17th best forward?

[King Knut]

According to NHL Network:

1. Patrick Kane, Chicago Blackhawks
2. Sidney Crosby, Pittsburgh Penguins
3. Alexander Ovechkin, Washington Capitals
4. Jamie Benn, Dallas Stars
5. Jonathan Toews, Chicago Blackhawks
6. Joe Pavelski, San Jose Sharks
7. John Tavares, New York Islanders
8. Anze Kopitar, Los Angeles Kings
9. Tyler Seguin, Dallas Stars
10. Evgeni Malkin, Pittsburgh Penguins
11. Steven Stamkos, Tampa Bay Lightning
12. Vladimir Tarasenko, St. Louis Blues
13. Connor McDavid, Edmonton Oilers
14. Patrice Bergeron, Boston Bruins
15. Johnny Gaudreau, Calgary Flames
16. Joe Thornton, San Jose Sharks
17. Claude Giroux, Philadelphia Flyers

Am I being a total Homer or is this list off?

Even if they're more heavily weighing offensive production  heavily, Giroux's overall game and overall role on his team surely should have more weight.  FOR INSTANCE:  

Ovie for managed 50 goals last year and is an amazing threat... but he STILL only outscored Giroux by 4 points.  

 

Taveres by 3.  Bergeron by 1 and they all played more games than Claude (though not by much).  Bergeron is obviously a masterfully responsible two way player, and Taveres is pretty solid plus fantastically clutch (G used to be) so I'm certainly not saying Claude is far and away better than either of them just not THAT much worse, especially in light of his overall responsibilities. 

 

Color me crazy, but while I'm not quite as much of an offense buzz kill as Hakstol, I'd still take Giroux's overall game on my team over most of these guys.  

Certainly Ovechkin, Malkin, Bergeron, Seguin (though I like him) and especially Joe friggin' Thorton and probably Pavelski as he's 32 at this point.   Stamkos is also on my question mark list because frankly the blot clot issue would scare the crap out of me if he was on my team (though granted Timmo did give us almost 7 years between his first and having to basically retire over it) but obviously were it not for that, he's in a class above.

 

Tarasenko, Crosby, Kane, Toews and Benn are clearly special players. McDavid probably is too, but he's way too new to the league to compare to the overall games of most of these guys. Johnny Hockey is already an impressive and an exciting talent and his ceiling is pretty sky high and Kopitar is pretty much an ideal for today's NHL.  

 

 

[mojo1917]

I think 17 is probably low.

 

I can think of 8 guys right off the bat that i'd put before Claude.

In no particular order, Crosby, Towes, Benn, Stamkos, Seguin, Kane, Little Joe, Tarasenko....maybe  how many is that ?    yeah, 7.5 , i'm not sold on Tarsenko being a 2 way player, but he's got mad skills.  

I have homer feelings about this, but until McDavid becomes McDavid I'll stick with my guy.  Gadreau needs to do it at a high level for a little longer and be a better all around player before i'd pick him over Giroux.

I think it's a wash with G ,Tavares, and Bergeron as well.  think G could be as high as 12 on an objectively arrived upon list.  

 

[Cheesesteak]

Definitely low.  

 

How could he be seventeenth when he's the leading point scorer over the last five seasons.

 

http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/seasons/last-5-nhl-seasons-players-stats.html

[Claude Monet]

I believe a couple of the bottom six signings are going to allow G to play a more offensive game. .. Getting less PK minutes and d zone starts. 

 

Schenn G Koneckcy (sp) 

 

they are going to kill it ! 

[King Knut]

13 hours ago, Cheesesteak said:

Definitely low.  

 

How could he be seventeenth when he's the leading point scorer over the last five seasons.

 

http://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/seasons/last-5-nhl-seasons-players-stats.html

 

It would be nice to get him onto the plus side of +/- again.  The fact that Claude's is so low is a pretty strong indicator of how skewed that stat can get.

