Player Style Preference

[Randall Flagg]

There's a 20+ minute youtube video of Datsyuk plays that aren't the mainstream ones, like the shootout goal against Nashville, ones that get forgotten because goals weren't immediately scored after.

It's an incredible video. I'll try and find it later.

[dudacek]

Eli Manning will be in the HoF, easily. And it's solely because his rings, and that he played in NY

 

TBF I never criticized Flutie and Kelly for winning.

 

Winners win. Jack is not a winner yet. Nolan is. I didn't say I have anything against Jack's attitude, or like Nolan's more. Nor did I say Nolan should get the C. But he's won, so he's a winner.

 

I mean you're right, I get the winner mentality and all that. But what's the point of that mentality if you don't, you know, actually win? Unless you have an out of your mind performance on the big stage and just get shafted. But ask anyone, Kelly is a loser, Marino is a loser, and Eli is a winner

I don't hate him, but personally I don't care about class or grit or anything like that in sports. Give me a player that 'wows' me. Give me a guy that is unique, has fun, and treats the game like a game. That might just be me though

I don't think it's just you at all. Lots of love for the Pavel Bures out there.

But Forsberg must have wowed you sometime. And I don't mean just with his smarts.

Edited September 29, 2017 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

I never got to see Forsberg in his prime, but I picture Sidney Crosby style hockey with Toews determination and Tarasenko's raw strength.

[WildCard]

I never got to see Forsberg in his prime, but I picture Sidney Crosby style hockey with Toews determination and Tarasenko's raw strength.

So you hate him

[North Buffalo]

I never got to see Forsberg in his prime, but I picture Sidney Crosby style hockey with Toews determination and Tarasenko's raw strength.

He had a nastier attitude, would just assume slash someone or check as drive to the net. Could take over a game with pure grit.

[darksabre]

He had a nastier attitude, would just assume slash someone or check as drive to the net. Could take over a game with pure grit.

This is more it. He was the embodiment of "guy you hate to play against". Talent and snarl. Like a better Lucic.

[dudacek]

This is more it. He was the embodiment of "guy you hate to play against". Talent and snarl. Like a better Lucic.

Picture O'Reilly with Grier's strength, Kaleta's fearlessness and Tim Connolly's hands.

[darksabre]

Picture O'Reilly with Grier's strength, Kaleta's fearlessness and Tim Connolly's hands.

That's about right. Forsberg had no sense of self preservation, which made him extremely dangerous to play against.

[North Buffalo]

That’s how I remember him... the bigger the game, the more fearless, always amazed his body held up for as long as it did.

[darksabre]

That’s how I remember him... the bigger the game, the more fearless, always amazed his body held up for as long as it did.

I always remember him doing this thing where if he had the puck and you tried to hit him, he would just hit you instead, all while maintaining possession. He would launch himself into guys and hit them even though they were the ones trying to hit him.

[French Collection]

I always remember him doing this thing where if he had the puck and you tried to hit him, he would just hit you instead, all while maintaining possession. He would launch himself into guys and hit them even though they were the ones trying to hit him.

Yeah, he did that quite often. It was very effective because the opponents were not expecting it.

 

I liked Sakic due to the quiet leadership and a wicked wrist shot. He was my guy after Perreault retired, took a couple of years to find a replacement.

[drnkirishone]

My ideal forward has speed, goal scoring, and plays a bit nasty. Player I think of is Ovechkin, but Peter Forsberg was the player I always wanted to watch. Hell whenever I would play nhl be a pro mode he was the player I would try and make my pro play like.

 

On defense I like smooth skating, puck skills, passing, and just enough open ice hitting to keep forwards honest. Soupy has been my ideal player for a long time. If I could Frankenstein a player I would take karlsson and graft him to the open ice hitting of Peca

[darksabre]

My ideal forward has speed, goal scoring, and plays a bit nasty. Player I think of is Ovechkin, but Peter Forsberg was the player I always wanted to watch. Hell whenever I would play nhl be a pro mode he was the player I would try and make my pro play like.

 

On defense I like smooth skating, puck skills, passing, and just enough open ice hitting to keep forwards honest. Soupy has been my ideal player for a long time. If I could Frankenstein a player I would take karlsson and graft him to the open ice hitting of Peca

Another tally for Foppa. Is this a thing? Are we lacking some Forsberg on the Sabres? 

