cjsgro@watdragon.UUCP (Carlo Sgro) (03/04/86)
Warning: the following article contains plenty of unedited material. I usually cut down the preceding articles far more than this but I felt that it was necessary in order to maintain the spirit of this article. Please do not adjust your set. In article <7865@watrose.UUCP> gbelleville@watrose.UUCP (gbelleville) writes: >< Donning Asbestos Suit > Damn right, Gary! :-) > >> In article <1796@dciem.UUCP> jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes: >> >Dahlin's great stats are dismissed because >> >about half of them (13 goals and I don't know how many assists) have come >> >while playing on the top power-play in the league, with people like Mats >> >Naslund, Larry Robinson and Bobby Smith helping him out. >> I've seen Dahlin play a few times this >> year and am of the opinion that, if he were on a different line, he would be >> an acceptible rookie, but not good enough for the Calder. > I suggest you watch a few more Montreal games. > Kjell Dahlin is NOT riding on the coat tails of Naslund and Smith. > Did Montreal have the best power play last year? Noooooo. > And why do you suppose it is a lot better this year? > Did Bobby Smith score 80+ points last year? > Did Mats Naslund score 100+ points last year? > What has been added to the Montreal power play since last year? > Yup... Kjell Dahlin. I suggest that you review the principles of causation. Just because Dahlin is new does not mean that he is responsible for the success. Nor am I saying that he did not have a part in it, either. What I said was that Dahlin would not be good enough for the Calder. Is that a sin? He's still good but let's not go overboard here. >(Bobby Smith is the one benefitting from playing with Naslund and Dahlin). Smith finally has the type of atmosphere that made him such a success in Minnesota. He's a talented player who was not adapting to things in Montreal. I'm glad that he's finally clicking. Let's not minimize his effect on the other two, either. > >> >The name I hear the most as the league's top rookie is Toronto's Wendel >> >Clark, and that talk is coming from across Canada, not just the Toronto >> >area. Clark is well down the list of rookie scorers and Toronto scorers >> >with only 35 points, but what really catches people's eyes is his >> >aggressive play and his ability to get things going by whatever means are >> >appropriate, and he is seen as a much more complete player than Dahlin. >> >> Definitely! He can really get a game going with his hitting. >> He reminds me of Terry O'Reilly, except with more talent. > And we all know how many awards O'Reilly won. Come on! Do you mean to tell me that Terry O'Reilly was not a valuable member of the Boston Bruins?!? Before age crept up on him, O'Reilly was the team leader and a primary inspiration on the Bruins. I've always hated the Bruins but I've always admired Terry O'Reilly's spunk and value. By the way, in case you don't like the O'Reilly example, let me name a few more names from the past for you (and remember, add more talent, OK?): John Ferguson, Serge Savard, Butch Goring, Bobby Clarke ... > The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box. > How many goals has he cost the Leafs this year by stupid penalties? > (Like Saturday vs Detroit). I agree the man has goal scoring talent, > but its awful hard to score from the penalty box. He's just a rookie making mistakes of overaggressiveness. And sometimes when you're the only guy with guts out there you have to take some penalties in order to show the other team that you can't be pushed around (like going after (I think) Reed Larson on Friday night after Larson injured Salming). If you're going to yell at him for goals scored due to penalties then at least examine the other side of the ledger and take into account the number of goals that he produces both directly and indirectly due to his inspirational aggressive play. >> >> >Also, he has scored almost as many goals as Dahlin (26) playing on a bad team >> >with nowhere near as much help. What they fail to mention, however, is how >> >such a great complete player can have the second worst plus/minus on the >> >team (-27), >> But when you watch him play, you don't see any obvious flaws in his defensive >> style. > Ha! Maybe you don't but I do. He rarely back checks, and is always coasting > at centre ice. (The only reason he has so many goals is because Courtnall > is spoon-feeding him all the time). It's obvious that we see two different types of games. To me, it seems like Clark has directly produced Courtnall's improvement by letting him get more open ice. I claim that Clark is to Courtnall as you claim Dahlin is to Naslund and Smith (proportionately). > When someone is -27, that says something about his defensive ability. > And don't use that "HE'S ON THE LEAFS AND THEY ARE A CRUDDY TEAM" argument, > because that doesn't cut it. Check Courtnall's, Thomas' and Salming's > plus-minus. As far as his backchecking goes, it's no worse than Mr. Dahlin's (and I would say better). He's only a rookie playing on a lousy team. Like it or not, it is a valid argument (or do you believe that all players should be able to play like they've just played 5 years on the Edmonton Oilers?). > >> >Mike Ridley of the Rangers may also be ranked ahead of Dahlin. He's second >> >in rookie scoring, 13 points behind Dahlin, but he is leading his team in >> >scoring and getting much less help than Dahlin. He obviously means much more >> >to the Rangers than Dahlin does to Montreal. >> >> I haven't seen much of Ridley but, based on the numbers, I would agree with >> Jeff. > So What? > The Calder Trophy is not for the most valuable rookie, but for the *BEST* > rookie. Just because Clark plays for the hapless Leafs is no reason to hand > him the Calder. a) No one is *handing* him anything. b) Do you not define "best" as meaning best overall, including talent, aggressiveness, effect on the team, etc.? In that case, how can you categorically say "So What?" In doing that, you are saying that factors such as those mentioned above don't matter, instead of saying that we can make an incomplete judgement based on the information that we have. Don't forget, we're talking about Ridley here. c) Just because Dahlin plays for the Canadiens on a line with Naslund and Smith and regularly on the powerplay, let's not equate that with playing for the Leafs or the Rangers (as I stated before). > How can you justify giving the Calder to someone with NINE assists? By the same token, anyone with only 19 assists doesn't deserve to be on the All-Star team, right? I'm sure Tim Kerr would appreciate the vacation. > The last time I checked (3 weeks ago), Clark was 188 th in the NHL in > scoring. Rookie of the year??? Gimme a break. I call your attention to the aforementioned list of players, none of which would break the bank in any scoring race (except Mr. Clarke). Give *him* a break, huh? -- Carlo Sgro ...![ihnp4||decvax||allegra||clyde||utzoo]!watmath!watdragon!cjsgro "ihnp4 Express: Overnight to the USA or you don't pay!"
