TrueBlueGED Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I throw ALL the current centers in as bottom six centers.. It's only in Buffalo that we make guys like Ennis, Hodgson, some rookie names Grig something top six. Here's my test: where would they be on a Pittsburgh, Boston, Chicago or Detroit team? If you can answer top six, so be it... Just my warn out, humble opinion... By that logic, there's only about 5 top-6 centers in the entire league not on those teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I throw ALL the current centers in as bottom six centers.. It's only in Buffalo that we make guys like Ennis, Hodgson, some rookie names Grig something top six. Here's my test: where would they be on a Pittsburgh, Boston, Chicago or Detroit team? If you can answer top six, so be it... Just my warn out, humble opinion... How do we do this without playing word games? Yes, all three of those centers are still developing. I really do not believe they are being developed with the expectation that their top end is checking line / energy line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 By that logic, there's only about 5 top-6 centers in the entire league not on those teams. Yeah, people have made very reasonable arguments for each of Pittsburgh's top line centers being the best player in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 How do we do this without playing word games? Yes, all three of those centers are still developing. I really do not believe they are being developed with the expectation that their top end is checking line / energy line. Fair enough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 ###### ###### ######. I like Ennis. I like Ennis a lot. But this is asking gim to take the responsibilities of a first line two-way center. That's not what anyone wants to hear. Two reasons: 1) Ennis' usage will likely shift towards the more-defensive and he'll face a higher quality of competition. I hope he thrives, but a roster shouldn't be built on hope. I really wanted to see Ennis thrive as Roy's replacement as a second line center that sees a little weaker-than-top compeition and contributes to the powerplay. 2) Maybe they're just preparing for the what-ifs, but this could be an indication that they've accepted the idea that they will not acquire a proven first line center before the season starts. Which means we may be standing pat with our top six. I've accepted that the team is not trying to win the Stanley Cup this season. The best way to get a number one center is to develop one yourself, and that's what the Sabres are attempting to do. If Oreo makes it as the no.3, that makes three first round picks at center with a fourth waiting in the wings (Girgensons). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Given where Hodgson and Ennis are now, and where Grigorenko could be, and what all three mean to the Sabres future, the only way you could see the Sabres bringing in a number one guy is if he is physical and/or great defensively. That"s why I wanted Staal so bad. The only guy potentially available who may fit the bill is Getzlaf. Ott or a traditional number-three type acquisition will be our third unless Grigs surprises. Hodgson and Ennis will be centering the top two lines this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Wait, which center on Boston is elite? They have one who may someday get there, but he isn't yet. Their top center in Bergeron is a very good #3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Wait, which center on Boston is elite? They have one who may someday get there, but he isn't yet. Their top center in Bergeron is a very good #3. If Bergeron is a #3, what in the world does a man have to do to be considered a #2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubkev Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 If Bergeron is a #3, what in the world does a man have to do to be considered a #2? I agree. Bergeron is a pretty damn capable #2. Not sure you could ask for much more really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Aargh! :wallbash: Here we go again slotting lines as if it was still a six-team league. Bergeron a third line centre my ass. He made Team Canada for ######'s sakes. Doubt you could name 20 better centres than him, let alone 30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted July 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 ###### ###### ######. I like Ennis. I like Ennis a lot. But this is asking gim to take the responsibilities of a first line two-way center. That's not what anyone wants to hear. Two reasons: 1) Ennis' usage will likely shift towards the more-defensive and he'll face a higher quality of competition. I hope he thrives, but a roster shouldn't be built on hope. I really wanted to see Ennis thrive as Roy's replacement as a second line center that sees a little weaker-than-top compeition and contributes to the powerplay. 2) Maybe they're just preparing for the what-ifs, but this could be an indication that they've accepted the idea that they will not acquire a proven first line center before the season starts. Which means we may be standing pat with our top six. When was Roy a first-line two-way center? He was a second-line center, decent but not excellent in his own end. He played on the top line because the team doesn't have anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 If Bergeron is a #3, what in the world does a man have to do to be considered a #2? He is the prototypical defensive center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 He is the prototypical defensive center. It's possible we're talking past each other. When I hear #3 center, I think that defensive ability and 30-40 points (Antoine Vermette, for example). Bergeron is good for 60-70 points coupled with his defensive ability. To me, that screams #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Days Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Tuesday practice observations IMO. It was hard to keep track of everything. A lot was going on. Braden McNabb looked like the best player on the ice. McNabb & Foligno definitely deserve to have full time jobs in the NHL. There was a play where Foligno knocked down Armia took the puck into the offensive zone and fed a perfect pass to McNabb who scored about 10 feet inside the blue line. Several times McNabb stood up players coming into his defensive zone and broke up plays. There was another play where the puck came to the back boards and Boychuck checked McNabb and tried to take McNabb off the puck but McNabb was able to bring the puck behind the net and pass it out of the zone. Foligno showed some decent