[RJ8812]

No respect for Giroux. McDavid and Gaudreau ahead of him makes me laugh. Tavares and Giroux are practically the same, yet for some odd reason, the "experts" think he's a tier above him. 

[King Knut]

8 hours ago, Claude Monet said:

I believe a couple of the bottom six signings are going to allow G to play a more offensive game. .. Getting less PK minutes and d zone starts. 

 

Schenn G Koneckcy (sp) 

 

they are going to kill it ! 

 

I think Konecny will be a big plus if Haks and Hex ever let him up to the team.  His two way game can develop over time, and his team mates can cover for him while it does, but right now what this team needs is hands with some touch.  As it is Giroux is really the only guy who can thread or receive a pass in stride and he can only pass to himself so many times a game.  I really love the games that Simmonds, Coots and now Schenn bring.  But their offensive games are too similar and each one seems to really be in need of a partner with some skilled hands to make their own games as effective as they should be.  

 

I believe Konecny could be that guy... but I also believe that in another year or two if he hasn't emerged as such, they're going to have to go out and pay for it.  

 

The kind of game they WANT guys to play can be coached into a guy.  Unfortunately, the kind of skill I'm talking about simply can't be.  

[King Knut]

4 minutes ago, RJ8812 said:

No respect for Giroux. McDavid and Gaudreau ahead of him makes me laugh. Tavares and Giroux are practically the same, yet for some odd reason, the "experts" think he's a tier above him. 

 

To a degree, Tavares has been able to score the big goals when his team needs them.  

That said, I'll be interested to see how he does this year with such a drastically reduced cast of characters around him.

I just don't see Ladd and Chimera being able to pick up that much slack.   

[Poconono]

Sorry but I think #17 is just about right.  And his selections to team Canada for World Cups and Olympics attest to that ranking.  He's usually among the bottom group selected to play.  No crime in that.  Giroux is a great player but not a superstar.

[murraycraven]

I have to agree with that ranking as well...

 

I love G but in my eyes he is not a top 10 in the league and looking at 11 to 17 the only one I could argue is McDavid based on tenure. If you were given a choice bt G and McDavid, even at G's top play, who would you want to build a team around?    I would pick McDavid...

 

I don't think the list is all that bad.

[TedZep]

On 8/8/2016 at 8:21 PM, Cheesesteak said:

Definitely low.  

 

How could he be seventeenth when he's the leading point scorer over the last five seasons.

 

Correction, he's the leading point scorer over the last SIX seasons, and flipped that +/-:

 

[King Knut]

20 hours ago, Poconono said:

Sorry but I think #17 is just about right.  And his selections to team Canada for World Cups and Olympics attest to that ranking.  He's usually among the bottom group selected to play.  No crime in that.  Giroux is a great player but not a superstar.

 

Except... you know... stats and stuff.

[King Knut]

6 hours ago, murraycraven said:

I have to agree with that ranking as well...

 

I love G but in my eyes he is not a top 10 in the league and looking at 11 to 17 the only one I could argue is McDavid based on tenure. If you were given a choice bt G and McDavid, even at G's top play, who would you want to build a team around?    I would pick McDavid...

 

I don't think the list is all that bad.

 

I'd probably take McDavid because he's 19 years old and for now at least cheap as hell and gives you a chance to win games for the net 10 years or more if he can stay healthy.

 

If However I wanted to win games now, I'd take Giroux.

 

I'd take almost everyone on this list over Ovechkin.  Dude can score PP goals but is poison for winning.

 

 

[murraycraven]

16 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

I'd probably take McDavid because he's 19 years old and for now at least cheap as hell and gives you a chance to win games for the net 10 years or more if he can stay healthy.

 

If However I wanted to win games now, I'd take Giroux.

 

I'd take almost everyone on this list over Ovechkin.  Dude can score PP goals but is poison for winning.

