Top 5 “can’t win with ‘em” players

[Silky Johnson]

That's not very impressive considering he basically doesn't play defense.

Great hot take!

Top 12 ever would be impressive if he just played offence.

However, Karlsson can play defence and tilt the ice as good as any defender - when he is engaged.

In some of those runs and some of his Team Sweden appearances he was the best allround player on the ice - period.

Karlsson is enigmatic and can stop playing defence - but anyone who has watched him when he is "on" would not label him as one dementional - unless they were a fool.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Great hot take!

Top 12 ever would be impressive if he just played offence.

However, Karlsson can play defence and tilt the ice as good as any defender - when he is engaged.

In some of those runs and some of his Team Sweden appearances he was the best allround player on the ice - period.

Karlsson is enigmatic and can stop playing defence - but anyone who has watched him when he is "on" would not label him as one dementional - unless they were a fool.

Dude he's a career loser that missed the playoffs his entire career practically. I literally don't care enough about him to play make belief.

'Oh he has 3 norris trophies', yeah so does Paul Coffey who was almost as bad as Karlsson at defense.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Great hot take!

Top 12 ever would be impressive if he just played offence.

However, Karlsson can play defence and tilt the ice as good as any defender - when he is engaged.

In some of those runs and some of his Team Sweden appearances he was the best allround player on the ice - period.

Karlsson is enigmatic and can stop playing defence - but anyone who has watched him when he is "on" would not label him as one dementional - unless they were a fool.

 

[Silky Johnson]

Dude he's a career loser that missed the playoffs his entire career practically. I literally don't care enough about him to play make belief.

'Oh he has 3 norris trophies', yeah so does Paul Coffey who was almost as bad as Karlsson at defense.

My suggestion to you is to watch more hockey. People who watch alot of hockey voted for Karlsson to get those three Norris's (and two second places).

Anyone who watched his 2017 playoff run knows they were watching something special.

Like I said, Karlsson is an enigmatic player who runs hot and cold. He is a complicated player. But some keyboard jockey calling him a "career loser" and implying he is someone you can't win with is a joke.

Do better.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

To Silky's point, when Karlsson was engaged back in Ottawa, he was a beast all over the ice. When he went to SJ, it seemed like he lost a lot of the fire.

 

[Gorskyontario]

To Silky's point, when Karlsson was engaged back in Ottawa, he was a beast all over the ice. When he went to SJ, it seemed like he lost a lot of the fire.

He's going to retire a loser, ruining the end of Crosby and Malkins careers.

 

[eojsmada]

Matthews
Jack Hughes
Chychrun
Panarin
Dubois

 

[crowi]

I don't think there's any player you absolutely cannot win with under any circumstances.

It's more a question of players who aren't good enough to win the Cup as the main guys or top two to three players on a team. Some players' names have been listed repeatedly in this thread. The perception of those players is teams can't win with them as core pieces. In some cases, that perception is fair based on how they've performed in the playoffs over the years.

But who's to say one or more of these guys couldn't be an important part of a Cup winner under different circumstances?

Agreed. Problem is some teams pay these guys who move from main guys to side guys at best, top dollar. If you get paid top dollar, then you perform in the playoffs or you fit this thread like a glove. I don't understand how a team can just look at this dejavu for nearly a decade and decide to pay one of them even more money. These guys who become side guys when playoffs start, shouldn't be getting paid as much as they are.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

The entire Maple Leafs franchise.

well..... your not wrong

When your 69 goal scorer being the highest paid player in the league can’t score in the big games to me he is the single biggest reason the leafs haven’t advanced and have only 1 playoff series win since he has been there.
Simply doesn’t have that win at all cost mentality.

its problem is and the problem is of the Maple Leafs in general is they dont hate to lose

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I don't think there's any player you absolutely cannot win with under any circumstances.

It's more a question of players who aren't good enough to win the Cup as the main guys or top two to three players on a team. Some players' names have been listed repeatedly in this thread. The perception of those players is teams can't win with them as core pieces. In some cases, that perception is fair based on how they've performed in the playoffs over the years.

But who's to say one or more of these guys couldn't be an important part of a Cup winner under different circumstances?

This is pretty much the issue with this discussion. It's not like Tampa, Pittsburgh, Chicago, etc. don't win their Cups if you put any of the players listed in this thread on their third or fourth line in place of their worst player that played that spot. It's more about which players you can't win the Cup with if they're your top guy or close to your top guy.

For instance, people saying Mitch Marner. You put current Marner on the 2016 Pens instead of Conor Sheary and the Pens are still winning that Cup. But if you swapped out Crosby or Malkin for Marner, do they still win? You put John Tavares on the 3-time Cup champ Hawks instead of Kris Versteeg they still win the Cup. But if you replace prime Toews or prime Kane with Tavares, they likely don't.

 

[Mav3rick07]

Johnny Gaudreau.

 

[Astyanax]

If your argument is that he underscores and may be a drag, I agree.

If your argument, like the OP premise, is that you “can’t win with him”, that’s patently false.

