A good PP is a beautiful thing to watch.
- powerhouse

Absolutely it can be. Unfortunately we only get to see that beauty a small percentage of the time, the majority of the time it's just wasted perimeter play waiting for someone to make a mistake.

Well... okay then ya perv
- Guile

you call it being a perv, I call it true love

Is Spezza playing wing? Where's Hörnqvist on this list?
- Barnaby36

Hörnqvist is the same as Oshie at 0.45.

As for Spezza, I originally started it including centres, then I narrowed it to wingers, but I missed chopping him from the list.

The thing with Kessel is he has produced at virtually the same pace in the playoffs, wherever he has played. 15 points in 15 games with Boston, 6 points in 7 games with Toronto, and now 22 in 24 with Pittsburgh.

Additionally, very few players have higher PPG in the playoffs than they do in the regular season. Phil is 0.77 in the regular season and 0.93 in the playoffs. That's a considerable jump in performance at a time when checking gets harder.

Today's NHL is a snooze fest most nights. Teams play to not lose. I want to see records broken or at least challenged. Goalie pads are stupid big. In the 90's you could mug a guy, but there were still a dozen or so 100 pt players and multiple 50 g players. Making everything a penalty and constant PP's is dumb. Not saying every game should be 8-7, but too many 2-1 games sucks. Then again I miss steroids in baseball.

no for sure...you have to be horrific at the right times.

Lemieux
Jagr
Crosby
Malkin
Staal
Fleury


- Garnie

4 out of 5 years in the late 80,s and early 90's the Penguins drafted Rechi, Jagr, Naslund, and Straka. That's pretty damn good even though they traded Naslund for trash, I still have t gotten over that mess.

I agree, I don't even count cups from the Original 6 era...kind of silly...but drafting 1,2,1,2 in 4 years is just as silly....team goes from moving to a new town to a dynasty...all from sucking...while teams that were drawing fans and trying to make the playoffs just keep getting worse. They need to put a cap on top 10 picks or top 5 or top 3 or whatever they found to be the best recipe.






- Garnie

In the past 25 years the Penguins have had much more success than most teams. Like 16 Hart trophies and 15 Art Ross. They really had 4 bad years and yes they got great players out of it but if you turn high picks into a decade and a half of success what's the problem with that? The ownership in those days was horrible and fans gav up on them after they salary dumped player after player. There was no reason for the fans to support the team during those days. The leafs had the same thing the entire Ballard era, the only difference is Pittsburgh fans wouldn't tolerate a garbage product and Toronto fans pat themselves on the back for doing it.

In the past 25 years the Penguins have had much more success than most teams. Like 16 Hart trophies and 15 Art Ross. They really had 4 bad years and yes they got great players out of it but if you turn high picks into a decade and a half of success what's the problem with that? The ownership in those days was horrible and fans gav up on them after they salary dumped player after player. There was no reason for the fans to support the team during those days. The leafs had the same thing the entire Ballard era, the only difference is Pittsburgh fans wouldn't tolerate a garbage product and Toronto fans pat themselves on the back for doing it.
- Dcoms

They had what 4 bad years? 00-01 Lemieux came back and they had a decent run. They then went on to finish 5th in the Atlantic 4 years in a row. The Leafs and many other teams have done far worse. I think a good ownership group knows when to go all in, when they have a decent playoff team and when to bail.

In the past 25 years the Penguins have had much more success than most teams. Like 16 Hart trophies and 15 Art Ross. They really had 4 bad years and yes they got great players out of it but if you turn high picks into a decade and a half of success what's the problem with that? The ownership in those days was horrible and fans gav up on them after they salary dumped player after player. There was no reason for the fans to support the team during those days. The leafs had the same thing the entire Ballard era, the only difference is Pittsburgh fans wouldn't tolerate a garbage product and Toronto fans pat themselves on the back for doing it.
- Dcoms

Easily said when you get Lemieux / Crosby

4 years?

You drafted 5 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 2 in the 2000's and ended up with possibly the top 2 players in the league

Late 80's you drafted 1 - 2 - 4 - 5 - 4 and drafted the best player to ever play


If it wasn't for Sid you guys made might have even moved cities...sure the Leafs have screwed up lots...but Pitts has had it pretty easy in comparison.

Easily said when you get Lemieux / Crosby

4 years?

You drafted 5 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 2 in the 2000's and ended up with possibly the top 2 players in the league

Late 80's you drafted 1 - 2 - 4 - 5 - 4 and drafted the best player to ever play


If it wasn't for Sid you guys made might have even moved cities...sure the Leafs have screwed up lots...but Pitts has had it pretty easy in comparison.
- Garnie

how many times in the past 10-15 yrs have the Leafs been in the bottom 1/2 of the standings? All of those top 15 1st rounders and they cant even make the playoffs. Having top 5 picks have nothing to do with it (cough EDM cough) It has more to do with smart management and a fan base that wont tolerate crap on ice vs a fan base that drives talent away with their overblown expectations on marginal talent.

how many times in the past 10-15 yrs have the Leafs been in the bottom 1/2 of the standings? All of those top 15 1st rounders and they cant even make the playoffs. Having top 5 picks have nothing to do with it (cough EDM cough) It has more to do with smart management and a fan base that wont tolerate crap on ice vs a fan base that drives talent away with their overblown expectations on marginal talent.
- sammy87

Bottom half doesn't land you Lemieux or Crosby, Malkin....but carry on

Smart management has zero to do with drafting in the top 2 spots for 1/2 a decade.