 

 

 

 

completely agree...  what I was trying to refer to was that if you take the best days of G and McDavid (spanning their entire careers) I think it is an easy choice.   Again, I am still hesitant b/c McDavid has not been in the league for a full season.   

 

It is a tough call but if you go by purely stats then G is the "best player in the world" over the last 1/2 decade +...   If you ask me to pick someone to build a team around I would not have G in my top 5.   Hopefully, he gets a cup and this argument becomes pure nonsense.  I am not really worried about "rankings"... 

 

If G can get us a Cup I could care less what other people around the league feel about our C 

[radoran]

16 hours ago, King Knut said:

 

Except... you know... stats and stuff.

 

Just now, murraycraven said:

It is a tough call but if you go by purely stats then G is the "best player in the world" over the last 1/2 decade +...   If you ask me to pick someone to build a team around I would not have G in my top 5. 

 

Stats and stuff?

 

Sure, over the past six years he's got the most points in the league. And over the past five years. Which is terrific.

 

But he's 6th over the past four

8th over the past three

13th over the past two

and was 20th last season

 

Points per game he's:

6th over the past six years

7th over the past five

13th over the past four

12th over the past three

17th over the past two

and 25th last season

 

Neither of those are encouraging trend lines and looking at the actual stats it's not hard to see why someone might slot him in at 17 going into next season because what he did five and six years ago is less and less relevant to the evaluation. Sure, I might not have him at 17 and might push him a little higher, but it's hard to argue that he's even a top 10 player over the past three seasons because the stats don't actually back up that theory.

 

Crosby, Benn and Kane have been a mix of 1/2/3 in terms of total points over the past four years. Giroux hasn't even been top five since he was #1 - five years ago.

 

8 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

Hopefully, he gets a cup and this argument becomes pure nonsense.  I am not really worried about "rankings"... 

 

If G can get us a Cup I could care less what other people around the league feel about our C 

 

 

Exactly. Go out and prove it on the ice and show the whackadoodles at NHL Network why they're not actually involved in evaluating talent with real-world application.

[fan4ever]

@radoran

 

Sure Rad....when you put it that way...

 

Great points!!!!

[King Knut]

5 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

 

Stats and stuff?

 

Sure, over the past six years he's got the most points in the league. And over the past five years. Which is terrific.

 

But he's 6th over the past four

8th over the past three

13th over the past two

and was 20th last season

 

Points per game he's:

6th over the past six years

7th over the past five

13th over the past four

12th over the past three

17th over the past two

and 25th last season

 

Neither of those are encouraging trend lines and looking at the actual stats it's not hard to see why someone might slot him in at 17 going into next season because what he did five and six years ago is less and less relevant to the evaluation. Sure, I might not have him at 17 and might push him a little higher, but it's hard to argue that he's even a top 10 player over the past three seasons because the stats don't actually back up that theory.

 

Crosby, Benn and Kane have been a mix of 1/2/3 in terms of total points over the past four years. Giroux hasn't even been top five since he was #1 - five years ago.

 

 

 

Exactly. Go out and prove it on the ice and show the whackadoodles at NHL Network why they're not actually involved in evaluating talent with real-world application.

 

Interesting.  What could possibly have happened over the past three or four seasons to make Giroux score less?

I can't imagine.  

 

The fact that Giroux scoring less directly Coincides with the departures of Laviolette and to a lesser extent Jagr should tell everyone everything they need to know.  Berube was a complete and utter disaster for all aspects of this team and Homer made it worse by giving him bupkis to work with.   Hakstol I like, but let's face it.  He isn't exactly encouraging offense at this point (though I think that may change in the next year or two as the team settles together).  

 

Look at the list again.  How many of the players that are "better" than Giroux actually play with each other?  How many of the points scored by people in the standings above Giroux are actually a goal or assist shared with another guy on that list? 

 

You see my point.  Unless you're trying to tell me that the musical chairs of Hartnell, Simmonds, Jake, Brayden and or Raffl are somehow analogous to playing along side the likes of Malkin or Toews or Backstrom or Seguin.    I mean I like Jake and I know he had a good season and a half, but let's think about this now.  

