Eric Staal vs. Vincent Lecavalier

[Vagrant]

I do have a question, who does Staal play with usually? I've only seen him a few times during the regular season and never really noticed.

Staal usually plays on a line with Francis and O'Neill. Last game he didn't, but Lavy has been trying to shake things up a little as far as the combinations are concerned.

Despite the names on that line, Staal has not been a passenger. He's actually been the most consistant 'Canes forward this season after starting the year at the tender age of 18. I think the thing that keeps Staal afloat more than other talents to come down the pipe in the past few years is his intense understanding of the importance of neutral zone pressure and backchecking. He already plays the defensive game like a veteran and is getting better. Maybe i'm a homer, but I think that if defense was regarded as important as the numbers he's putting up in scoring, Staal would be running hard for the Calder trophy.

 

[punchy1]

Carefull Caniac, someone will start comparing Staal to Howe if you talk that way....

OOps! I already did.

 

[bleedgreen]

Exactly!!!!!! Gaborik scored 67 points and everyone consider him a star (not that I dont like Gaborik because I do like him), and before this breakout season everyone think Kovalchuk are a star too and he also only socred like 67 points in his two previous season. And Lecavalier have also scored 67 points in hi second season and last season the guy had 78 points!!! Why is he not a star???

dont bring kovulchuck into this, he is a star, was a star, and will be one until he eventually flames out like one. he had 29 goals as an 18 year old! he had all the hype of the world on his shoulders and delivered. he has improved every season, and is arguably the best goal scorer in the league(and has been since he joined it). his play in ALL THREE years i think puts him above lecavalier and gaborik at the same point in their careers. stats dont cay everything about the way these guys played in these first three years. kovulchucks desire to show his ability is evident every night. he may have been introduced to his goalie after every game his first two years-but he was 18-19! how was he not already a star! i know he played with heatley and his all around game, but to sell him short and say this year is a suprise and he wasnt a star previous to this yearmeans you havent been watching him UNTIL this year. i would be curious to see the ages of the youngest players to reach 100 goals of all time, and see where kovalchuck may show up-cause i think he has already accomplished something special. staal over vinny too

 

[punchy1]

I agree. In fact, since he is still young a favorable comparison for him would be say a player like Pavel Bure. It isn't out of reach for Kovy to become significantly better than Pavel is/was either. To me, Kovy is a *star* because he not only has had to produce on a questionable (until Hartley) team but he also had to start off producing right away as he was viewed as a saviour for his team. Now, he may have a ways to go to become the total player that he looks to be but I would rather call him a Star as he deserves it.

In a trade where you could choose Kovy or Gaboric or Vinnie I don't know if there are many who would take Gabby or Vinnie first. I think Gabby has come in and been a steady performer but the jury is still out on his being a star. He is a great young talent and in the process of becoming one but isn't there yet.

Kovy, Lemieux etc are all a clear step above Vinnie so far and in fact, Lemieux is still a whole level above Kovy and that is saying something, let alone Vinnie.

Now, if you want to say that Vinnie is a great young talent with good skills who is slowly starting to show signs of becoming one of the games talented young stars then I would buy that. He is a step below Heatly but a step above some other young centers out there. IF IF IF he can pick up his play this year and finish with another 60+ point season and help his team do something in the playoffs then you might slowly make a believer out of me.

But then again, who gives a rot what rubbish comes out of my festering gob anyways? I am certainly no authority on the game or its players. No more so than anyone else who posts here and I would argue allot less than some. Maybe someone will roust Buffaloed or Dr Chimera and get an actual authorative posters opinion if they truly care. Them two are a cut above allot of the rest of us and most of the Mods. Thier opinion matters more than mine. I am just a Kiwi who has been following the game for awhile. Certainly not a hotbed for hockey but if you lived where I do mate, you would see why I have time to follow up on the sport.

Wake up, have a surf. Work the farm. Work the presses. Eat. Have a surf. Work on the motorbikes. Eat. Off to pub for a pint with my mates. Back to see if any hockey is on and if not, waste my time scouring the net on the sport or motorbikes. Knock on the Shiela, repeat.