As I stated...Leafs haven't been good at all, but until recently ( last 5 years or so ) they haven't had a sniff at a SUPER STAR.

Lol no need for salt, I wasn't bashing your team at all. Anyways, that's kind of a redundant statement seeing that Versteeg is better than at least 3-5 players on any NHL roster. And if you think he would crack our top 6, you obviously don't follow hockey much outside of your team, because while our defense sucks, we have one of the deepest forward groups in the league.
- SpeedBlue91

You're mistaking having a 'lot of forwards' with a 'lot of quality forwards'. Big difference.

Bottom half doesn't land you Lemieux or Crosby, Malkin....but carry on

Smart management has zero to do with drafting in the top 2 spots for 1/2 a decade.

As I stated...Leafs haven't been good at all, but until recently ( last 5 years or so ) they haven't had a sniff at a SUPER STAR.
- Garnie

I'm not going to say I have nearly half the idea of about the history of the game as you, but to be able to draft those players when it counts you're either extremely lucky or genius. You can't just drop from the clouds & pick #1, you have to be around a bouts don't you the previous year or 2? That means if you say the tanking was precision tanking the team all of a sudden got terminal very quickly, or the team was bad for those previous years legitimately. I can't remember but I think the Pens had a fire sale going into the 66 draft year or were they close to going under & had to offload their players? They were bad for Sid's draft & probably did what Toronto is doing now & stayed down to get a few more quality players - crazy not to. (The Oil have not read the tanking instructions correctly - some idiot tore up the last couple of pages where the team is supposed to get good!)

Buffalo tanked hard to get a shot at McD, but they were bad as well. Could they have improved? Yes. The Oil were just an unbelievable poop fight but they were very lucky unless someone wants to say Bettman rigged the draw??

Looking for a superstar when you tank is a 4/5 year study, if the organisation is that good at scouting 12/13 year old then tank away. LA didn't draft an elite player(s), & the Hawks it 'can' be said are very lucky with contracts, injuries & were coached well with the talent they had. Neither team has a 99, 66 or 87 on it. We'll see what McD can come up with because he may rewrite the tanking philosophy - just because you have a generational player your team may still be high on the 'suck' chart without educated management.

I'm not going to say I have nearly half the idea of about the history of the game as you, but to be able to draft those players when it counts you're either extremely lucky or genius. You can't just drop from the clouds & pick #1, you have to be around a bouts don't you the previous year or 2? That means if you say the tanking was precision tanking the team all of a sudden got terminal very quickly, or the team was bad for those previous years legitimately. I can't remember but I think the Pens had a fire sale going into the 66 draft year or were they close to going under & had to offload their players? They were bad for Sid's draft & probably did what Toronto is doing now & stayed down to get a few more quality players - crazy not to. (The Oil have not read the tanking instructions correctly - some idiot tore up the last couple of pages where the team is supposed to get good!)

Buffalo tanked hard to get a shot at McD, but they were bad as well. Could they have improved? Yes. The Oil were just an unbelievable poop fight but they were very lucky unless someone wants to say Bettman rigged the draw??


Looking for a superstar when you tank is a 4/5 year study, if the organisation is that good at scouting 12/13 year old then tank away. LA didn't draft an elite player(s), & the Hawks it 'can' be said are very lucky with contracts, injuries & were coached well with the talent they had. Neither team has a 99, 66 or 87 on it. We'll see what McD can come up with because he may rewrite the tanking philosophy - just because you have a generational player your team may still be high on the 'suck' chart without educated management.
- Aussiepenguin

Well obviously it's luck to get the Lemieux's / Crosby's / McDavid. I just find it funny when other fans say the Leafs fans shouldn't be supporting their team in the down years....which lead to the Pens filing for bankruptcy twice and almost having to change cities before they won Sidney Crosby.

I like the Pens (well I used too with Mario ) now I cheer hard against them

Easily said when you get Lemieux / Crosby

4 years?

