Value of a center vs value of a winger?

[grieves]

I'm not going to pretend my motivation is not the Laine vs Matthews debate, but as a fairly new (4 yearish) fan of the sport, I'm really interested if the valuation of centers in HFBoards is higher than it should be vs wingers, or am I a biased SOB.

I absolutely recognize that the center piece usually has more duties on the defensive side, but is the difference really to the point that "you always pick a center no matter what" (to put it bluntly)

In a three man offensive unit in such a small play-area the appreciation of centers THAT HIGH vs wingers doesn't seem right to me. But I don't know s**t so that is not saying much.

I would be grateful if neutral fans would chime in too and the "combatants" observe what they have to say.

 

[Used As A Shield]

1.25x

 

[The Macho Man]

I'm not going to pretend my motivation is not the Laine vs Matthews debate, but as a fairly new (4 yearish) fan of the sport, I'm really interested if the valuation of centers in HFBoards is higher than it should be vs wingers, or am I a biased SOB.

I absolutely recognize that the center piece usually has more duties on the defensive side, but is the difference really to the point that "you always pick a center no matter what" (to put it bluntly)

In a three man offensive unit in such a small play-area the appreciation of centers THAT HIGH vs wingers doesn't seem right to me. But I don't know s**t so that is not saying much.

I would be grateful if only neutral fans would chime in. I promise to keep quiet too.

I don't think it's "centers no matter what". It's "all else being equal (or roughly equal), take the player in the more valuable position (which is center)."

A lot of that comes from the fact that centers are in a more important position defensively. They also (generally) have the ability to use the whole ice more offensively (although I don't think this is as relevant today as it used to be).

I'm wondering how much of it comes from just - as a general matter - pee-wee through juniors put their better players at C rather than W, which skews the results?

 

[Rebels57]

Pick the Center if the players are equal in terms of skill level. They have a bigger impact off the scoresheet usually. Doesn't mean Centers are always more valuable. Not many Centers are better than Kane, Tarasenko, etc.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Not that wingers are unimportant, but centers are much more important than wingers. Center should be the position most likely to be carrying the puck through the neutral zone and making decisions on whether to dump or dangle. The term 200 foot player is a bit exaggerated for other positions, as wingers rarely defend deep in their zone and defensemen rarely attack deep in the other team's zone without giving up strong positioning, but for a center I think a very literal interpretation is valid - you want your center playing all 200 feet because it's the position most able to generate offense from defense.

Centers have to be in position to give their wingers and D a clean outlet on the breakout, they have to be elusive and creative generals on the ice flying into the zone, and it's the position most ideal to be the high forward covering for their D allowing an ideal 5 man attack.

Oh and it's pretty much a guarantee the center is expected to win a draw here or there on special teams, so having a center that drives offense is preferable to having a plug who's just in there for faceoffs.

Auston Matthews along with Eichel are in many ways setting up to become the ultimate centers. They are simply drool-worthy. A guy like Laine will never have as much impact, although it's true he has the benefit of playing with Scheifele so it might work out for him.

 

[Maukkis]

Please don't say that the idea of value being something that's set in stone still exists.

 

[THall4]

Not that wingers are unimportant, but centers are much more important than wingers. Center should be the position most likely to be carrying the puck through the neutral zone and making decisions on whether to dump or dangle. The term 200 foot player is a bit exaggerated for other positions, as wingers rarely defend deep in their zone and defensemen rarely attack deep in the other team's zone without giving up strong positioning, but for a center I think a very literal interpretation is valid - you want your center playing all 200 feet because it's the position most able to generate offense from defense.

Centers have to be in position to give their wingers and D a clean outlet on the breakout, they have to be elusive and creative generals on the ice flying into the zone, and it's the position most ideal to be the high forward covering for their D allowing an ideal 5 man attack.

Oh and it's pretty much a guarantee the center is expected to win a draw here or there on special teams, so having a center that drives offense is preferable to having a plug who's just in there for faceoffs.

Auston Matthews along with Eichel are in many ways setting up to become the ultimate centers. They are simply drool-worthy. A guy like Laine will never have as much impact, although it's true he has the benefit of playing with Scheifele so it might work out for him.

Agreed.

For example, Marian Hossa on Chicago was more valuable to their team as a winger than any C they've had not named Toews on any of their cup teams.

 

[mikee]

When you are dealing with an truly elite winger like a Patrick Kane or a prime Ovi who can drive a line without requiring a good center to play with than those guys are just as valuable as a #1 C imo. But there is usually only a couple of those around the league at any one time. A two way center would be more valuable than the rest of the wingers in the league. Maybe Laine can become one of those wingers.

 

[JaegerDice]

Centers are generally more valuable because they have a more direct impact on more facets of play across all areas of the ice.

That doesnt mean every center is more valuable than every center though.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Centers have more responsibility at both ends of the ice so they have more value by default, but there are a lot of variables and factors at play

 

[tarheelhockey]

It's not at the level of "take the center no matter what", but a winger has to be considerably better than a center to be more valuable.

It's not just defense, either. The center is responsible for faceoffs, patrols the high-traffic parts of the ice, and is responsible for puck distribution both in transition and during in-zone offense. And yes, he is also the most important defensive forward.

If you're consistently winning the center matchup, you have a very good chance of winning the game.