You lot at least can turn on the tele or pick up a paper and read about the game. Its the web or tele or naught for me.

 

[bleedgreen]

"Wake up, have a surf. Work the farm. Work the presses. Eat. Have a surf. Work on the motorbikes. Eat. Off to pub for a pint with my mates. Back to see if any hockey is on and if not, waste my time scouring the net on the sport or motorbikes. Knock on the Shiela, repeat."

absolutely awesome. what do you mean you dont know hockey? spoken like you've played all your life. knock on the sheila once for me, ill have a pint for you.

 

[Stephen]

If his being on a poor team is the excuse for his not doing well then why have so many other players that have gone to "horrible" teams to start thier careers that don't get nearly as much attention as him done so well by starting with them? Kovy went to the worst team in the league and he tore it up and still is. HE is a budding superstar and is proving that he is worthy of the praise he recieves.

Vinnie is nothing special yet. He has the skills to become that if he wants to, he just hasn't done anything special yet. 78 points in a season is good play, not star or superstar quality in my book but then, I have actual standards for what I think is star or super star talent.

The problem with Lecavalier is the fact that there is so much hype around him, or there was when he first broke in. If Tampa Bay isn't going, nobody blames St. Louis, Richards, Modin or Andreychuk. They look at Vinny. When he plays well, and the team is going, it's just what he should be doing.

His two good seasons are pretty significant accomplishments for players of his age. Outside of six or seven players, like Thornton, Kovalchuk, Hossa, Samsonov, Heatley and Gaborik, Richards, very few players in his age bracket have put up the points he has shown he can put up. These guys are seen as the future elite. None of them have really accomplished anything special, but that doesn't take away from their 'specialness.' Also, the Lightning playoff run was pretty successful for a first effort.

You say he's an average top six forward. I say he's a bonafide top line player. Not in the same class as Forsberg, Sakic, and definitely not Lemieux. But his numbers are comparable to the stats Modano, Sundin, Alfredsson, Fedorov put up. As a young player on a young team, that's pretty good, certainly better than a Jozef Stumpel.

 

[punchy1]

I think I have said pretty much the same thing you did with the exception that I said that *at this point in his career* you are better off comparing his point production to Josef Stumpel than to Mario Lemiux. He has the skills and if he can have another solid year this year (which don't look good so far mate) then he will have done allot to establish that he can be more than a solid young player.

I have said all through my posts that Vinnie has special skills, he just doesn't use them with any consistancy so I don't see him a star. Remember though, it appears that I have a higher expectation of what makes a player special. To me, being able to consistantly produce in your area of expertise is what makes you a star. Not that you were over hyped as a youth and then have had one solid season at it. Vinnie is a good young player who is a solid top six talent with special skills and *if* he can have more years like last year then who knows where he will end up? I sure don't. The problem is that neither does anyone else.

I wouldn't compare Vinnie with any of the players you have for the simple reason that they have produced the same level of intensity in thier games and around the same production for a number of years. Vinnie has been in the league for a bit now and has been nothing special with the exception of last year. If he can have a couple more years like that one then he has star written all over him. He isn't one now. Stumpel is an unfair comparison also as even though Josef is soft as whipped milk, he has been a consistant point producer who has scored more than Vinnie at his best so Vinnie will have to work to reach his level.

We can hope and believe our players to be anything we want but at the end of the day there are stats that we use to judge thier performance by(point production and team success for top sixers, wins gaa etc for goalies, etc). That isn't to say that you can only judge a player based on stats. I watched allot of ducks games (go ahead, de louse me now. I was living in the states with a mate who's brother is an executive at the pond so there were naught to pay) a season ago prior to thier run and felt the JS were one of the best goalies I had seen even though his team were filth.

That said, its easier to judge top sixers because they have a clear cut job in scoring that will show itself. You may be able to argue that they are great in thier own end and such as in the case of Alexander Frolov but if he weren't putting up the points his astonishing plus minus (an average of +14 during his season and a third NHL career) would simply be an arguement to use to say that he belongs in the league and not one to use to support his scoring or him being a budding star (he still has a way to go to be close to a star, he is doing the same thing vinnie has done so far and that is showing that he *can* be one, not that he is).