Sorry, I definitely read the O P as Stanley cups, but then I felt the need to further defend my pick. And I believe "Can't win with him" versus win in spite of him equals out the same. On hall of fame all star squads he has gotten medals, true!! But I'm not putting him on my stanley cup squad.

 

[Astyanax]

If you can't win with Rick Nash, why didn't he drag Canada away from gold in both Olympics he was a part of?

Also, his Rangers went to the cup finals, where they lost 4-1 yeah, but other than Game 3, they were all one goal games, with 5 periods of OT in the series. Anyone could have come out on top in those games, it's not difficult at all to imagine a world where the Rangers won that cup.

There are tons of good players who didn't win a cup. When you play 16 seasons in a 32 team league, its a coinflip statistically if you win a cup in your career.

Agreed completely Nash is a playoff/clutch underperformer, but I don't believe for a second it means that that single player is capable for dragging an entire team down, making them unwinnable.

Once again, only exception is goalie. If you have a goalie who mentally collapses and can't sort himself out, giving up horrible goal after horrible goal, no chance you're winning a cup.

Sorry, my man. Maybe I'm overly bombastic in my opinions and statements, but seriously, just how colossally bad would one player have to be to take out a team of all stars. He's come close. So, ok maybe not can't win, buy f@@$ing never want him near my team. And I truly think that is what was at the heart of the OP.

 

[Astyanax]

From the 3rd line. Kessel was, at best, the 4th best player on the Penguins at the time. That's not being the focal point of a team. Still part of the core, but a complimentary part of the core.


He was also declining when he left Columbus. It isn't his fault that CBJ couldn't put decent players around him for his tenure there. Who was his best linemate? David Vyborny?

Again, I would like to say I'm not a Kessel fan. Just mention him because he has won cups. I'm getting shit from another guy because nash has won medals with team Canada. But playoff stats Kessel doubles nash up, but with about 11 more game. And agreed nash never had much to work with in columbus, but that is the whole narrative!!. Get him out of columbus and watch out!!!. I believe he was 28 when he traded to NYR. So,.... declining at 28 or just more nash? And lastly NYR went to the finals in 2014. Nash had 3 goals and 10 pts in those 25 playoff games. So sure, maybe on an all star squad, he isn't such a black hole as to derail the bullet train. But dammit, he definitely comes pretty close.
So can't win with to me equals absolutely don't want said player on my team.

 

[Astyanax]

Dude he's a career loser that missed the playoffs his entire career practically. I literally don't care enough about him to play make belief.

'Oh he has 3 norris trophies', yeah so does Paul Coffey who was almost as bad as Karlsson at defense.

Yes, different eras, but Coffey has 4 cups

 

[GarlicbreadTB]

I remember before Brett Hull won the cup in 99 the talk was you couldn't win with Brett Hull then in the years after with going to the finals again in 2000 and winning in 2002 the talk was: "Can you win the Cup without Brett Hull?"

 

[Gorskyontario]

Yes, different eras, but Coffey has 4 cups

Coffey was way better than Karlsson.

 

[karltonian]

Joe Pavelski

too soon lol

 

[Astyanax]

This is pretty much the issue with this discussion. It's not like Tampa, Pittsburgh, Chicago, etc. don't win their Cups if you put any of the players listed in this thread on their third or fourth line in place of their worst player that played that spot. It's more about which players you can't win the Cup with if they're your top guy or close to your top guy.

For instance, people saying Mitch Marner. You put current Marner on the 2016 Pens instead of Conor Sheary and the Pens are still winning that Cup. But if you swapped out Crosby or Malkin for Marner, do they still win? You put John Tavares on the 3-time Cup champ Hawks instead of Kris Versteeg they still win the Cup. But if you replace prime Toews or prime Kane with Tavares, they likely don't.

I think we mostly agreed. I just think some of us are taking it to literally. I don't think he meant to equate it with a cooler. To wit, if you put player X on the 78 Canadians, they suddenly don't win. Please!!! By the same token you could put Gretzky and McDavid on the 71 seals to no effect. But I do believe that there are guys that you straight up don't win with.

 

[NotASheep]

For those mentioning Marnier should then mention Matthews. Marniers plsyoff stats have been equal to that of Msrthews.

Until a player wins the cup he is on this list

 

[Astyanax]

Coffey was way better than Karlsson.

Ok....? Not a committed Karlsson apologist, or anything, but I read that as you shiting on Coffey. As if to say they both suck.
P. S. I just read it again and it still reads like they both suck.

 

[PeE eL DuBoiS]

Pacioretty is a good one.

In the meaningful part of his career he scored at a 34-goal pace in the regular season, then fell off to a 26-goal pace in the playoffs. Then throw in his continuous injury issues. It a big blow when a team is relying on a guy who fades in the spring and constantly deals with nagging injuries.

He played on some pretty good teams over the years and never went deeper than 10 wins in the playoffs.

You mean Max Paci-where-is-he? That's a good one.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Coffey was way better than Karlsson.

You should limit your "Karlsson bad" obsession to one post per thread. You don't seem to have anything to add to it.

You hate Karlsson, we get it.

 

[beardawg]

Lundqvist
Price
Rinne
Luongo
Miller

 

[CraigBillington]

Olli Jokinen