gbelleville@watrose.UUCP (gbelleville) (03/04/86)
> > < Donning Asbestos Suit > > Damn right, Gary! :-) It's getting mighty warm in here! :-) > > Kjell Dahlin is NOT riding on the coat tails of Naslund and Smith. > > Did Montreal have the best power play last year? Noooooo. > > And why do you suppose it is a lot better this year? > > What has been added to the Montreal power play since last year? > > Yup... Kjell Dahlin. > I suggest that you review the principles of causation. Just because Dahlin > is new does not mean that he is responsible for the success. Nor am I saying > that he did not have a part in it, either. OK fine. He's not the only reason, but he is a contributing factor. And that fact has been ignored in the media's evaluation of Dahlin. > >(Bobby Smith is the one benefitting from playing with Naslund and Dahlin). > Smith finally has the type of atmosphere that made him such a success in > Minnesota. He's a talented player who was not adapting to things in > Montreal. I'm glad that he's finally clicking. Let's not minimize his > effect on the other two, either. You are right, Bobby is playing better this year, but I don't think the powerplay would suffer without him. (I am confident Stephane Richer could be just as successfull). > > The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box. > > How many goals has he cost the Leafs this year by stupid penalties? > > (Like Saturday vs Detroit). I agree the man has goal scoring talent, > > but its awful hard to score from the penalty box. > He's just a rookie making mistakes of overaggressiveness. And sometimes when > you're the only guy with guts out there you have to take some penalties in > order to show the other team that you can't be pushed around (like going > after (I think) Reed Larson on Friday night after Larson injured Salming). Isn't that what Goons are for?? Why should you have your #1 draft pick playing policeman?? That job used to belong to Brubaker, but since the Leafs got Clark they don't need him anymore. You should have your garbage players doing the fighting so the people with goal scoring talent(like Clark) can put the puck in the net. Clark might have 35+ goals by now if he had stayed on the ice longer this year. > > > And don't use that "HE'S ON THE LEAFS AND THEY ARE A CRUDDY TEAM" argument, > > because that doesn't cut it. Check Courtnall's, Thomas' and Salming's > > plus-minus. > As far as his backchecking goes, it's no worse than Mr. Dahlin's (and I would > say better). He's only a rookie playing on a lousy team. Like it or not, > it is a valid argument (or do you believe that all players should be able > to play like they've just played 5 years on the Edmonton Oilers?). No, it is NOT a valid argument. You can't really believe that someone with a -27 plus/minus is no worse defensively than someone with a -2 plus/minus when they both play forward on the same team. Statistics do not tell the whole story, but this stat on Clark cannot be overlooked when one tries to decide who is the best rookie. > > > How can you justify giving the Calder to someone with NINE assists? > By the same token, anyone with only 19 assists doesn't deserve to be on > the All-Star team, right? I'm sure Tim Kerr would appreciate the > vacation. Wrongo. Consider that: 1) 19 is more than twice as much as 9, and that it was attained in fewer games 2) Kerr had an amazing number of goals 3) Please don't compare being named to the "All Star" team with winning a major NHL award. > > > The last time I checked (3 weeks ago), Clark was 188 th in the NHL in > > scoring. Rookie of the year??? Gimme a break. > I call your attention to the aforementioned list of players, none of which > would break the bank in any scoring race (except Mr. Clarke). Give *him* > a break, huh? Sure. But if he didn't get into double digits in assists in his rookie year thats *all* I would give him. Gary.