, Talbot, Thorburn, Armstrong, Ouellet, Petrovicky Laraque, Roberts, Ruutu, Orpik, Fleury, Thibault
Trade: Malkin, Malone, Eaton, Gonchar, Whitney
Release: Recchi, Ekman, Kwiatkowski, Melichar, Nasreddine, Scuderi
Needs in offseason (order of precedence):
1) shut-down defensemen.
2) wing for Sid/wing for 2nd line
3) face off guy
4) backup goalie (if Thibault leaves)
Explain why about Thorburn please? And please explain why Malkin doesn't know English, considering he's known he'd be in the NHL for years now.Ogie wrote:Do you understand that Malkin can't speak English, this was a great year from him, the only people who are disappointed are those who thought he would come in and break 212 points this year.gigz51 wrote:I have to disagree. I think it was a good grading. Sure we'll all disagree about Malkin. He's looking at it from what Malkin is capable of vs what he did through very objective eyes, everyone else is looking at Malkin's point total and using the rookie reasoning. The other grades I found reasonable. I'd give Whitney a little higher grade (he isn't my favorite by far, but he seems to have progressed), as well as Orpik (he seemed to start playing better positionally towards the end of the year, NOT the playoffs though). I'd also give Thorburn an A- for the role he was expected to play, and filled in very well when given the chance.Henry Hank wrote:This is a bait thread plain and simple. edog is a troll and nobody should take him seriously.
BTW, Thorburn A- is where you are going to get ripped.
...And there, my friend, is where you lose this arguement...and prove that it's not about 'objective observation' (which you claim it is), but all about your preconceived notions of what a player "should" be.edog wrote:eastonpensfan wrote:OK, so according to you, Crosby=Staal=Talbot????edog wrote:My year-end rant.....grade for the entire team....
Centers:
1) Erik Christensen: C+. Highly effective on shootouts, good wrist shoot. Disappeared during playoffs.
2) Sidney Crosby: A+. Art Ross winner & probable Hart Trophy winner. Enough said
3) Evgeni Malkin: D+. Will win Calder, but did not come close to realizing full potential. Wasted year in RBL, called out by MT on numerous occasions. Needs to address attitude towards pro hockey & add upper body strength
4) Jordan Staal: A+. Set rookie record for SHG & put in Selke candidate season. Surprisingly made team out of Junior & had solid playoff.
5) Max Talbot: A+. Gritty 3rd/4th line center who gave solid efforts night in, night out.
Sid improved from last year...
Staal surprised everyone & made the team
Talbot was fantastic all season long as a 3rd/4th liner. I graded them according to their expectations & where they played on the team....
and Christensen is better than Malkin???
Skill wise? No. But I had less expections for Christensen then I did Malkin.
Here's what Geno had to say about staying in Russia versus coming here...pfim wrote:Yep, that's why he didn't come over last year.He's the front runner for the Calder because he cherrypicked the year to come over....let me ask you something, does he win the Calder if he went up against Sid & Ovechkin last year?
You could make the last comment about every Calder winner since at least 1995, maybe even further back.
Finally, someone who gets it...who can actually look beyond the stats & see the team for what it is...gigz51 wrote:I have to disagree. I think it was a good grading. Sure we'll all disagree about Malkin. He's looking at it from what Malkin is capable of vs what he did through very objective eyes, everyone else is looking at Malkin's point total and using the rookie reasoning. The other grades I found reasonable. I'd give Whitney a little higher grade (he isn't my favorite by far, but he seems to have progressed), as well as Orpik (he seemed to start playing better positionally towards the end of the year, NOT the playoffs though). I'd also give Thorburn an A- for the role he was expected to play, and filled in very well when given the chance.Henry Hank wrote:This is a bait thread plain and simple. edog is a troll and nobody should take him seriously.
Ogie wrote:
Do you understand that Malkin can't speak English, this was a great year from him, the only people who are disappointed are those who thought he would come in and break 212 points this year.
Malkin had 3 years to learn English since he was drafted....
BTW, Thorburn A- is where you are going to get ripped.
I didn't give Thorburn a grade....