 

Again, I'm not saying I think Giroux is the best forward in the league.  I'm saying he's better than 17.  Much better than 17.  

[radoran]

2 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Interesting.  What could possibly have happened over the past three or four seasons to make Giroux score less?

I can't imagine.  

 

The fact that Giroux scoring less directly Coincides with the departures of Laviolette and to a lesser extent Jagr should tell everyone everything they need to know.  Berube was a complete and utter disaster for all aspects of this team and Homer made it worse by giving him bupkis to work with.   Hakstol I like, but let's face it.  He isn't exactly encouraging offense at this point (though I think that may change in the next year or two as the team settles together).  

 

Look at the list again.  How many of the players that are "better" than Giroux actually play with each other?  How many of the points scored by people in the standings above Giroux are actually a goal or assist shared with another guy on that list? 

 

You see my point.  Unless you're trying to tell me that the musical chairs of Hartnell, Simmonds, Jake, Brayden and or Raffl are somehow analogous to playing along side the likes of Malkin or Toews or Backstrom or Seguin.    I mean I like Jake and I know he had a good season and a half, but let's think about this now.  

 

Again, I'm not saying I think Giroux is the best forward in the league.  I'm saying he's better than 17.  Much better than 17.  

 

I absolutely see your point.

 

As I said, I concur that Giroux is likely "better" than 17th overall forward in the league (the last two seasons in the rankings I used also included E. Karlsson so you could bump him up one spot on both as a "forward"). But, again, it's not hard to see why someone who isn't a "Flyer fan" (and may, in fact, not like the Flyers) would see it differently.

 

They may not see the intangibles and work like FOs and PK time overcoming a declining score sheet for a team that has two playoff rounds in the past four years.

 

And, who he's playing with and coached by is a valid point as well, but, quite frankly, the Flyers are "all in" committed to Jake as the "other guy" in their tandem. For the next six years. So if he's not going to be the likes of a Malkin/Toews/Backstrom/Seguin, etc. then that's a serious problem for not only Giroux's stat line, but also the Flyers' team prospects. 

 

Simply put: Jake has to be "that guy" and he's never scored 25 (or even 24) in a season. Giroux has never scored 30 - even with Jagr and Laviolette - and has scored more than 25 just twice in six full seasons (including 28 in his first season under Berube and 25 in his second).
 

That said, in the end, all of the evaluations by NHL Network, Puck Daddy, fantasy GMs and Mike Milbury don't matter a bit.

 

Prove it on the ice.

[murraycraven]

24 minutes ago, radoran said:

And, who he's playing with and coached by is a valid point as well, but, quite frankly, the Flyers are "all in" committed to Jake as the "other guy" in their tandem. For the next six years. So if he's not going to be the likes of a Malkin/Toews/Backstrom/Seguin, etc. then that's a serious problem for not only Giroux's stat line, but also the Flyers' team prospects. 

 

darn... you stole my thunder rad.

 

Could not agree more... if Jake does not reach, and IMO, break that ceiling he was at 2 years ago that contract is gonna be a killer for a long time.   I am hopeful but very hesitant he is going to come close to living up to that contract.   Hextall, and I will argue this forever, was an idiot when signing him to this deal.  It is one thing if he were a UFA but he did not even have to sign him.   This is where I still think Hextall needs work... I love the patience and prospects pool but do think he has made some head-scratching signings in terms of dollars and years. 

 

If Jake can't be that player this is a real issue for the Flyers and really could damage the "rebuild."

[King Knut]

59 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

And, who he's playing with and coached by is a valid point as well, but, quite frankly, the Flyers are "all in" committed to Jake as the "other guy" in their tandem. For the next six years. So if he's not going to be the likes of a Malkin/Toews/Backstrom/Seguin, etc. then that's a serious problem for not only Giroux's stat line, but also the Flyers' team prospects. 

