Proposal: Bruins-Hurricanes

[nmbr_24]

I'm not implying anything. These were arguments from a Vancouver Canucks fan. I'm not characterizing either player except in the way that they were originally presented. That should be fairly clear from the of quotes, if one bothered to read them without implying the wrong basis.

I fail to see why "top-6" potential implies "potential 2nd liner". It seems to me that if one thought a player only had second line potential, they would say "Second line potential" and not "top-6" potential. Top-6 is a subset which includes both the 1st and 2nd line. This was what I said, it isn't really disputable.

When someone compares two players and says one is a top line player and one is a top six player it is obvious what they mean. We all know that is an established way of describing the differences between two players.

I find it dishonest for anyone to pretend that when using these terms to compare players they mean anything other than the long established use of these terms.

This isn't a case where someone says this guy has top six potential, he said this guy has top six potential and the other has top line potential. He specifically made the effort to differentiate between the two players ability.

 

[GoldiFox]

When someone compares two players and says one is a top line player and one is a top six player it is obvious what they mean. We all know that is an established way of describing the differences between two players.

I find it dishonest for anyone to pretend that when using these terms to compare players they mean anything other than the long established use of these terms.

This isn't a case where someone says this guy has top six potential, he said this guy has top six potential and the other has top line potential. He specifically made the effort to differentiate between the two players ability.

I wasn't comparing them at all. I was talking terminology. I also think that logic is a little petty. If he called Pastrnak a "top-line potential talent" and Slavin a "top-4 potential talent" then I'd honestly have no issue with it. Mostly due to the fact that "top-4 potential" does not mean "2nd pairing potential". "Top-4 potential" means he will likely slot somewhere in the top-4, which includes the 1st pairing. I can't believe I'm having to type this out as if it doesn't make sense.

 

[nmbr_24]

I wasn't comparing them at all. I was talking terminology. I also think that logic is a little petty. If he called Pastrnak a "top-line potential talent" and Slavin a "top-4 potential talent" then I'd honestly have no issue with it. Mostly due to the fact that "top-4 potential" does not mean "2nd pairing potential". "Top-4 potential" means he will likely slot somewhere in the top-4, which includes the 1st pairing. I can't believe I'm having to type this out as if it doesn't make sense.

I never said that you compared them, I said the guy who posted that comment did.

Sure, if someone says that guy has top 4 potential it could mean anything but when a person also makes the effort to describe one as in a different group then he has made it quite clear that there is a difference in his mind. It is a long established way of talking about players on these boards, you might have a point if it hasn't been that way since the very first day I looked at these boards way back before the whole system crashed and wiped everyone's info way back in something like 2001.

 

[PsychoDad]

I never said that you compared them, I said the guy who posted that comment did.

Sure, if someone says that guy has top 4 potential it could mean anything but when a person also makes the effort to describe one as in a different group then he has made it quite clear that there is a difference in his mind. It is a long established way of talking about players on these boards, you might have a point if it hasn't been that way since the very first day I looked at these boards way back before the whole system crashed and wiped everyone's info way back in something like 2001.

Somehow I already feel story for "starting" this and involving fellow Bruins fans in this progressively stupid conversation. All I wanted to say that there must be a way to like one player/team/whatever without trashing the other side. Pastrnak showed just as much promise (lets just leave it at this for the time being, because clearly I think that David showed more at younger age, but I am also biased) at his own position as Slavin at his. Not really that controversial. Can we leave it at that? I didn't talk their boy down. I replied to a fan of another team. What a childish circle jerk this became.

 

[RodTheBawd]

slavin might be special one day but when ive seen him play, he hasnt impressed me...

I'd question how often you actually watched him, or your ability to evaluate players, because there is virtually no one involved in hockey that wasn't impressed with Slavin last year.

Why not just lock this ****show up? Both sides have said no, and it's devolved into pages of arguing the intent of "top 6" crap.

 

[nmbr_24]

Somehow I already feel story for "starting" this and involving fellow Bruins fans in this progressively stupid conversation. All I wanted to say that there must be a way to like one player/team/whatever without trashing the other side. Pastrnak showed just as much promise (lets just leave it at this for the time being, because clearly I think that David showed more at younger age, but I am also biased) at his own position as Slavin at his. Not really that controversial. Can we leave it at that? I didn't talk their boy down. I replied to a fan of another team. What a childish circle jerk this became.

No problem.

 

[Carolinas Identity*]

pastrnak already is number 1 on bruins right wing depth chart... has played the majority of his games skating with either krejci or spooner on the ' scoring line'

and is averaging roughly 45 points per 82 games played. to say he might have the potential to become a top 6 forward is insulting to your own intelligence.

now if you wanted to say he has potential to be an elite top 20 winger, we might have something to talk about. he certainly isnt there yet

lots of players play a role... because the team is weak and has no better options. zach trottman was skated in a first pair role last year but was probably the 60th best guy in that role. just because a player is used in a role doesnt make him elite in that role... or even competent.

bruin fans look forward to a happy future with pastrnak being a force on our first line. there's no fault to uneducated fans of other teams if they cant see it. im sure they have kids, we dont know about.

slavin might be special one day but when ive seen him play, he hasnt impressed me...

if im king of the world... and decesion maker for boston... i say this idea is dead in the water... but its not because i feel any need to run down slavin. honestly i dont know him.

this is strictly about being high on pastrnak. sorry doubters, but thats how bruin nation feels about our shinny new toy

you're just as uneducated as us then?

got it

fixed your spelling error also btw

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Lol, you are a funny guy.
So a guy who was 19 year old with following stats:
AHL: 28g 32 points
NHL: 97g 53 points
somehow only has top6 potential (potential!). Not 1st line potential, really?
But Slavin has 1st pairing potential... well, just because.

Ok let me be more specific, One player has top 6 potential, one has top 4 potential.

I think that the Dman with top 4 potential is more valuable than the winger with top 6 potential. Is that clear?

Also LOL at the poster who said that I meant top 6 means he will top out as a 2nd liner, no middle six means topping out as 2nd liner, really thought that was common knowledge.

 

[PensandCaps]

alot of people underratting the hell out of pasta and slavin. slavin is at worst a top 4 dman, thats how good he is, and when pasta is healthy hes really impressed me and certainly looks like a top 6 forward without question. he put pretty nice numbers as a 18/19 yr old! wouldnt be shocked at all if he turns out to be a top line player. that being said a top pairing dman is more valuable than a top line forward.

 

[OConnellsProtege]

I think there are too many variables to out right say "a top pairing dman is more valuable than a top line forward". Top line and top pairing are very broad terms. There's a big difference in value between Karlsson, Seabrook, Markov and Chara, but all are top pairing defenders (in terms of actually being part of the first pairing on their respective clubs). Looking at just Pasta and Slavin, the value seems close, at least not as far off as some make it out to be.

I know on Boston's end, Pasta is staying unless someone over pays. I don't think an offer of Slavin alone qualifies as that. I think Carolina needs Slavin more than Pasta anyways.