stick handling today and made some nice passes. He showed good effort as usual. Logan Nelson showed good scoring touch and appeard to score the most goals on the day. Cory Tropp had some nice goals early on in the afternoon session. Kevin Sundher and Daniel Cattenacci looked better as a whole than Cody Hodson and Luke Adam in the morning session. Linus Ullmark played solidly. MIkhail Grigerenko decent. He showed some good hands and had some nice passes. Zemgus Gerginsons was ok too, but seams like his hands could use some more development. Jake McCabe seemed to struggle a bit, but he's got time to imrove. Riley Boychuck needs a lot of work to do on his shooting. I noticed a play Mark Pysyk in front of his of his own net with a forward from the opposition standing in front of the goalie. Pysyk did nothing to move the forward away and just stood there. Could be that the coaches wanted to limit the checking but it is something that caught my eye. Jerome Guthier Leduc looked a bit better defensively than he has in past camps. Connor Knapp was excellent throughout. Big body covers a lot of the net, yet he stopped a lot of shots low with his pads today. During breakaway drills he was stonewalling almost everyone. Then Armia got a couple on him off the post and in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Here's what my sports psychologist taught me.....when a player is listing all the great things about an organization off the cuff....and the first thing he mentions is sports psychologist........you may be asking for trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 I have a request. Can we agree to put this Oreo monicker to rest. You might as well call him Nunzio. Its as retarded. Just my opinion mind you. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 i'm still hoping for Gringo to catch on for his nickname Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 i'm still hoping for Gringo to catch on for his nickname Gringo sounds one hell of a lot better than Oreo but it might get a little awkward if we acquire Gomez :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 I think "Grigs" is fine. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 People are arguing past eachother because one group thinks #3 Center is your second worst center, while the other things #3 center simply means he's skilled defensively. Datsyuk spends time on the 3rd line in Detroit and they shift Abdelkader up. I offer this solution: Top Ross Center for the player you want to pivot the line who's job is to put pucks in the net. Top Selke Center for the middleman on the line you'd put out against the Ovechkin-Backstrom-Johansson line. Agreed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 I have a request. Can we agree to put this Oreo monicker to rest. No. Because it's a million times better than Grigs, Grigsy, Griggy, etc. and that's what we're going to be stuck with if we don't adopt something else. Come up with something better than Oreo and we'll talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 No. Because it's a million times better than Grigs, Grigsy, Griggy, etc. and that's what we're going to be stuck with if we don't adopt something else. Come up with something better than Oreo and we'll talk. How is a completely random nickname that nobody outside of this forum will ever understand "a million times better" than a nickname derived from his actual name? Besides, you guys are all violating the unwritten rule of nicknames anyway -- you don't just "decide" on a nickname on a fan message board. More likely, the players and coaches and people who actually spend time with him, practice with him, dine with him, play with him -- people who actually KNOW him -- will come up with a nickname that sticks. And it will probably be one of ones that you have a problem with, because that's how 95% of all nicknames work. That is all. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 It's possible we're talking past each other. When I hear #3 center, I think that defensive ability and 30-40 points (Antoine Vermette, for example). Bergeron is good for 60-70 points coupled with his defensive ability. To me, that screams #2. And this is why I hate numbering them. I guess the whole thing comes down to not understanding why anyone would group in Boston with those other teams mentioned. You guys already nailed it in mentioning that no team should be listed alongside Pittsburgh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 People are arguing past eachother because one group thinks #3 Center is your second worst center, while the other things #3 center simply means he's skilled defensively. Datsyuk spends time on the 3rd line in Detroit and they shift Abdelkader up. I offer this solution: Top Ross Center for the player you want to pivot the line who's job is to put pucks in the net. Top Selke Center for the middleman on the line you'd put out against the Ovechkin-Backstrom-Johansson line. Agreed? This is pretty much how I look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 How is a completely random nickname that nobody outside of this forum will ever understand "a million times better" than a nickname derived from his actual name? 1. "Oreo" IS derived from his actual name: GrigOREnkO. So it's at least as valid as Grigs, Griggy, and Grigsy, and possibly MORE valid since those three all add either 's' or 'y', which aren't in his "actual name." 2. A person with average intelligence should require 10 seconds or less to spot the OREO in Grigorenko. 3. Grigs, Griggy, and Grigsy are all painfully lazy. 4. This is a message board so something shorter and easier to type than "Grigorenko" is fine by me. So if it never catches on and no one outside this forum ever sees or uses it, it really doesn't matter to me. It serves its purpose. Besides, you guys are all violating the unwritten rule of nicknames anyway -- you don't just "decide" on a nickname on a fan message board. More likely, the players and coaches and people who actually spend time with him, practice with him, dine with him, play with him -- people who actually KNOW him -- will come up with a nickname that sticks. And it will probably be one of ones that you have a problem with, because that's how 95% of all nicknames work. That is all. :) Fair enough, except that the history of sports is riddled with nicknames that weren't given by teammates and coaches. I doubt Lou Gehrig's teammates called him "The Iron Horse." I can't imagine Kobe Bryant's teammates came up with "The Black Mamba." Fans and media come up with nicknames that stick all the time. And no one is being forced to use anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.