Player Discussion Nick Suzuki Part 11

[Scriptor]

What do you think the top tier of centers looks like? It’s Crosby, Malkin, McD, Drai, Mackinnon, Matthews, Stamkos, Point… and soon you’ll see guys like Bedard. About half the number one centers in the league will have a shot at the HOF. Kopitar, Bergeron, Aho.. that’d be the next tier down. These are great players man. And we’ll have to beat these kinds of guys if we want a cup.

And we’re going to try to win with Suzuki as our number one?


I haven’t dug my heels in. I’ve made an assertion that it’s pretty common for first line centers to break out at or before 23. I gave you a quick list because it was asked.

If you think I’m wrong YOU come back with some evidence. I’d love to see it and will be more than happy to discuss.

YOU listed him. YOU brought him up. If you don’t want him compared. Then don’t bring his name into the conversation.

I’ve already told you. I think Suzukis a solid two way player who so far has demonstrated he’d be a great second liner. That’s where I think he’s best suited.

Now, maybe he proves me wrong. But as I said, he’s 24. It’s well into his prime years. If he doesn’t do it now, I think we have to accept that he’ll probably never be the point per game guy we were hoping for.

It’d be one thing if we had Carey Price. He’s a huge equalizer. But we don’t have that anymore. We can’t just punt on center and expect to win.

It’s well into his prime years.

Poppy Cock!

Farcical statement, at best.

It's difficlt to be endeared to your position when you spout absurdities. Not just entering his prime, maybe, or, in his prime, but WELL into his prime!

So what, about four years for you? He was in his prime the second he started playing in the NHL, or was it in his sophmore year? Or was it before that, rather, some time when he was playing Juniors? I mean, he's WELL into his prime as a player that just turned 24 on the 10th of August that just passed, as a player that has only four seasons under his belt.

The more you defend your position, the less serious your arguments are becoming.

I'm assuming, by your metrics, that it's pretty much all downhill for Suzuki now, after all of these prime years (again, being WELL into them) producing no more than 66 points?

I think we should consider trading him before his value is completely gone and we need to add to the trade to move his albatross of a contract.

Again, Poppy Cock!

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

It’s well into his prime years.

Poppy Cock!

Farcical statement, at best.

It's difficlt to be endeared to your position when you spout absurdities. Not just entering his prime, maybe, or, in his prime, but WELL into his prime!

So what, about four years for you? He was in his prime the second he started playing in the NHL, or was it in his sophmore year? Or was it before that, rather, some time when he was playing Juniors? I mean, he's WELL into his prime as a player that just turned 24 on the 10th of August that just passed, as a player that has only four seasons under his belt.

The more you defend your position, the less serious your arguments are becoming.

I'm assuming, by your metrics, that it's pretty much all downhill for Suzuki now, after all of these prime years (again, being WELL into them) producing no more than 66 points?

I think we should consider trading him before his value is completely gone and we need to add to the trade to move his albatross of a contract.

Again, Poppy Cock!

I don’t even know what your argument is here.

 

[Miller Time]

What do you think the top tier of centers looks like? It’s Crosby, Malkin, McD, Drai, Mackinnon, Matthews, Stamkos, Point… and soon you’ll see guys like Bedard. About half the number one centers in the league will have a shot at the HOF. Kopitar, Bergeron, Aho.. that’d be the next tier down. These are great players man. And we’ll have to beat these kinds of guys if we want a cup.

Goalpost moving isn't your typical style LG...

And we’re going to try to win with Suzuki as our number one?

We certainly can. He proved himself up to the challenge of a cup finals run in a #1C role at 21.

Which doesn't preclude us from taking a shot at a Draisatl caliber player IF they become available, but it would be assinine to stay in rebuild focused mode until getting a HOF-lock caliber C.

&, besides that, it's an entirely different argument to make that Suzuki isn't a HOF caliber 1C than to try to argue he isn't a 1C.... that's the part that makes no sense in your arguments

I haven’t dug my heels in. I’ve made an assertion that it’s pretty common for first line centers to break out at or before 23. I gave you a quick list because it was asked.

The posts don't lie... maybe go back and re read the exchange with a cooler head. You might find what a few of us have been pointing out. It's odd BC you typically are one of the strongest posters on this board, but this rabbit hole your replies are going down is quite atypical to your normal approach

If you think I’m wrong YOU come back with some evidence. I’d love to see it and will be more than happy to discuss.