 

[huntison]

It goes

Elite 1C (Mcdavid)
Elite 1D (Karlsson)
#1D (Pietrangelo)
#1C (Giroux)
Elite winger (Kane)

Imo

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

It goes

Elite 1C (Mcdavid)
Elite 1D (Karlsson)
#1D (Pietrangelo)
#1C (Giroux)
Elite winger (Kane)

Imo

I'd value an elite 1D over an elite 1C simply because they generally play 5-10 more minutes per night roughly, which adds to their value

 

[Patrik Barkov]

It goes

Elite 1C (Mcdavid)
Elite 1D (Karlsson)
#1D (Pietrangelo)
#1C (Giroux)
Elite winger (Kane)

Imo

I'll take Kane over Giroux any day of the week, probably Pietro as well.

 

[Rorschach]

Centers also start possession through winning face offs.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

It is far from a coincidence that the team with two top-5 centers has won 4 of the last 10 Prince of Wales trophies and 2 of the last 9 (likely 3 of the last 10) Stanley Cups

 

[Nithoniniel]

The default is that the center is more involved in the game, participates in more situations, and will have more puck and more defensive situations closer to the net. They have a larger effect on expected goals both for and against.

With that said, it's just the baseline, not the expectation in every case. I generally view even strength hockey as consisting of four phases. You have transition for and against, and controlled defense/offense.

I think nowadays its fairly common to see some centers, those inexperienced or considered weak, get help from their wingers in some of these areas. In Toronto, Bozak generally does the least heavy lifting when transitioning the puck, but he plays the traditional center role when opposing team has controlled offense. Might be wrong, but on Jets I've noticed Perreault coming deep in a usual center role in those situations instead of Scheifele, who definitely carries the play like a center otherwise. Offensively, guys like Ehlers, Hall, Kane, or Marner is often mentioned driving offense "like a center."

Transition against blurs out the positions. The forward up high picks up the third opposing player going on transition, and so on. Center-winger split of duties occur when it's become a controlled offense-situation.

So in general, the center is more valuable. But if you have a Hossa or Palat, they can pretty much do most of the two-way work for your center if you want them to. If you have a Kane and Marner, you don't need to have a center comfortable with carrying the puck.

 

[Aerchon]

I'm not going to pretend my motivation is not the Laine vs Matthews debate, but as a fairly new (4 yearish) fan of the sport, I'm really interested if the valuation of centers in HFBoards is higher than it should be vs wingers, or am I a biased SOB.

I absolutely recognize that the center piece usually has more duties on the defensive side, but is the difference really to the point that "you always pick a center no matter what" (to put it bluntly)

In a three man offensive unit in such a small play-area the appreciation of centers THAT HIGH vs wingers doesn't seem right to me. But I don't know s**t so that is not saying much.

I would be grateful if neutral fans would chime in too and the "combatants" observe what they have to say.

Mathews has the Calder wrapped up now if that is your angle. The Calder is typically decided by points alone no matter position. With defensemen and goalies obviously having different criteria.

As for building a team there is a significant advantage to always take a centre. IMO, after watching the Oilers closely for 35 years, seeing Crosby/malkin versus Ovie, Toews success/contract, Kopitar, or even Getzlaf dominate like he did this year... Centre versus winger is not even close. 1.5 times better? 2 times better? Not sure if you can quantify the amount but it's big.

Team Canada typically only takes a couple natural wingers on its regular March to gold medal after gold medal. Surprised more NHL teams have not followed that build method.

Goalie = most impactful, then defense, then centres, then wingers trail to an after thought really in the scheme of things. Teams really can't afford to tie up too much money with wingers.

Edit: didn't think it needed mentioning but obviously there are some wingers that are more impactful than centres but is very rare and situational at best.

 

[Sens Rule]

It's not at the level of "take the center no matter what", but a winger has to be considerably better than a center to be more valuable.

It's not just defense, either. The center is responsible for faceoffs, patrols the high-traffic parts of the ice, and is responsible for puck distribution both in transition and during in-zone offense. And yes, he is also the most important defensive forward.

If you're consistently winning the center matchup, you have a very good chance of winning the game.

There are exceptions. Like with the Pizza line in Ottawa. All 3 forwards were great and on similar 100 point paces but Alfredsson was the defensive conscience of the line, by far the best checker, leader on the line. He didn't take faceoffs and was a winger.

Or take Jamie Benn and Seguin on the same line.

Or Selanne and Kariya on the Ducks. Clearly the wings ran that line.

There are always exceptions even though centres generally are the key cogs on great lines.

 

[Zuluss]

Generally, if a center and a winger have the same amount of points, the winger is better (see Maurice Richard's point finishes as a prime example). Wingers are more likely to be the goal-scorers and are less likely to rake in the assists just bringing the puck over the blue line or constantly touching the puck on PP.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

Wingers have to be better on board abttles and they are responsible for more transitions in general, however centers are more responsibles for controlled entries and exits, and important transitions. Overall transitions is the Dman's job, and they need to be the best for your team to succeed. Centers overall have far more defensive responsibilities and are the ones that drive the play from the neutral zone onwards. They have to have the ability to play deep in all three ends.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

Generally, if a center and a winger have the same amount of points, the winger is better (see Maurice Richard's point finishes as a prime example). Wingers are more likely to be the goal-scorers and are less likely to rake in the assists just bringing the puck over the blue line or constantly touching the puck on PP.

So you're basically saying almost all wingers are better than centers? Right....

 

[Zuluss]

So you're basically saying almost all wingers are better than centers? Right....

Why would you think that?
I am saying that there are twice as many wingers in the league than centers, but top10 in points is usually 50% centers. That's not because centers are twice better, that's because it is easier for a center to pick up points.
If the points gap is sizeable (like 10-15%), then yes, the center is better than the winger.
Just look at the season that just ended: don't you think that Kucherov and Marchand had a better season than Backstrom and Scheifele?