So basically Chris Kreider is Tony Amonte

  • Thread starter Thread starter KreiMeARiver*
  • Start date Start date
  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Gartner was one of the greatest goal scorers in NHL history.
You knew you were getting at least 30 every year. Kreider is nothing like Gartner.


Besides place of birth and being home grown
I fail to see the Amonte comparison as well.

At the end of the day I think he'll end up putting numbers up
Between Darren Turcotte and say Billy Guerin

The comparison to Gartner had nothing to do with scoring numbers.
 
Gartner was one of the greatest goal scorers in NHL history.
You knew you were getting at least 30 every year. Kreider is nothing like Gartner.

Besides place of birth and being home grown
I fail to see the Amonte comparison as well.

At the end of the day I think he'll end up putting numbers up
Between Darren Turcotte and say Billy Guerin

Honestly, he isn't. Other than his severely inflated totals due to when he played, I am not sure how this misconception exists. But the Gartner over-rating these days is def weird. He had a long, very consistent career and huge kudos to him on that. But he also had the good fortune of playing in a very watered down league, with terrible goalies, in one of the easiest eras ever to score goals. The reality is, though, he wasn't even one of the best goal scorers among his own peers during his career, let alone all time. During his career, 20-30 guys a year were scoring over 40 goals and Gartner only once cracked the top 5, and he reached 5th. There were seasons where he scored 40 goals and wasn't even in the top 15...

  • 1979-80 he nets 36, 28th overall. 9 guys over 50, 24 over 40
  • 1980-81 he nets 48, 10th overall. 9 guys over 50, 19 over 40
  • 1981-82 he nets 35, 40th overall. 10 guys over 50, 22 over 40
  • 1982-83 he nets 38, 24th overall. 7 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1983-84 he nets 40, 21st overall. 8 guys over 50, 24 over 40
  • 1984-85 he nets 50, 9th overall. 9 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1985-86 he nets 35, 34th overall. 6 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1986-87 he nets 41, 11th overall. 5 guys over 50, 17 over 40
  • 1987-88 he nets 48, 10th overall. 8 guys over 50, 29 over 40
  • 1988-89 he nets 33, 36th overall. 6 guys over 50, 22 over 40
  • 1989-90 he nets 45, 9th overall. 8 guys over 50, 21 over 40
  • 1990-91 he nets 49, 5th overall. 4 guys over 50, 20 over 40
  • 1991-92 he nets 40, 14th overall. 5 guys over 50, 17 over 40
  • 1992-93 he nets 45, 19th overall. 14 guys over 50, 25 over 40
  • 1993-94 he nets 34, 35th overall. 9 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1994-95 shortened season, he's 85th overall
  • 1995-96 he nets 35, 28th overall. 7 guys over 50, 18 over 40
  • 1996-97 he nets 32, 44th overall. 4 guys over 50, 12 over 40

Throwing out his last season cuz he fell off, as players do, his average seasonal placement was 26th and he was 20th in GPG among his peers. Sure, in GPG during his career he lost to guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Bossy, Dionne, Robitaille and Hull. But during his career, he was also behind Kerr, Nieuwendyk, Simmer, Bondra, Goulet, and Vaive in GPG. He had great length of career, and he deserves huge credit for playing at a high level for so long. But when your GPG during your career are, in that time period, behind Petr Bondra, Charlie Simmer and Rick Vaive, you are not close to one of the all-time great goal scorers.

The above is why, despite potting over 700 career goals, Gartner is basically almost never considered among the top 100 players all-time. If you don't think Garnter's era affected his all-time placement and his 0.49 GPG aren't severely inflated, consider that Pierre Larouche and Blaine Stoughton played about the same time as Gartner and that they also have a career 0.49 GPG. That should pretty much say it all right there.
 
Honestly, he isn't. Other than his severely inflated totals due to when he played, I am not sure how this misconception exists. But the Gartner over-rating these days is def weird. He had a long, very consistent career and huge kudos to him on that. But he also had the good fortune of playing in a very watered down league, with terrible goalies, in one of the easiest eras ever to score goals. The reality is, though, he wasn't even one of the best goal scorers among his own peers during his career, let alone all time. During his career, 20-30 guys a year were scoring over 40 goals and Gartner only once cracked the top 5, and he reached 5th. There were seasons where he scored 40 goals and wasn't even in the top 15...


Throwing out his last season cuz he fell off, as players do, his average seasonal placement was 26th and he was 20th in GPG among his peers. Sure, in GPG during his career he lost to guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Bossy, Dionne, Robitaille and Hull. But during his career, he was also behind Kerr, Nieuwendyk, Simmer, Bondra, Goulet, and Vaive in GPG. He had great length of career, and he deserves huge credit for playing at a high level for so long. But when your GPG during your career are, in that time period, behind Petr Bondra, Charlie Simmer and Rick Vaive, you are not close to one of the all-time great goal scorers.

The above is why, despite potting over 700 career goals, Gartner is basically almost never considered among the top 100 players all-time. If you don't think Garnter's era affected his all-time placement and his 0.49 GPG aren't severely inflated, consider that Pierre Larouche and Blaine Stoughton played about the same time as Gartner and that they also have a career 0.49 GPG. That should pretty much say it all right there.