I have. Repeatedly.
You keep ignoring the evidence provided that refutes/challenges your take & instead pivoting your argument.

YOU listed him. YOU brought him up. If you don’t want him compared. Then don’t bring his name into the conversation.

I referenced him in a completely different context than what you framed in your reply... either you didn't actually read what you were replying to, or didn't understand it (I suspect the former).

I’ve already told you. I think Suzukis a solid two way player who so far has demonstrated he’d be a great second liner. That’s where I think he’s best suited.

Now, maybe he proves me wrong. But as I said, he’s 24. It’s well into his prime years. If he doesn’t do it now, I think we have to accept that he’ll probably never be the point per game guy we were hoping for.

False.

Just entering prime years is far more accurate than "well into". Look it up.

It’d be one thing if we had Carey Price. He’s a huge equalizer. But we don’t have that anymore. We can’t just punt on center and expect to win.

You have no clue what the roster will look like in 2-4 years from now.

We can build a winner by having excellent players in key spots who play well in the post season. Suzuki has already been the #1C on a cup finalist, we know he can handle that pressure. He is already significantly better than he was 2 years ago, and since he's just entering his prime years, will likely continue to improve.

The roster needs more talent to win, that's a given. 1C is, by a large margin, the least of our concerns assuming he continues progressing as he has.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Goalpost moving isn't your typical style LG...

Totally agree. It’s not.

We certainly can. He proved himself up to the challenge of a cup finals run in a #1C role at 21.

Which doesn't preclude us from taking a shot at a Draisatl caliber player IF they become available, but it would be assinine to stay in rebuild focused mode until getting a HOF-lock caliber C.

&, besides that, it's an entirely different argument to make that Suzuki isn't a HOF caliber 1C than to try to argue he isn't a 1C.... that's the part that makes no sense in your arguments

Let’s say a little less than half the number ones in the league are HOF. It’ll be close to that. That’s what we’ll have to beat to win.

If Suzuki busts out to 80, then hes in the mid tier. If not, we’re at a huge disadvantage.

The posts don't lie... maybe go back and re read the exchange with a cooler head. You might find what a few of us have been pointing out. It's odd BC you typically are one of the strongest posters on this board, but this rabbit hole your replies are going down is quite atypical to your normal approach

I don’t know what you want me to say here. You asked me to back up an assertion and I did so. I’m sorry you don’t like the results. If you don’t feel it’s accurate, then provide something to disprove it.

I have. Repeatedly.
You keep ignoring the evidence provided that refutes/challenges your take & instead pivoting your argument.

Where? Show me.

I referenced him in a completely different context than what you framed in your reply... either you didn't actually read what you were replying to, or didn't understand it (I suspect the former).

It’s silly to do this though. Fine to argue that offense isn’t everything but you’re invoking the name of a guy who’s among these two way players ever. The example is used to reinforce Suzuki’s value and it’s a bad use case.

False.

Just entering prime years is far more accurate than "well into". Look it up.

I’d say a players prime years are going to be 22-25. That’s not always the case but on average that’s where I’d put it. Some players develop later but check out career years for a lot of guys and you’ll be surprised to see how young they are.

You have no clue what the roster will look like in 2-4 years from now.

We can build a winner by having excellent players in key spots who play well in the post season. Suzuki has already been the #1C on a cup finalist, we know he can handle that pressure. He is already significantly better than he was 2 years ago, and since he's just entering his prime years, will likely continue to improve.

The roster needs more talent to win, that's a given. 1C is, by a large margin, the least of our concerns assuming he continues progressing as he has.

None of us do. But that’s all the more reason to build the best team we can. Why start with a huge disadvantage at center?

Edit: How about this? Forwards peak around 24. Prime years are pretty much 22-26.

When NHLers get old, they get old fast

www.sportsnet.ca

 

[Scriptor]

I don’t even know what your argument is here.

It' friggin' clear that my argument is that you are exaggerating to prop up your argument.

Matthews, who played in the NHL at 18, for example, had six years under his belt as he entered his 7th year as a 24-yr-old.

Yes, as a 23-yr-old, he had a breakout season of 106 points, but that was his 6th season!

It is also an outlier season for him, so far in his career, as he went back to an 85-point production the year after.