Rant is right. Add the word "insane" in front of it and you're on to something.edog wrote:Trade: Malkin, Malone, Eaton, Gonchar, Whitney
Yep, that's why he didn't come over last year.edog wrote:Here's what Geno had to say about staying in Russia versus coming here...pfim wrote:Yep, that's why he didn't come over last year.He's the front runner for the Calder because he cherrypicked the year to come over....let me ask you something, does he win the Calder if he went up against Sid & Ovechkin last year?
You could make the last comment about every Calder winner since at least 1995, maybe even further back.
Update 8/26/05 - Comments from Evgeni Malkin: "After the last season Metallurg saved many great players and added the new ones to them. The lineup looks younger now. After the Canadian coach came we should increase in our speed and toughness. Possibly, this Metallurg is weaker than the one in late nineties, but we have an excellent chance to win the gold... I was ready to compete with Alexander (Ovechkin) and Sidney (Crosby) for the Calder Trophy (the NHL's Rookie of the Year). 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, where the coaches watch the players all the time. 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."
http://beanballinc.blogspot.com/2005_08_01_archive.html
what did all 4 contribute when the big game was on the line? Very little...Pitts wrote:Rant is right. Add the word "insane" in front of it and you're on to something.edog wrote:Trade: Malkin, Malone, Eaton, Gonchar, Whitney
I think he's confusing me and you, I gave Thorburn an A-, and I'll stand by that, even though I'll be "getting ripped" for it. I can't wait to hear why.edog wrote:Ogie wrote:
Do you understand that Malkin can't speak English, this was a great year from him, the only people who are disappointed are those who thought he would come in and break 212 points this year.
Malkin had 3 years to learn English since he was drafted....
BTW, Thorburn A- is where you are going to get ripped.
I didn't give Thorburn a grade....
malkinshair wrote:...And there, my friend, is where you lose this arguement...and prove that it's not about 'objective observation' (which you claim it is), but all about your preconceived notions of what a player "should" be.
Speaking that everyone's expectations were that Staal would be returned to Juniors, it is improper to state he was a pleasant surprise....
Your grades are a joke. Your rationale is a joke. Your bias against Malkin and Whitney is a joke...too bad no one's laughing.
Whitney had knocks against him in college & couldn't play defense at BU...in fact, he got hammered his sophomore season after getting drafted by the Pens for having a big head....he also cost his team the Hockey East title with poor play that resulted in a 1-0 win for UNH that year...
If you mean in the final 2 games of the season, nobody on the team contributed much of anything...not Sid, Staal, Rex, etc.edog wrote:what did all 4 contribute when the big game was on the line? Very little...Pitts wrote:Rant is right. Add the word "insane" in front of it and you're on to something.edog wrote:Trade: Malkin, Malone, Eaton, Gonchar, Whitney
Wow, someone can read Wikipedia. Nevermind he basically played on one leg the entire season because of an ankle injury.Whitney had knocks against him in college & couldn't play defense at BU...in fact, he got hammered his sophomore season after getting drafted by the Pens for having a big head....he also cost his team the Hockey East title with poor play that resulted in a 1-0 win for UNH that year...
Not very well man. Yur grades were strictly like favoritism.edog wrote:Aside from Mad City Mike, I noticed no one else bothered to put together a grade for the team....I just merely broke mine down by player....Henry Hank wrote:This is a bait thread plain and simple. edog is a troll and nobody should take him seriously.
malkinshair wrote:
If you mean in the final 2 games of the season, nobody on the team contributed much of anything...not Sid, Staal, Rex, etc.
I agree Rex sucked, Sid had absolutely no help, but still managed to put up 6 points....Staal elevated his play & ended up with 3 goals....MT himself praised the guys under 20 for their play & critized those in their 20s....sounds like the lines of demarcation were pretty clear....
During the regular season, however, Malkin led the team with 6 game winning goals...meaning he played well when in the clutch, and scored goals that mattered.
how many of those were at the beginning of the year versus towards the end? I'll bet you the numbers will be surprising & telling....
...so, do you think it's maybe just that you don't like these players (personally) more than they don't contribute to the success of our team? Take a sec to mull it over
I don't know any of these guys socially, so it's a little hard to dislike them based on that. However, I can judge them based upon expectations & whether or not they met those expectations....in my mind, Malkin had way too much talent to not score over 100 points. As soon as the hitting began, he wiltered.....as far as Whitney is concerned, I've covered that in detail....just because some don't like the message I send, doesn't mean it's wrong....you may wish to consider that for a moment....