 

Simply put: Jake has to be "that guy" and he's never scored 25 (or even 24) in a season. Giroux has never scored 30 - even with Jagr and Laviolette - and has scored more than 25 just twice in six full seasons (including 28 in his first season under Berube and 25 in his second).
 

That said, in the end, all of the evaluations by NHL Network, Puck Daddy, fantasy GMs and Mike Milbury don't matter a bit.

 

Prove it on the ice.

 

Yeah.  This is a big concern for me.  Jake Thrived amidst the chaos of a systemless system.  He struggled when needing to buy into a system. This is a problem.  I wasn't sold on his deal when they gave it to him and the fact that they did give it to him scares me about their thinking and frankly makes me wonder if Hextall's powers of observation are quite as nuanced and forward thinking as we hope.  Mostly everyone on the team struggled and had huge drop offs under Berube.  Jake came into his own.  Then under Hak, a lot of guys start to look better again, exept for Jake.  But Jake did start to look better by mid season and was clearly not himself when he came back from injury and really seemed to be playing through something against the caps in the first round... So maybe he'll sort it out.  Long story short, If the intention is that he'll be Giroux's Malkin or Toews or Seguin, we're in a bit of trouble.  

[King Knut]

35 minutes ago, murraycraven said:

 

darn... you stole my thunder rad.

 

Could not agree more... if Jake does not reach, and IMO, break that ceiling he was at 2 years ago that contract is gonna be a killer for a long time.   I am hopeful but very hesitant he is going to come close to living up to that contract.   Hextall, and I will argue this forever, was an idiot when signing him to this deal.  It is one thing if he were a UFA but he did not even have to sign him.   This is where I still think Hextall needs work... I love the patience and prospects pool but do think he has made some head-scratching signings in terms of dollars and years. 

 

If Jake can't be that player this is a real issue for the Flyers and really could damage the "rebuild."

 

I totally agree with you and it's an area of concern.  a BIG one, but I think there's hope.  Mostly in that Jake's game in both the strike shortened season and his "break out" #3 in the Art Ross year were seemed to be build on confidence.  He was confidently relying on his size and skill to just make things happen.  I think in the beginning of last year he lost a lot of that comfort zone and confidence because he was very concerned about his responsibilities for Hak's system.  He started to get a lot better by mid season.  He wasn't scoring goals, but he was putting up a lot of points.  I think it's a realistic hope and not just wishful thinking that he'll be more comfortable in his role within the system and can start to spice things up from that baseline this year.  I'm actually hoping the same can be said of a lot of guys on this team.  But who knows.

 

[radoran]

Just now, King Knut said:

Long story short, If the intention is that he'll be Giroux's Malkin or Toews or Seguin, we're in a bit of trouble.  

 

At $8.25M for six more years I can't see what else the intention would have been...

 

Giroux and Voracek are the 11th and 13th overall cap hits in the league for next season. They were 20th and 67th in points last season.

 

1 minute ago, King Knut said:

I totally agree with you and it's an area of concern.  a BIG one, but I think there's hope.  Mostly in that Jake's game in both the strike shortened season and his "break out" #3 in the Art Ross year were seemed to be build on confidence.  He was confidently relying on his size and skill to just make things happen.  I think in the beginning of last year he lost a lot of that comfort zone and confidence because he was very concerned about his responsibilities for Hak's system.

 

I'm wondering how much of it also goes back to your point about not re-signing Jagr. That's exactly how Jagr plays the game and we know that Jake grew up with a Jagr poster on his wall. Another year or two of imprinting on Jagr might have helped his consistency.

 

Jake had a lot going on last season with trying to live up to a contract that hadn't even started yet and in playing a different sort of system under Hackstol.

 

There's a chance he can get it done. Let's get'er done.

 

 

[King Knut]

3 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

At $8.25M for six more years I can't see what else the intention would have been...