Matthews did reach 80 points (14 more points than Suzuki, in 12 less games) in his 4th season, but the Leafs' offensive depth was superior to the Habs offensive depth in Suzuki's 4th season, even if we were to overlook all the injuries sustained by the Habs' better players; Monahan, Caufield, Dach, Matheson, Guhle.

Having Tavares as a 2nd line C goes a long way in supporting Matthews. Having Draisaitl as a 2nd line C (or as a winger) goes along way in supporting McDavid. Having malkin as a 2ndline C goes along way in supporting Crosby. Having Hischier as a 2nd line C goes a long way in supporting Hughes. Having...

This is always the context you overlook, acting as though every other C than Suzuki also had to carry the team on their shoulders, with absolutely zero offensive depth behind them in the lineup, on their way to producing at a PPG pace (or better).

I'm not saying Suzuki would have reached 80 points, without all of the injuries, last season, but he definitely would have passed the 70-point mark, if not toyed with the 80-point plateau, IMO (the 80-point plateau part is the subjective part, but it wouldn't have been impossible).

I don't think that Suzuki will become as productive, offensively, as Matthews, but I think he will be more of a gamer come playoff time. I also think that, given how engaged Suzuki is, defensively, compared to Matthews, that the difference in point production, combined with the 5.35M Cap hit difference, will become a distinct advantage for Hughes when assembling and, especially, retaining a Cup-contending team.

Of course, the work still needs to be done and the pieces still need to be assembled.

You clearly state we will be fighting against teams with McDavid, Matthews, McKinnon, etc. as #1Cs, with the popgun offense that Suzuki brings (not will bring, but brings, so far, in his career), in comparison, but you don't take into account those teams' difficulties assembling, or keeping together Cup-contending rosters, because they are top heavy teams with too much Cap concentrated around too few talented (ultra-talented, even) offensive players.

You also don't take into account that many of those most productive Cs you compare Suzuki with aren't always complete players with good defensive acumen.

Your analysis is too thin, IMO, when dismissing Suzuki, even if the constant that is true is that Suzuki still needs tossup up his production level.

Easier to build the argument you build when keeping your argument bare-boned.

Usually, your arguments are better thought out and better supported.

Again, you disappoint me.

Not that you should care, of course.

 

[Miller Time]

Where? Show me.

Right here...

It’s silly to do this though. Fine to argue that offense isn’t everything but you’re invoking the name of a guy who’s among these two way players ever. The example is used to reinforce Suzuki’s value and it’s a bad use case.

Go back and re-read...

Bergeron was listed with several other #1C's specifically because they ALL had fewer points than Suzuki.

That was a direct rebuttal to the point you made that being outside of the top 30 C's in scoring was evidence of him not being a #1C.

Simple. Direct. Then spun off by you to talk about defensive acumen. Shifted goalpost. Not useful.


Suzuki was well within the range of productivity of a #1 NHL C last season...
AND is better defensively than many of the C's who scored more
AND had the worst scoring support of just about any C in the league because of a uniquely bad rash of injuries and rebuild focused roster lack of NHL depth.

You ignore those two variables continuously in claiming he isn't a #1C & in diminishing or flat out ignoring the very legitimate evidence that his current performance level AND reasonable progression expectations are 1C caliber.

Suzuki is not an elite 1C. Sure.

Suzuki will never be an elite 1C. Debatable.

Suzuki will never be good enough to be a cup winning 1C. Nonsense.

Suzuki is not currently a 1C caliber NHLer. Nonsense.

Clear enough for you?

 

[Redux91]

73rd in league scoring. Outside the top 30 for centers… those don’t look like number one center numbers to me.

That's if he was and is only a 66 point player. Yes, you are right, 66 points placed him as 33rd among C's. Borderline 1C production in the entire NHL.

If we go by your rules, if Suzuki is a 66 point man, then Caufield is a 26 goal man, not a "paced for 50 man". And in turn, I look silly saying Suzuki is a 75 point man.

BUT, if we open up our minds a bit to the possibility that if Caufield, who as YOU say paced for 50ish, woulda, coulda given a couple more points to Suzuki, in this case we've been toying with the number 75, which I think is totally fair.