I don't think so. Just my opinion.

He was named #89 on the all time list of greatest hockey players by The hockey news. You might of heard of them.

Made 7 all star games, was MVP during one (93) -

I can go on and on just like you did but in the end its just a matter of opinion and I consider him one of the Rangers greatest goal scorers and one of the NHL's best ever goal scorers.
 
Gartner had world-class consistency and world-class longevity. His peak was nothing spectacular but the guy basically had an 18-year prime.
 
Any update on a potential suspension for Kreider?

Did I miss RB's post on this one? :)

There was no need for any post regarding a suspension. It was not a five minute major and game misconduct. 2 minutes. Brooks tweeted after the game that player safety wasn't going to pursue it. The Rangers are trying to get the game misconduct scratched from his record.
 
No comparison at all exists with Gartner and Kreider. They don't even skate the same.

How do people come up with this stuff, and then spend time debating it back forth?

Each player is completely unique in their own way.

I guess the good thing is that because of Kreider's size, skill and grit he will remain a very intriguing player.
 
There was no need for any post regarding a suspension. It was not a five minute major and game misconduct. 2 minutes. Brooks tweeted after the game that player safety wasn't going to pursue it. The Rangers are trying to get the game misconduct scratched from his record.

Sending Tyutin into the boards from that distance was dangerous play, and I'm fine with the game misconduct. But no suspension because it was a clean and legal hit.

Kreider learned a lesson (knows where the refs are) and should be more careful when throwing his weight around.
 
Honestly, he isn't. Other than his severely inflated totals due to when he played, I am not sure how this misconception exists. But the Gartner over-rating these days is def weird. He had a long, very consistent career and huge kudos to him on that. But he also had the good fortune of playing in a very watered down league, with terrible goalies, in one of the easiest eras ever to score goals. The reality is, though, he wasn't even one of the best goal scorers among his own peers during his career, let alone all time. During his career, 20-30 guys a year were scoring over 40 goals and Gartner only once cracked the top 5, and he reached 5th. There were seasons where he scored 40 goals and wasn't even in the top 15...

  • 1979-80 he nets 36, 28th overall. 9 guys over 50, 24 over 40
  • 1980-81 he nets 48, 10th overall. 9 guys over 50, 19 over 40
  • 1981-82 he nets 35, 40th overall. 10 guys over 50, 22 over 40
  • 1982-83 he nets 38, 24th overall. 7 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1983-84 he nets 40, 21st overall. 8 guys over 50, 24 over 40
  • 1984-85 he nets 50, 9th overall. 9 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1985-86 he nets 35, 34th overall. 6 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1986-87 he nets 41, 11th overall. 5 guys over 50, 17 over 40
  • 1987-88 he nets 48, 10th overall. 8 guys over 50, 29 over 40
  • 1988-89 he nets 33, 36th overall. 6 guys over 50, 22 over 40
  • 1989-90 he nets 45, 9th overall. 8 guys over 50, 21 over 40
  • 1990-91 he nets 49, 5th overall. 4 guys over 50, 20 over 40
  • 1991-92 he nets 40, 14th overall. 5 guys over 50, 17 over 40
  • 1992-93 he nets 45, 19th overall. 14 guys over 50, 25 over 40
  • 1993-94 he nets 34, 35th overall. 9 guys over 50, 23 over 40
  • 1994-95 shortened season, he's 85th overall
  • 1995-96 he nets 35, 28th overall. 7 guys over 50, 18 over 40
  • 1996-97 he nets 32, 44th overall. 4 guys over 50, 12 over 40

Throwing out his last season cuz he fell off, as players do, his average seasonal placement was 26th and he was 20th in GPG among his peers. Sure, in GPG during his career he lost to guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Bossy, Dionne, Robitaille and Hull. But during his career, he was also behind Kerr, Nieuwendyk, Simmer, Bondra, Goulet, and Vaive in GPG. He had great length of career, and he deserves huge credit for playing at a high level for so long. But when your GPG during your career are, in that time period, behind Petr Bondra, Charlie Simmer and Rick Vaive, you are not close to one of the all-time great goal scorers.

The above is why, despite potting over 700 career goals, Gartner is basically almost never considered among the top 100 players all-time. If you don't think Garnter's era affected his all-time placement and his 0.49 GPG aren't severely inflated, consider that Pierre Larouche and Blaine Stoughton played about the same time as Gartner and that they also have a career 0.49 GPG. That should pretty much say it all right there.

You're leaving out a bunch of stuff that could question your reasoning. Gartner played his first 7 seasons with no Center to speak of before the Rangers gifted Mike Ridley to the Caps. Also, those scorers you say were ahead of Gartner every year, some of those guys played with the greatest players of all time, if Gartner had a Gretz or Messier feeding him like Kurri and Anderson did maybe he scores 70 a season and is first on that list season after season.

After all is said and done, Gartner was a world class goal scorer. He played in the 80's but what about scoring 300 goals in the 90's ?? In 96 and 97 when he was 37/38 yrs old he was still scoring 30 goals a season.
 