[3putt]

Up front I want players who do the seemingly impossible whether by natural talent, hockey IQ or pure will.  Perreault,  Lemieux Molginly, Bure and Datsyuk were some favorites.  But the second tier are the guys who just seem to be consummate pros.  Messier, Sakic, Forsberg, Lafleur, Trottier, 

 

Gretzky, Crosby and McDavid are just in another class.

 

On d Orr was the standard, though Park (yeah that one) Leetch, Coffee, Lidstrom Bourque Potvin were special.  Karlson and Oel are the current rage but they need a bit more track to be thought of in the same light.

 

We have a lot of good young players in the league and I enjoy watching them push the envelope.  Including Jack.

[Thorny]

Sakic was a guy that growing up I always felt exuded such a natural poise. Whenever he got the puck on his stick in Salt Lake City in 2002, I knew we'd be ok.

 

His 2001 playoff run sans Forsberg was the stuff of a first ballot HOF'er.

Edited September 29, 2017 by Thorny

[darksabre]

Sakic was a guy that growing up I always felt exuded such a natural poise. Whenever he got the puck on his stick in Salt Lake City in 2002, I knew we'd be ok.

 

His 2001 playoff run sans Forsberg was the stuff of a first ballot HOF'er.

 

Those Colorado teams were so damn good. I adored them as a kid. I remember playing NHL '97 on Playstation and I always played as the Avs because the Sabres kinda sucked  :blush: 

 

I think I knew Sakic, Ozolinsh, Foote, Roy, etc. before I had any idea who the French Connection were. 

[Pokey Jones]

You can't compare players from one era to another. It's just not possible. Perrault was the greatest player the Sabres have ever had, he was dominant in his era. Bobby Orr was the greatest player in the league, he changed the game.

 

The game has changed a lot more now. Fast guys who were too small or too soft can have allstar careers now. I dumped on Connolly in another thread but in today's game he'd excel. 

 

I loved old time hockey but it ain't coming back. To win today you need speed and so playing with speed is what I want our team to do. 

[Thorny]

Those Colorado teams were so damn good. I adored them as a kid. I remember playing NHL '97 on Playstation and I always played as the Avs because the Sabres kinda sucked  :blush: 

I think I knew Sakic, Ozolinsh, Foote, Roy, etc. before I had any idea who the French Connection were.

 

And their jerseys were so cool.

[Neo]

I'm not sure if this is a direct response to the OP and the thread's theme. I'm also cognizant of the lack of insight associated with a reference to the obvious, when conjuring the GOAT ....

 

Despite this, I'll mention Gretzky, because he comes to mind.

 

My memory of him is one of a skater among ten. I see Gretzky as a point on a plane, with lines or vectors to 9 others. As he moved about, the other 9 moved, as well. I see him controlling, or influencing the other 9, each at the end of a line connected to him. He created his own space, without the brute force of mass or speed. In short, everyone else seemed to move, at the end of a vector originating at him, to the spot necessary for him to create an opportunity. It was as if he willed everyone to a spot, while he wheeled and dealed.

 

Wayne Gretzky was a video game player. He was the focal point of a joy stick that moved him, directly, and 9 others, indirectly. The result was always Wayne, where he needed to be, with everyone else scrambling but unable to keep up.

[Taro T]

I'm not sure if this is a direct response to the OP and the thread's theme. I'm also cognizant of the lack of insight associated with a reference to the obvious, when conjuring the GOAT ....

Despite this, I'll mention Gretzky, because he comes to mind.

My memory of him is one of a skater among ten. I see Gretzky as a point on a plane, with lines or vectors to 9 others. As he moved about, the other 9 moved, as well. I see him controlling, or influencing the other 9, each at the end of a line connected to him. He created his own space, without the brute force of mass or speed. In short, everyone else seemed to move, at the end of a vector originating at him, to the spot necessary for him to create an opportunity. It was as if he willed everyone to a spot, while he wheeled and dealed.

Wayne Gretzky was a video game player. He was the focal point of a joy stick that moved him, directly, and 9 others, indirectly. The result was always Wayne, where he needed to be, with everyone else scrambling but unable to keep up.

"Don't go where the puck is, be where it's going." - Walter Gretzky

 

(Probably should've used single quotes as that's probably a paraphrase.)

[Randall Flagg]

I'm not sure if this is a direct response to the OP and the thread's theme. I'm also cognizant of the lack of insight associated with a reference to the obvious, when conjuring the GOAT ....

 

Despite this, I'll mention Gretzky, because he comes to mind.