75 points would of placed Nick top 20 in C's for last year, and if he reaches 80 this year, that would of placed him top 15 among all C's next to Stamkos and Malkin last year

I just need to hear you say it lol, IF Suzuki had reached the 75 points he should have reached last year if it weren't for injury to himself, injury to his wingers, and a PP that was struggling because of too much drouin, Gallagher and Anderson and no PP QB til Matheson came around

I NEED you to tell me, even with a bunch of 'if's' in there lol, that the 75 pt Suzuki that would of put him top 20 for C's in the league, makes him a 1C.

 

[Scriptor]

Right here...



Go back and re-read...

Bergeron was listed with several other #1C's specifically because they ALL had fewer points than Suzuki.

That was a direct rebuttal to the point you made that being outside of the top 30 C's in scoring was evidence of him not being a #1C.

Simple. Direct. Then spun off by you to talk about defensive acumen. Shifted goalpost. Not useful.


Suzuki was well within the range of productivity of a #1 NHL C last season...
AND is better defensively than many of the C's who scored more
AND had the worst scoring support of just about any C in the league because of a uniquely bad rash of injuries and rebuild focused roster lack of NHL depth.

You ignore those two variables continuously in claiming he isn't a #1C & in diminishing or flat out ignoring the very legitimate evidence that his current performance level AND reasonable progression expectations are 1C caliber.

Suzuki is not an elite 1C. Sure.

Suzuki will never be an elite 1C. Debatable.

Suzuki will never be good enough to be a cup winning 1C. Nonsense.

Suzuki is not currently a 1C caliber NHLer. Nonsense.

Clear enough for you?

Couldn't be clearer to me. However, this is where LG, remarkably enough, will huff and puff until the goal posts get moved again, or attack a comma in the post, focusing on a smaller, less significant point to make it look like he is right.

I've rarely seen him dig in so hard like this with such flimsy arguments and a complete refusal to even acknowledge context that is being provided.

 

[DAChampion]

Suzuki hasn't yet demonstrated that he can be a legitimate 1st line C on a contender.

To me, that statement is uncontroversial, and I don't get the consternation.

 

[Scriptor]

Suzuki hasn't yet demonstrated that he can be a legitimate 1st line C on a contender.

To me, that statement is uncontroversial, and I don't get the consternation.

I don't argue against this, personally.

I argue against all the hyperbole that seems aimed at convincing us he won't be ablate prove he is a legitimate 1st line C on a contender; the alleged multiple years WELL into his prime not having produced at a PPG pace, the arbitrary cut-off line wherein, if he isn't a PPG after this upcoming season, he never will be, the refusal to look at context surrounding Suzuki's production level and overlooking that, despite this context, he still upped his production every single year he has played at the NHL level and that it's not unimaginable that he should continue progressing, given that.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Right here...



Go back and re-read...

Bergeron was listed with several other #1C's specifically because they ALL had fewer points than Suzuki.

That was a direct rebuttal to the point you made that being outside of the top 30 C's in scoring was evidence of him not being a #1C.

Simple. Direct. Then spun off by you to talk about defensive acumen. Shifted goalpost. Not useful.


Suzuki was well within the range of productivity of a #1 NHL C last season...
AND is better defensively than many of the C's who scored more
AND had the worst scoring support of just about any C in the league because of a uniquely bad rash of injuries and rebuild focused roster lack of NHL depth.

You ignore those two variables continuously in claiming he isn't a #1C & in diminishing or flat out ignoring the very legitimate evidence that his current performance level AND reasonable progression expectations are 1C caliber.

I don’t think his defense is as strong as you seem to think it is. Scoring may not be everything but there are other centers not listed who are strong defensively or had off years. Aho and Kopitar for example. Even if you want to elevate Suzuki up because of his D… there are still others he’d have to contend with.

He’s a bottom tier number one at this point. And I think he’s much better suited to a second line role.

Suzuki is not an elite 1C. Sure.

Suzuki will never be an elite 1C. Debatable.

It’s a we’ll see. I don’t think so but we’ll see .

Suzuki will never be good enough to be a cup winning 1C. Nonsense.

Didn’t say he couldn’t. But you’d better have Carey Price or something else up your sleeve. If he’s your best player? You aren’t winning.

Suzuki is not currently a 1C caliber NHLer. Nonsense.

73rd scorer overall. Out of the top 30 centers in scoring… You can argue his D makes up for it, I don’t agree. Far from nonsense to say he’s not a real number one.

Unless the only criteria is being used as one and then guys like Desharnais and Kyle Wellwood apply. Then sure, he’s absolutely a number one.

 

[Miller Time]

I don't argue against this, personally.