My cloudy point is this, Vinnie has to produce more than once to make allot of us feel that he will be anything more than allot of other top six forwards out there. I can name dozens of blokes who have had a couple of good years that didn't amount to all that much.

Jimmy Carson had a couple of great ones to start his career (made the records) and then whispers of what could have been. Bobby "the can't miss kid" Carpenter had a couple of dandy (he too is in the books) years as well and then were only able to be a solid defencive forward for the rest. Would you rate either of them as stars?

The list would go on forever mate. Vinnie, like that lot above, has the skills to be special, he just has to do it more than once to be anything more than the rest. To me anyways but again, read my accounting of my hockey knowledge above before you jump me mate.

 

[Sotnos]

Lordy, you're almost as long winded as me! (I mean that as a compliment BTW, I like a long post myself).

You say you've seen him play a few times and aren't just going on stats, but then you go back to the stats again for EVERY player you mention. Jozef Stumpel is better than Vinny? Sorry, but that doesn't fly with me. As Stephen said above:

These guys are seen as the future elite. None of them have really accomplished anything special, but that doesn't take away from their 'specialness.'

There are a ton of contributing factors behind stats, so you have to look beyond them to see the whole picture. I'll take the word of people who have been watching someone play for seven or eight years over a bunch of numbers any day when judging someone's potential.

Anyway, this is totally off the original topic, so I'll stop now.

 

[bleedgreen]

yeah, back the subject! i think its going to be fun watching both these guys regardless. im rootin for staal as a carolina fan, but its unfair to put vinnie down too much. staal hasnt been around long enough to fairly rate his consistency, and to go to such great lengths to point out their differences is unrealistic, based on lack of proof. staal does seem more inclined to play two-way, and vinnie tends to be flashy. i think staal has a lot more flash in him, he just needs more time and confidence to show it. either way, possibly the best prospect on this team since chris pronger-and possibly better down the road. hes already out shined oneill's first 4 years!

 

[stardog]

I can pretty much agree with all the sentiment expressed above. Lecavalier has the talent to be on the second tier of superstars in this league with the likes of players like Forsberg, Jagr and such. But under the Gretzky, Lemuiex tier. Staal is going to be a fine point per game player who plays a devastating two-way game. Consistancy has just been the major flaw for Lecavalier and I think that is one of the most underrated problems with hockey players. Guys often say "if he could only be consistant", well he probably can't. That is probably a lot of the reason why the points between these two will stay about even throughout their entire careers. I was just seeing if the name Vincent Lecavalier alone was enough for people to think this was a laughable comparison. A lot of people never got over the hype he came in with and still see his name as superstar.

It just hit me all of a sudden and it was almost eerie how much these guys had in common.

Am I misreading something here or are you saying Staal is going to be a star on the Gretzky Lemieux level?

 

[stardog]

You might want to head back and re read my post mate. You seem to have missed big parts of it. Maybe its a language thing. I can clear it all up for you though right here to make it easy. Vinnie has done nothing, on a consistant basis, (thats the important bit) to establish his self as a better than average player. Period. He is a solid top six pivot with the talent to be one of the games better centers. He NEVER has been able to do it consistantly and that is why I refuse to compare him with Forsberg or Sakic let alone Lemiux as so many others seem ready to do. The guys numbers aren't any better than allot of middle of the road centers in the league and while that is good enough to be recognized as a solid player today, he certainly has done nothing *yet* (there is a part that you seem to have missed also) to give anyone a reason to remember him after he has retired. He went to a horrible team at the time he were drafted and were thier go to guy. He didn't do too much with it in his first year, had a solid second year and has had one good year since and isn't off to a great one this year. Average or slightly better than is about all he has shown so far.

If his being on a poor team is the excuse for his not doing well then why have so many other players that have gone to "horrible" teams to start thier careers that don't get nearly as much attention as him done so well by starting with them? Kovy went to the worst team in the league and he tore it up and still is. HE is a budding superstar and is proving that he is worthy of the praise he recieves.

