theIceWookie
#LeafHysteriaAlert
Seems fair in the eyes of the GMs and Coaches that voted for this. They know more about hockey talent than a majority of us on this board (if not all).
Yep, and infallibty rains supreme in the NHL correct?
Seems fair in the eyes of the GMs and Coaches that voted for this. They know more about hockey talent than a majority of us on this board (if not all).
Yep, and infallibty rains supreme in the NHL correct?
That sounds like a BS reason to rank certain players ahead of others. So just because Kessel is a winger, that makes him less deserving of the top 30 or 20? The list is a joke, TSN is a joke.
infallibility, reigns.
These are guys that get paid based on their hockey knowledge. How much is your hockey knowledge worth? (aimed at 90% of the basement dweller members here)
Neal is a case where it seems he is just ranked too high, overrated I suppose is the word. If Kessel is 43rd, I'd think Neal would have to be around 45-48.
Winger is the least important position on a winning team as G,D and C all play more critical positions and impact a game result more.
NHL GMs and Coaches simply place less value in wingers in team building strategies and its a fact.
Are you seriously telling me all these GM's and coaches had nothing better to do than to make a top 50 list for TSN? Seriously?
Kessel > Hall lol
43 is a bit low for Phil. ~30 would have been more reasonable in my opinion.
Polls of "hockey people" are just as prone to emotional decisions over logic as polls of fans. For example, Patrick Kane is really the same player he was a year ago, but this year they ranked him as the 9th best player in the league, while last year he was ranked 38th best. Their logic is clouded because he won the cup, pure and simple. Yeah, he was a significant part of that, but team accomplishments really should not play much into individual player rankings. Great players on weak teams will never win the cup, weak players on great teams can win cups, cups wins say very little about the ability of an individual player.
In a similar vein, how about Patrice Bergeron at 16th, and Mikko Koivu at 50th? These guys are more or less on dead even levels as players, but Bergeron has been getting tonnes of press on a great Boston team, while Koivu gets very little on the out-of-the-limelight Wild, so he gets ranked 34 spots lower. For that matter, what are guys like Spezza, Staal, Thornton, Backstrom, etc. doing so much lower than Bergeron? All of these guys are as good or better.
Kessel seems a bit low to me, but really all sorts of guys are either way lower or way higher than where I'd rank them. I think there's clearly a lot of illogical thinking in these rankings. You can bet your ass that:
- If the Wild win the cup, Koivu will jump from 50th to ~10th-15th, even if he does not improve at all as a player
- Nash will jump into the top 10 if the Rangers win the cup, even if he does not improve at all as a player
- Spezza will jump into the top 10-15 if he stays healthy and the Sens make a deep playoff run, even if he does not improve at all as a player (also, if this happens Bobby Ryan will go from not even getting an honourable mention to top 35)
etc.