I argue against all the hyperbole that seems aimed at convincing us he won't be ablate prove he is a legitimate 1st line C on a contender; the alleged multiple years WELL into his prime not having produced at a PPG pace, the arbitrary cut-off line wherein, if he isn't a PPG after this upcoming season, he never will be, the refusal to look at context surrounding Suzuki's production level and overlooking that, despite this context, he still upped his production every single year he has played at the NHL level and that it's not unimaginable that he should continue progressing, given that.

Bingo.

Some just really can't enjoy what is it would appear.

A player heading into his 5th season, at 24, who has improved every year, been a #1C on a cup finalist, and flirted with stretches of play/production putting him in a top tier level of forwards...

Future is bright

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Suzuki hasn't yet demonstrated that he can be a legitimate 1st line C on a contender.

To me, that statement is uncontroversial, and I don't get the consternation.

Neither do I.

It’s not like I think he sucks.

 

[Redux91]

Suzuki hasn't yet demonstrated that he can be a legitimate 1st line C on a contender.

To me, that statement is uncontroversial, and I don't get the consternation.

Yeah well, if only that was what all the hoopla was about.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Bingo.

Some just really can't enjoy what is it would appear.

A player heading into his 5th season, at 24, who has improved every year, been a #1C on a cup finalist, and flirted with stretches of play/production putting him in a top tier level of forwards...

Future is bright

Some can’t enjoy him for what he is and have to project something that isn’t there.

I mean I love watching Suzuki. But that doesn’t mean I can’t see him for what he actually brings. His possession numbers are great relative to his teammates but not great raw numbers. It’s not like he’s dominating his opponents.

 

[Miller Time]

Didn’t say he couldn’t. But you’d better have Carey Price or something else up your sleeve. If he’s your best player? You aren’t winning.

Now it's "Suzuki isn't good enough to be the team's best player on a cup winner"



Goalposts officially torn down lol

McDavid as the best player on the planet hasn't even made a final, let alone sniffed a cup as closely as Suzuki has.

"Winning a cup" takes a lot, and no one mix of assets is the only way to do it. To argue otherwise is nonsense & useless hyperbole

73rd scorer overall. Out of the top 30 centers in scoring… You can argue his D makes up for it, I don’t agree. Far from nonsense to say he’s not a real number one.

So you feel the same about Lindholm, Hertl & Zegras, got it. I disagree.

Unless the only criteria is being used as one and then guys like Desharnais and Kyle Wellwood apply. Then sure, he’s absolutely a number one.

You are the one reducing it to one criteria... the one that excludes Lindholm, Zegras, Hertl, and Bergeron lmao

That's the point I've been making all along... look at the full context and it's a poor argument to make that Suzuki is not, currently, a #1C. You've offered nothing of substance to counter that, only shifted your argument to keep trying to find some frame that diminishes the asset that the player is. Why? No idea.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

That's if he was and is only a 66 point player. Yes, you are right, 66 points placed him as 33rd among C's. Borderline 1C production in the entire NHL.

If we go by your rules, if Suzuki is a 66 point man, then Caufield is a 26 goal man, not a "paced for 50 man". And in turn, I look silly saying Suzuki is a 75 point man.

BUT, if we open up our minds a bit to the possibility that if Caufield, who as YOU say paced for 50ish, woulda, coulda given a couple more points to Suzuki, in this case we've been toying with the number 75, which I think is totally fair.

75 points would of placed Nick top 20 in C's for last year, and if he reaches 80 this year, that would of placed him top 15 among all C's next to Stamkos and Malkin last year

I just need to hear you say it lol, IF Suzuki had reached the 75 points he should have reached last year if it weren't for injury to himself, injury to his wingers, and a PP that was struggling because of too much drouin, Gallagher and Anderson and no PP QB til Matheson came around

I NEED you to tell me, even with a bunch of 'if's' in there lol, that the 75 pt Suzuki that would of put him top 20 for C's in the league, makes him a 1C.

If he gets 75 points? Yeah. It’s still teetering in bottom third production but it’s a lot better than low 60s.

Now let me ask you a question. If CC is paired with Dach instead of Suzuki, does Suzuki crack 70 points this year?

 

[Miller Time]

If he gets 75 points? Yeah. It’s still teetering in bottom third production but it’s a lot better than low 60s.