Vinnie is nothing special yet. He has the skills to become that if he wants to, he just hasn't done anything special yet. 78 points in a season is good play, not star or superstar quality in my book but then, I have actual standards for what I think is star or super star talent.

For my money I take Staal but I think Vinny is definately more than a better than average player in this league. Alot more.

 

[stardog]

You cant compare the like of Robitaille, Delmore and so on with the star status Lecavalier have. And yes Comrie is good and maybe are already a star. But dont compare Comrie with Lecavalier beacause Lecavalier are already a star. And why cant u compare Lecavalier to a young Lemieux? They play the same style but as I mention in another post, Lecavalier play on a lower level than a young Lemeiux. And why do so many consider Kovalchuk and Gaborik a star because they scored 67 points or so in previous seasons but not Lecavalier?

Lemiex first 5 seasons=715 points
Vinny first 5 season=261 points
Thats why.
Not even close. Even at a lower level.
They dont play a similar style at all as Lemiux is much more creative, dynamic and visionary than Vinny will ever be. Thats a poor comparison.

 

[1Timer]

I understand where you're coming from, stardog, but I don't see how that comparison helps your case. Lecavalier was drafted fourteen years later, the game was almost completely different. Lemieux didn't play the same game that Lecavalier plays, there was no trap, goalie pads were reasonable, sticks were made out of wood, etcetera. Lemieux's numbers came while he played 80's hockey.

I could see you making a case for Lemieux's continued dominance of the game, but Lecavalier hasn't played long enough to make them relative.

 

[CRUNK JUICE]

I understand where you're coming from, stardog, but I don't see how that comparison helps your case. Lecavalier was drafted fourteen years later, the game was almost completely different. Lemieux didn't play the same game that Lecavalier plays, there was no trap, goalie pads were reasonable, sticks were made out of wood, etcetera. Lemieux's numbers came while he played 80's hockey.

I could see you making a case for Lemieux's continued dominance of the game, but Lecavalier hasn't played long enough to make them relative.

I agree with your assessment of the way the game has changed, but Lemieux was still on a completely different level than Vinny. More defensively oriented league or not, the difference is still 454 points. Even if there was a way to standardize their respective totals, I'd wager that Lemieux's would still be more than double Vinny's.

 

[Beniersgeron]

Ok people, this is going out of hand. IM NOT COMPARING LECAVALIER TO LEMIEUX!!! All I was saying is that Lecavalier play a similar game to Lemieux but ON A LOWER LEVEL. So plz dont start to compare what Lemieux have done and put it on Lecavalier. There are players nowdays that play a similar game to some Hall of Fame but it does not mean they will reach the same kind of career.

And BTW no matter what everyone said, Lecavalier are a star, maybe it will take a Art Ross trophy for some to realize but for me Lecavalier is a star.

 

[THE NEXT ONE #87]

Hey guys don't Vinny to much overhype! thnx

He'll never win a Art Ross Trophy or anything else...

 

[Beniersgeron]

Hey guys don't Vinny to much overhype! thnx

He'll never win a Art Ross Trophy or anything else...

How can u know that? when u are sooooo sure Crosby will be the messias to save hockey. Its all prediction...

 

[punchy1]

"but for me" luongo. There is the important bit mate. For You, he is a star, that doesn't make him one for the rest.

 

[Beniersgeron]

"but for me" luongo. There is the important bit mate. For You, he is a star, that doesn't make him one for the rest.

The same thing can be said to you. Just because he is not a star in you eye does not mean he is not a star in others eye.

 

[punchy1]

True, but that has been my point from the start. You are the guy who seems to think that he can ONLY be viewed as a star. I have said that it is only my opinion that he isn't. To you, anyone who doesn't agree with you is totally wrong. To me, its just another point of view.

Still, saying something is true doesn't make it so and in this case, where at best this is a subjective issue there is no way to prove either one of us right. That is why I had the position I did from the start. You are the person who wouldn't budge and that is why the thread went on so long, see?