The truth? Hornqvist is extremely good at what he does, and he is without a doubt a top 6 winger in the NHL. But his production comes from one of two ways. 1) hard work and driving the net. 2) his center/linemates create his chances for him. It's not something that's unique to him. The same applies to Hagelin, Rust and it applied to Comeau, Kunitz and Dupuis back in the day. And it will apply to many others over the next 5-8 years of Crosby and Malkin's careers.
Guentzel, Sheary and Kessel for example can all be credited to varying degree's of being able to create some of their own offense by both getting open to receive passes and getting the puck back to their centers - mainly Crosby. Hornqvist can only do the former. AKA he's heavily dependent on his center to create chances for him.
Acknowledging this doesn't take anything away from Hornqvist - it's just acknowledging what his strengths and weaknesses are. I love that we have him, and am constantly torn about how much I'd be willing to give him to keep him around (AAV/term). But that doesn't change how I see him and his weaknesses/limitations or his strengths.
Absolutely we will - and for good reasons. But one of those reasons will not be his playmaking skills.
Define Chris Kunitz (circa 2010/11 to 2013/14). And this is someone who had much better hands and playmaking then anyone ever accused Hornqvist of having. In that 4 year span he scored 106 goals and put up 229 points in 274 games. An average pace of 32g/69pts. And how was he frequently referred to around here? A leach. So why does the same not apply to Hornqvist? Neither were complete players as both had glaring strengths and weaknesses. Yet we praise Hornqvist and vilify Kunitz from around 2011 onward.
Hornqvist brings a lot of things to the table - all of which we're happy to have. Especially seeing how unique his skillset is and how well he does what he does - easily one of the top 2-3 guys in the league (if not the best) at going to the paint. So while that makes him a valued part of a power play (net front) and a key member to a quality offensive line due to his ability to muck things up in the corners, bang bodies, contribute even when he's not scoring and in his willingness to take a beating in the crease on a regular basis - and usually without taking penalties... Understandably, and rightfully so, no one will ever confuse him as being a playmaker.
Yet to call a spade a spade is somehow apparently insulting him. I don't get it. We knock Letang for his hockey sense at times and his typically poor abilities on the PP. Yet we rarely see anyone up in arms when doing so. So why now with Hornqvist? I don't get it.