Gartner was easily one of the best RW in the game for a while.

He was picked to play on two Canada Cups and could have easily been picked for the 1991 team since he was coming off a 49-goal season.

He was also a two-way forward. As durable and reliable as they come.

Henry Aaron never hit 50 HR and in 22 years led the NL in HR. Yet he's the greatest home run hitter to ever live and nobody questions it.

I dont punish guys for being compilers because that means they put the effort in to stay healthy and perform at an all-star level for decades at a time.
 
Two last things on Gartner:

Third most goal scored by a RW in NHL history -- Gordie Howe and Brett Hull only two


If scoring 40 goals isnt such a big deal, only five players in NHL history have compiled nine or more seasons of 40 goals regardless of position:

Wayne Gretzky 12
Marcel Dionne 10
Mario Lemieux 10
Mike Bossy 9
Mike Gartner 9
 
I dont punish guys for being compilers because that means they put the effort in to stay healthy and perform at an all-star level for decades at a time.

An underrated attribute.
 
Sending Tyutin into the boards from that distance was dangerous play, and I'm fine with the game misconduct. But no suspension because it was a clean and legal hit.

Kreider learned a lesson (knows where the refs are) and should be more careful when throwing his weight around.

I don't agree and I'm not sure you do either. You correctly state it was a clean and legal hit. So why a penalty or game misconduct? Sending Tyutin into the boards at that distance when he is facing the boards is dangerous. Hitting him shoulder to shoulder anywhere on the ice can't be ruled a penalty.

Like usual the refs in this league have no clue what they are doing. A puck to the head to knock some sense into him would have been fitting. If anything the ref should be suspended for not knowing the rules. He potentially cost the Rangers points and he gets off.
 
When he first came up I suggested that McD reminded me of Chelios. I got laughed at. Doesn't look so far fetched now, does it?

As to Kreider, his style reminds me of a young Messier, lite without the leadership. Not quite as nasty but many of the same attributes. Like Messier, Kreider can skate around a d-man and score. Also he has the same ability to come down the wing and score. He's a load down low with the puck and strong in the corners.

Now he doesn't forecheck quite to the extent that Mess did and he still hasn't shown the knack for throwing those big destructive hits Messier was known for in his early days.

If Kreider would play a little more physical and start forechecking harder he would be an absolute monster. He's just too big, fast and strong for most d-men in this league to handle.
 
If Kreider can bring a bulldog mentality to the ice every night, he's going to be a very successful hockey player in this league. He's got the size and the skills. It's all about consistency with him.
 
Would I be correct that right now Kreider does everything at an above average level offensively except shoot and deke and some things he does at a way better than average level like skate?
 
Kreider is tenacious, and he plays with an edge. He always has a look of attitude on his face, and players like that have a certain swagger when they're on their game. That kind of personality can be infectious.

He's a thorn in Phaneuf's side now, and I'm willing to bet that Phaneuf won't be the only EC #1 that is going to find himself locked in hard fought battles every time they play against a NYR team with Kreider in the line-up.

We talk about players playing with a snarl. We talk about players not being afraid and not backing down. We talk about players bringing an edge to the team and bringing a swagger to the ice and locker room. Offensive players that finish their hits, go to the front of the net, and win battles along the boards.

We have all of this wrapped up in one of the most talented offensive players on our team with a hell of a set of wheels. Kreider might not be the pure breakaway sniper that Gartner was, but imho, he's going to bring a lot more to this franchise than Gartner brought to his.
 
Kreider is tenacious, and he plays with an edge. He always has a look of attitude on his face, and players like that have a certain swagger when they're on their game. That kind of personality can be infectious.

He's a thorn in Phaneuf's side now, and I'm willing to bet that Phaneuf won't be the only EC #1 that is going to find himself locked in hard fought battles every time they play against a NYR team with Kreider in the line-up.

We talk about players playing with a snarl. We talk about players not being afraid and not backing down. We talk about players bringing an edge to the team and bringing a swagger to the ice and locker room. Offensive players that finish their hits, go to the front of the net, and win battles along the boards.

We have all of this wrapped up in one of the most talented offensive players on our team with a hell of a set of wheels. Kreider might not be the pure breakaway sniper that Gartner was, but imho, he's going to bring a lot more to this franchise than Gartner brought to his.

Hold the phone on this. Kreider had the compete level of a dead fish last season -- hes only showing that level now in spurts. Thats to be expected in his development.

You're painting him as some sort of mental leader for this team. Hes far too inconsistent to be that at this point.
 
He's 16th all time in GWG's. In the top 25 all are HOF's or on their way, minus one or two players(Turgeon/Marleau).

Except... You're using a logical fallacy here. You seem to think that the fact that he's scoring all of these GWGs contributes to him being a Hall of Famer. You're overlooking the fact that the reason these HOFers have so many GWGs goals is because they scored a lot of goals and just so happened to have a lot of them be GWGs. GWGs are quite often just completely random so it would be really hard to have somebody that has a significantly higher GWG to total goals ratio than average. These players scored a lot of goals that just so happened to be GWGs. That tends to happen when you score a lot of goals. It's not because they're super clutch or something.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad