Because he is not Denisenko I guess. Please ask the NA press and so called experts why they all the time hype up one one player and totally disregard the other. My guess is most of it copypasting, lack of professionalism and balls. It's safer to rate high a guy "everybody" rates high. If he fails afterwards you can always say "but look, everybody was high on him". It takes some analysis, time investment and guts to point to guys nobody has on the radar.First in scoring in the KHL among u21 players and 5th in ppg ( behind players who played 16, 4, 31, and 3 games compared to Galimov's 55 ). Still a very young player with good offensive abilities , why the lack of talk about him?
That said, I am happy as AkBars fan. Less hype is better for the player and for the team. But do not forget it is a Kvartalnov team right now. Stats of younger, less skilled players might get inflated in his system a bit.
My first draft of an answer went missing, but oh well...not related to Galimov but just curious as to your reference to a "Kvartalnov team"?
A couple of months ago in looking at European coaches that might make successful NHL coaches it was impressive to see how many winning seasons he had.
Combined with his having played in the league as well as playing in Europe it would seem that language would not be an issue.
Yes, most definitely. Basically Kvartalnov is said to have trouble working with stars in his locker room. He favors a scoring by comitee approach. Also Stanislav is one lucky guy, you have to say that. The amount of bounces he gets is even somewhat funny.Kind of answered another question I was going to ask about Stanislav Galiev. Saw his numbers tick up but that would fit with your assessment of the coach.
I’d imagine he is still better suited to playing in the KHL than in possibly giving the NHL another shot.
Hi caser, who would you prefer long term to be an effective NHLer?
Beryozkin or Galimov?
It's something like comparing apples to oranges to be honest or if we look at it in more of a HF way to look at it, high ceiling/high risk Vs. lower ceiling/lower risk. So I'm not exactly sure what to answer here, especially since "an effective NHLer" is kind of an abstract term.
Which player is higher ceiling / higher risk and lower ceiling/ lower risk in this scenario?