What does this even mean?Caufield parents are not rich enough
What does this even mean?Caufield parents are not rich enough
What does this even mean?
Yep. Underrated post. I’m giving it a like.He is referring to Andrew Berkshire's rant on Zach Hyman.
LOL Just read it.He is referring to Andrew Berkshire's rant on Zach Hyman.
So you are saying he didn't hand over his signing bonus.Caufield parents are not rich enough
i had to look it up.He is referring to Andrew Berkshire's rant on Zach Hyman.
It’s tighter that I thought after 15 butI don’t see 20 better centers than him.
I think he's on par with Thomas, but roughly 15 sounds about right. Especially when you consider the fact that Draisaitl and Miller switch from center to wing to play on the top line a lot.It’s tighter that I thought after 15 but
McDavid
MacKinnon
Matthews
Leon
Barkov
Petterson
Eichel
Point
Aho
Stuzle
Miller
Hughes
Hintz
Crosby
Bédard
Thomas
Theres no way Thomas is better that guy sucks defensively.It’s tighter that I thought after 15 but
McDavid
MacKinnon
Matthews
Leon
Barkov
Petterson
Eichel
Point
Aho
Stuzle
Miller
Hughes
Hintz
Crosby
Bédard
Thomas
As much as I appreciate Suzuki I don't think he's at the level of Aho, Hintz or Miller consistently right now. He could definitely take a step forward next year and reach that level, but I think those 3 are slightly better as of today.Theres no way Thomas is better that guy sucks defensively.
Hes similar to Aho, hintz, Miller.
That makes him a pretty solid 1C.
Many of these players have all-star caliber team/line mates.I think he's on par with Thomas, but roughly 15 sounds about right. Especially when you consider the fact that Draisaitl and Miller switch from center to wing to play on the top line a lot.
You think Suzuki and Slaf wont be similar caliber to Eichel and Stone in 2-3 years when we'll contend?? Suzuki is a notch below Eichel pts wise but he's got the edge on the defensive side and i would be very surprised if Slaf is not close to PPG in 2-3 yrsI don’t think we have anyone of Jack Eichel and Mark Stone caliber
Eichel is awesome defensively, better than Suzuki in my opinion plus also his elite offense.You think Suzuki and Slaf wont be similar caliber to Eichel and Stone in 2-3 years when we'll contend?? Suzuki is a notch below Eichel pts wise but he's got the edge on the defensive side and i would be very surprised if Slaf is not close to PPG in 2-3 yrs
Because of all the dark years we had offensively with this team i think people doesnt realize that we have a legit top 4 with Dach Suzuki Slaf and Caufield. I think all 4 players got the chance to be PPG players or close.
No I don’tYou think Suzuki and Slaf wont be similar caliber to Eichel and Stone in 2-3 years when we'll contend?? Suzuki is a notch below Eichel pts wise but he's got the edge on the defensive side and i would be very surprised if Slaf is not close to PPG in 2-3 yrs
Because of all the dark years we had offensively with this team i think people doesnt realize that we have a legit top 4 with Dach Suzuki Slaf and Caufield. I think all 4 players got the chance to be PPG players or close.
Eichel got 147pts in 154 games in the last 3 yrs since joining Vegas, its the same pace as Suzuki this yearEichel is awesome defensively, better than Suzuki in my opinion plus also his elite offense.
Big difference in doing it in 154 games on a team that compete then in 60 gamesEichel got 147pts in 154 games in the last 3 yrs since joining Vegas, its the same pace as Suzuki this year
Suzuki played 71games this years not 60 and he played on a team that you had one line to cover. He doesnt strike me at all like the kind of player who's gonna fold when the games we'll be meaningfull its quite the opposite.. Anyway we'll see.Big difference in doing it in 154 games on a team that compete then in 60 games
I don’t think Suzuki will fold on meaningful game either but it’s harder to produce when your a good team and other team are ready to face you then when your eliminated since the all star games and other doesn’t take you as seriouslySuzuki played 71games this years not 60 and he played on a team that you had one line to cover. He doesnt strike me at all like the kind of player who's gonna fold when the games we'll be meaningfull its quite the opposite.. Anyway we'll see.
He's more like Daniel Alfredsson than Joe Sakic. I was a big fan of Alfredsson so I think that's still good.For the last 20-30 games, Suzuki looks like the young Sakic.
When we played Carolina recently Suzuki made Aho his bitch.As much as I appreciate Suzuki I don't think he's at the level of Aho, Hintz or Miller consistently right now. He could definitely take a step forward next year and reach that level, but I think those 3 are slightly better as of today.
When we played Carolina recently Suzuki made Aho his bitch.
Brind'Amour had to change up his match ups because of it.
Just Sayin'
He's more like Daniel Alfredsson than Joe Sakic. I was a big fan of Alfredsson so I think that's still good.
His peak level lasted 5 minutes in a game - at most in some games.
Also, Suzuki brings other value to the game that Kovalev didn't even know existed. For example, Suzuki is not Bergeron but he's damn close. He plays the PK. Imagine putting Kovalev on the PK.
Suzuki played 71games this years not 60 and he played on a team that you had one line to cover. He doesnt strike me at all like the kind of player who's gonna fold when the games we'll be meaningfull its quite the opposite.. Anyway we'll see.
The original idea was that very few players the poster saw had more tools than Kovalev. When it comes to offensive tools I give the edge to l'artiste but Suzuki completely buries him when it comes to the defensive side of the game. So overall I'd take Suzki every day and twice on gameday. And I won't delve into Kovalev's inconsistent and erratic play.I think I know what point you are trying to make, but it's not the same idea as what was originally said.