 

Giroux and Voracek are the 11th and 13th overall cap hits in the league for next season. They were 20th and 67th in points last season.

 

 

I'm wondering how much of it also goes back to your point about not re-signing Jagr. That's exactly how Jagr plays the game and we know that Jake grew up with a Jagr poster on his wall. Another year or two of imprinting on Jagr might have helped his consistency.

 

Jake had a lot going on last season with trying to live up to a contract that hadn't even started yet and in playing a different sort of system under Hackstol.

 

There's a chance he can get it done. Let's get'er done.

 

 

 

Great clip!  

 

and don't get me started on Jagr.  How any GM could look at that season and not see what a breath of fresh air and how fantastic an influence Jagr was on that team is so far beyond me I'll never understand.    Even if Jagr didn't go on the play 4 (and counting) more seasons at high levels, just having him around worked wonders on the chemistry of everyone.   He was the anti-bryzaster.  

 

Homer took the chance to bring him back to the NHL and it worked out so well for both sides, and bringing him back would have been SO INCREDIBLY CHEAP AND EASY...  I just have no idea what the hell that idiot was thinking when he went all in on Parise and Suter (guys everyone knew he couldn't get) instead of sewing up Jagr and to a lesser degree Carle.

 

I have expanded on this theory in other threads, but to me it was that summer and those idiotic moves (or non-moves) that really dug the Flyers into this unbelievably dark hole they're still trying to beg borrow and steal their way out of.   

 

Unceremoniously dumping Richards and Carter and Signing Bryzaster was a good start.  but the ripple effects of trying to replace Jagr and Carle (trading JVR for Luke Schenn, Overspending and over committing on Mac and VLC) were really the things that handcuffed this team so badly.  Homer should have been fired unceremoniously at that point for such egregious miscues.    Hextall is still trying to make up for those god awful mistakes.  He somehow got rid of VInny, but he'll probably never get rid of Mac's contract (and again, I hate the contract not the player the player is a beetle for a mercedes deal).   He's unloaded some of the dead weight, but there's still no replacing what they lost in Jagr and JVR.   And not that I think either one is an amazing player... but they're both assets this team needed and has to this day failed to replace.  

 

Imagine the Flyers top 6 with those guys instead of the musical chairs they've had.

Do they need to make the Hartnell trade?  Imagine last year's Flyers with Hartnell and JVR and Jagr on the wings.  Now you're back to rolling three scoring line threats instead of two.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[radoran]

Just now, King Knut said:

And not that I think either one is an amazing player... but they're both assets this team needed and has to this day failed to replace. 

 

This is the major issue at hand with #homercoaster's "management" of the team.

 

He would deal away assets without any sort of reasonable plan to replace them.

 

Parise/Suter was never a "reasonable" plan. It was a pipe dream. A crack pipe dream.

 

And I'll never understand giving up on JVR the way they did. Not because I am particularly thrilled with JVR as a player, but that they had no plan to replace the gaping hole on the left side (again, "signing Parise" was not a "plan"). Trading Hartnell away only magnified the issue. There's no doubt that the lack of an effective LW hampers Giroux (and Voracek) to this day.

[murraycraven]

2 hours ago, radoran said:

At $8.25M for six more years I can't see what else the intention would have been...

 

Giroux and Voracek are the 11th and 13th overall cap hits in the league for next season. They were 20th and 67th in points last season.

 

 

Man, that is scary as all heck.

 

With the amount of money (and term) Hextall threw at Jake there is no other way to look at it.   If he is not that co-superstar I think Hextall gambled and lost which will kill the Flyers for years to come.  Although, Jake could rebound to that season before he was signed to that ridiculous contract.   Personally, I think it is somewhere in the middle but I do not think Jake is, ever was, or ever will be a 8.25M player.  

 

Call it Negadelphia and I hope I am wrong but I just dont see it.  I was critical of this contract from the beginning and will be until he either proves he is worth the money.   One great year and Hextall had to make this deal - still does not make sense to me.