 

My memory of him is one of a skater among ten. I see Gretzky as a point on a plane, with lines or vectors to 9 others. As he moved about, the other 9 moved, as well. I see him controlling, or influencing the other 9, each at the end of a line connected to him. He created his own space, without the brute force of mass or speed. In short, everyone else seemed to move, at the end of a vector originating at him, to the spot necessary for him to create an opportunity. It was as if he willed everyone to a spot, while he wheeled and dealed.

 

Wayne Gretzky was a video game player. He was the focal point of a joy stick that moved him, directly, and 9 others, indirectly. The result was always Wayne, where he needed to be, with everyone else scrambling but unable to keep up.

Obviously not anywhere near the same degree, but that's the kind of "hockey sense" I see in Matthews when I say that he has much better hockey sense than Eichel. Eichel creates chances by sheer physical abilities and talent but is 100% reactionary and 0% whatever the word is that is opposite to that which made Gretzky so great and differentiates guys like Crosby, McDavid, Matthews from guys like Eichel, Seguin, Ovechkin. 

"Don't go where the puck is, be where it's going." - Walter Gretzky

 

(Probably should've used single quotes as that's probably a paraphrase.)

""You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott

[Thorny]

I'm not sure if this is a direct response to the OP and the thread's theme. I'm also cognizant of the lack of insight associated with a reference to the obvious, when conjuring the GOAT ....

Despite this, I'll mention Gretzky, because he comes to mind.

My memory of him is one of a skater among ten. I see Gretzky as a point on a plane, with lines or vectors to 9 others. As he moved about, the other 9 moved, as well. I see him controlling, or influencing the other 9, each at the end of a line connected to him. He created his own space, without the brute force of mass or speed. In short, everyone else seemed to move, at the end of a vector originating at him, to the spot necessary for him to create an opportunity. It was as if he willed everyone to a spot, while he wheeled and dealed.

Wayne Gretzky was a video game player. He was the focal point of a joy stick that moved him, directly, and 9 others, indirectly. The result was always Wayne, where he needed to be, with everyone else scrambling but unable to keep up.

Fascinating. Well said.

 

Obviously not anywhere near the same degree, but that's the kind of "hockey sense" I see in Matthews when I say that he has much better hockey sense than Eichel. Eichel creates chances by sheer physical abilities and talent but is 100% reactionary and 0% whatever the word is that is opposite to that which made Gretzky so great and differentiates guys like Crosby, McDavid, Matthews from guys like Eichel, Seguin, Ovechkin. 

""You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott

I see plenty of that type of hockey sense in Eichel, definitely not 0%.

[Randall Flagg]

Fascinating. Well said.

 

 

I see plenty of that type of hockey sense in Eichel, definitely not 0%.

He's not a complete idiot but he's closer to Kane than to those two. If I had time I'd keep track of how many ill-advised passes/wrong decisions/collisions with teammates/cycle plays that don't involve him explicitly where he doesn't get open for even a millisecond but I don't have time

 

Luckily for us his skillset is unstoppable so it doesn't really matter and he'll still score a point per game. 

[Thorny]

He's not a complete idiot but he's closer to Kane than to those two. If I had time I'd keep track of how many ill-advised passes/wrong decisions/collisions with teammates/cycle plays that don't involve him explicitly where he doesn't get open for even a millisecond but I don't have time

Luckily for us his skillset is unstoppable so it doesn't really matter and he'll still score a point per game.

 

Maybe he's making those mistakes because he's still learning and developing his game, and not because his hockey sense is closer to Evander Kane than Auston Matthews.

 

Such an odd relative comparison to make, and one I completely disagree with. Every scout in the world raved about Eichel's hockey sense leading up to the draft. And now it's projecting closer to Kane than Matthews? No chance.

Edited September 30, 2017 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

Maybe he's making those mistakes because he's still learning and developing his game, and not because his hockey sense is closer to Evander Kane than Auston Matthews.

 

Such an odd relative comparison to make, and one I completely disagree with. Every scout in the world raved about Eichel's hockey sense leading up to the draft. And now it's projecting closer to Kane than Matthews? No chance.

Strome was a 1C leading up to the draft too. I stand by my statement. The difference between the two without the puck on their stick is like the grand canyon. I much prefer Jack with the puck on his stick, though. 

I'll throw this out there for a developing Jack - I was thrilled with his defensive play tonight in a game where his overall effort level was (rightfully so) quite low. I'm excited to see him play with the fire we know he's going to have.