Now let me ask you a question. If CC is paired with Dach instead of Suzuki, does Suzuki crack 70 points this year?

If Suzuki is paired with Dach instead of Suzuki, does he crack 30 goals

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Now it's "Suzuki isn't good enough to be the team's best player on a cup winner"



Goalposts officially torn down lol

? That’s what I wrote a page ago. Was that not what you were referencing?

McDavid as the best player on the planet hasn't even made a final, let alone sniffed a cup as closely as Suzuki has.

"Winning a cup" takes a lot, and no one mix of assets is the only way to do it. To argue otherwise is nonsense & useless hyperbole

Agreed.

But with McDavid you’ve got a huge advantage at centre. You’ve given you’re the best chance you can at that position. With Suzuki you’re at a disadvantage.

So you feel the same about Lindholm, Hertl & Zegras, got it. I disagree.

Didn’t discuss them because you told me to forget the players you wrote about… Remember how you didn’t want me to talk about Bergeron?

You are the one reducing it to one criteria... the one that excludes Lindholm, Zegras, Hertl, and Bergeron lmao

That's the point I've been making all along... look at the full context and it's a poor argument to make that Suzuki is not, currently, a #1C. You've offered nothing of substance to counter that, only shifted your argument to keep trying to find some frame that diminishes the asset that the player is. Why? No idea.

Okay so we are talking about Bergeron then? If we are… he’s got a great case. His advanced numbers are crazy. He puts up 60-70 points. He’s won multiple Selkes. Yep I’m convinced he’s a number one.

Suzuki? No.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

If Suzuki is paired with Dach instead of Suzuki, does he crack 30 goals

Yes. I think he hits 50 this year and I don’t think it matters which one is his center.

 

[Miller Time]

Yes. I think he hits 50 this year and I don’t think it matters which one is his center.

I hope you are right.

The massive optimism you have for Caufield is an interesting contrast to the excessive pessimism you hold for Suzuki.

The personal preference is far more understandable than the weak arguments you've put forward to rationalize the differing assessments.

 

[Miller Time]

? That’s what I wrote a page ago. Was that not what you were referencing?

Agreed.

But with McDavid you’ve got a huge advantage at centre. You’ve given you’re the best chance you can at that position. With Suzuki you’re at a disadvantage.

Didn’t discuss them because you told me to forget the players you wrote about… Remember how you didn’t want me to talk about Bergeron?

Okay so we are talking about Bergeron then? If we are… he’s got a great case. His advanced numbers are crazy. He puts up 60-70 points. He’s won multiple Selkes. Yep I’m convinced he’s a number one.

Suzuki? No.

Being disingenuous doesn't help matters. Such odd behavior on such a trivial perspective.

Enjoy pining for McDavid and feeling any other C puts us at a "disadvantage"

See how silly that is?

Carry on. Will do my best to steer clear of your Suzuki takes going forward & hope this approach doesn't spill over to your other takes.

 

[Rapala]

Suzuki hasn't yet demonstrated that he can be a legitimate 1st line C on a contender.

To me, that statement is uncontroversial, and I don't get the consternation.

The fact that we haven't shown we are contenders makes the entire point moot. Comparing his production to centers on teams who are contenders is not using the same ruler. This in my mind is incontrovertable. If and when the team gets better and Suzuki doesn't up his point total then we can go ahead and say he isn't a number one center. He's on the cusp on one of the worst teams in the league.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Being disingenuous doesn't help matters. Such odd behavior on such a trivial perspective.

Enjoy pining for McDavid and feeling any other C puts us at a "disadvantage"

See how silly that is?

Carry on. Will do my best to steer clear of your Suzuki takes going forward & hope this approach doesn't spill over to your other takes.

I’m sorry to have offended you with my disagreements. There’s nothing disingenuous in what I wrote. I simply don’t agree with you.

I don’t consider him a legit first liner right now and you haven’t convinced me otherwise. You think he is and that’s cool.

Hopefully he has a great year next season at which time I will revise/update my opinion.

 

[Miller Time]

The fact that we haven't shown we are contenders makes the entire point moot. Comparing his production to centers on teams who are contenders is not using the same ruler. This in my mind is incontrovertable. If and when the team gets better and Suzuki doesn't up his point total then we can go ahead and say he isn't a number one center. He's on the cusp on one of the worst teams in the league.

Exactly.

Odd how some view a team sport through an individual lens.