Player Discussion Nick Suzuki Part 11

[MasterD]

Imagine if you thought he was a 2md line center for years and now you're still saying he's playing bad while he's pacing for 90 points though

Imagine juding Suzuki's quality of play by his points total but dismissing Matheson's quality of play despite his point total though.

You make no sense. Points don't tell the whole story, for anyone. Matheson's playing bad, Suzuki's playing bad. They're both getting points because they get tons of ice time.

 

[Mrb1p]

Imagine juding Suzuki's quality of play by his points total but dismissing Matheson's quality of play despite his point total though.

You make no sense. Points don't tell the whole story, for anyone. Matheson's playing bad, Suzuki's playing bad. They're both getting points because they get tons of ice time.

This post is not serious.

Nick Suzuki is a hundred times better than Matheson at every single facet of the game of hockey.

Suzukis value goes further than points, Mathesons value isn't even related to his points as most of his production is incidental and heavily influenced by minutes played.

 

[The Great Weal]

Imagine if you thought he was a 2md line center for years and now you're still saying he's playing bad while he's pacing for 90 points though

People think there are 10 #1Cs in the league.

 

[morhilane]

People think there are 10 #1Cs in the league.

You are being generous, it's more like 5 the way they are talking.

 

[Heffyhoof]

Imagine juding Suzuki's quality of play by his points total but dismissing Matheson's quality of play despite his point total though.

You make no sense. Points don't tell the whole story, for anyone. Matheson's playing bad, Suzuki's playing bad. They're both getting points because they get tons of ice time.

He certainly was playing bad for most of the 16 games we've played as has much of the team. As the #1 centre, the captain, and highest paid forward currently playing, he needs to play better. I knew a bunch of narratives would flip with tonnes of points for everyone in a 7 goal win.

I say this as someone who absolutely believes he's a #1 centre (top-15?) and will be getting well above 82 points this season, even before the 4-point game.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

His job is to score goals. Anything beyond that is gravy.

His (and Suzuki’s) job is to gain the offensive zone and keep pressure there. That should result in points for and fewer points against.

The points and goals are there for those guys. Awesome. But I don’t think it’s sustainable if they keep playing like this.

And again, I don’t think it’s the fault of individual players. I think it’s the overall play of the club. There’s just no way to expect the production to continue if they keep playing like this.

You say you are not calling him out.........................what is this?

Sorry man, I don’t think you understand what I’m saying here.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Imagine if you thought he was a 2md line center for years

He was a lower tier first liner (high second liner) for years… that’s just a fact.

Great second half last year. He’s proven himself a legit number one. But it took a long time.

and now you're still saying he's playing bad while he's pacing for 90 points though

It’s the worst he’s played in a long time. Same with Caufield. Both have better results than ever - but I don’t think it reflects how they’ve played.

Sometimes you play well and don’t get results- Caufield last year is a great example. And sometimes it works the other way - as it is for these guys now.

I expected big things out of that line this year and they haven’t played put o their capabilities. Great that they’ve converted at a crazy rate but I don’t think it will continue if they keep playing like this.

This post is not serious.

Nick Suzuki is a hundred times better than Matheson at every single facet of the game of hockey.

You seem to be deliberately missing the point here.

Suzukis value goes further than points, Mathesons value isn't even related to his points as most of his production is incidental and heavily influenced by minutes played.

Of course. Nobody would suggest Matheson’s better than Suzuki. We’re simply holding Suzuki to the standard he’s set for himself previously. He can play better than home is right now. He’s already shown it. Ditto with Caufield.

 

[SOLR]

He was a lower tier first liner (high second liner) for years… that’s just a fact.

Great second half last year. He’s proven himself a legit number one. But it took a long time.

It’s the worst he’s played in a long time. Same with Caufield. Both have better results than ever - but I don’t think it reflects how they’ve played.

Sometimes you play well and don’t get results- Caufield last year is a great example. And sometimes it works the other way - as it is for these guys now.

I expected big things out of that line this year and they haven’t played put o their capabilities. Great that they’ve converted at a crazy rate but I don’t think it will continue if they keep playing like this.


You seem to be deliberately missing the point here.

Of course. Nobody would suggest Matheson’s better than Suzuki. We’re simply holding Suzuki to the standard he’s set for himself previously. He can play better than home is right now. He’s already shown it. Ditto with Caufield.

The production could remain. I think it's more that the system we play is open, so we could get both the upsides of offensive talent and the downsides of two-way talent at the same time. (vs. a closed system trying to diminish liabilities).

 

[HabsWhiteKnightLOL]

Imagine juding Suzuki's quality of play by his points total but dismissing Matheson's quality of play despite his point total though.

You make no sense. Points don't tell the whole story, for anyone. Matheson's playing bad, Suzuki's playing bad. They're both getting points because they get tons of ice time.

imagine comparing Nick Suzuki to turn over machine Matheson
thats crazy

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The production could remain. I think it's more that the system we play is open, so we could get both the upsides of offensive talent and the downsides of two-way talent at the same time. (vs. a closed system trying to diminish liabilities).

It could. I hope it does.

But I’d rather see improved play and results. This is supposed to be a development year. We don’t want players learning the wrong lessons.