You drafted 5 - 1 - 2 - 1 - 2 in the 2000's and ended up with possibly the top 2 players in the league

Late 80's you drafted 1 - 2 - 4 - 5 - 4 and drafted the best player to ever play


If it wasn't for Sid you guys made might have even moved cities...sure the Leafs have screwed up lots...but Pitts has had it pretty easy in comparison.
- Garnie

I guess I don't get what your point is. The business model has been the same, built on a cylcle of being bad and getting good picks so the team is great for years at a time. If we didn't get Crosby we still would have had Malkin and maybe got Toews and Kane instead. It sure beats the maple leaf business model of trading picks for players that are good not great and heaping unattainable expectations on them and then acting shocked when it all falls apart and then doing the exact same thing instead of building a team with 3-5 years of good draft picks. You have to get lucky too of course. Letang was a third round pick you have to have a few of those too. Toronto could have Seguin and Dougie Hamilton right now if they didn't waste their picks. Are we supposed to feel bad because we build dynasty's and realize that they end and new ones have to be built. I fully expect the Penguins to be a bottom feeder team in less than 10 years for about 4-5 years and then be a contender again. It's what we do

I guess I don't get what your point is. The business model has been the same, built on a cylcle of being bad and getting good picks so the team is great for years at a time. If we didn't get Crosby we still would have had Malkin and maybe got Toews and Kane instead. It sure beats the maple leaf business model of trading picks for players that are good not great and heaping unattainable expectations on them and then acting shocked when it all falls apart and then doing the exact same thing instead of building a team with 3-5 years of good draft picks. You have to get lucky too of course. Letang was a third round pick you have to have a few of those too. Toronto could have Seguin and Dougie Hamilton right now if they didn't waste their picks. Are we supposed to feel bad because we build dynasty's and realize that they end and new ones have to be built. I fully expect the Penguins to be a bottom feeder team in less than 10 years for about 4-5 years and then be a contender again. It's what we do
- Dcoms

Leafs sure havent done the greatest job in trading/drafting for sure...let's just end it at that.

Bottom half doesn't land you Lemieux or Crosby, Malkin....but carry on

Smart management has zero to do with drafting in the top 2 spots for 1/2 a decade.

As I stated...Leafs haven't been good at all, but until recently ( last 5 years or so ) they haven't had a sniff at a SUPER STAR.
- Garnie

Sharks dont have a super star. They have an old Thornton and Marleau, yet they made it to the finals, they have drafted well.

You sound like my sister in law. Majored in art, works as a barista, pissed at everyone else that's doing better than her and blames it all on corporate America for her own mistakes. Leafs have been poorly managed for a long time. The fans/media create an environment that nobody wants to be a part of.

I guess I don't get what your point is. The business model has been the same, built on a cylcle of being bad and getting good picks so the team is great for years at a time. If we didn't get Crosby we still would have had Malkin and maybe got Toews and Kane instead. It sure beats the maple leaf business model of trading picks for players that are good not great and heaping unattainable expectations on them and then acting shocked when it all falls apart and then doing the exact same thing instead of building a team with 3-5 years of good draft picks. You have to get lucky too of course. Letang was a third round pick you have to have a few of those too. Toronto could have Seguin and Dougie Hamilton right now if they didn't waste their picks. Are we supposed to feel bad because we build dynasty's and realize that they end and new ones have to be built. I fully expect the Penguins to be a bottom feeder team in less than 10 years for about 4-5 years and then be a contender again. It's what we do
- Dcoms

I say we blame the Oil for the Leafs woes - hogging all those #1 & top 10 picks!!!!

Sharks dont have a super star. They have an old Thornton and Marleau, yet they made it to the finals, they have drafted well.

You sound like my sister in law. Majored in art, works as a barista, pissed at everyone else that's doing better than her and blames it all on corporate America for her own mistakes. Leafs have been poorly managed for a long time. The fans/media create an environment that nobody wants to be a part of.
- sammy87

I think you're off base here. Joe Pavelski and Brent Burns are certainly super stars. Even in their old age Jumbo and Marleu are still high caliber players as is Coture. Add in Vlasic and for my money the Sharks have one of the best pure cores in the league. They've certainly drafted well and filled out their supporting cast with good players such as Braun, Donskoi, and Hertl and the Sharks have a solid chance at contending again this year.

Well obviously it's luck to get the Lemieux's / Crosby's / McDavid. I just find it funny when other fans say the Leafs fans shouldn't be supporting their team in the down years....which lead to the Pens filing for bankruptcy twice and almost having to change cities before they won Sidney Crosby.

I like the Pens (well I used too with Mario ) now I cheer hard against them
- Garnie

I think the 'why are you supporting 'that' team', is just an easy shot at the organisation. Who are you supposed to support? Real fans support 'their' team no matter what - even through the most extreme cases of mismanagement they're still your team. In saying that the best way to make changes is boycott the (frank)ers!!

I think the 'why are you supporting 'that' team', is just an easy shot at the organisation. Who are you supposed to support? Real fans support 'their' team no matter what - even through the most extreme cases of mismanagement they're still your team. In saying that the best way to make changes is boycott the (frank)ers!!
- Aussiepenguin

I don't buy much anyways...I just watch the (frank)ers on tv.

I think you're off base here. Joe Pavelski and Brent Burns are certainly super stars. Even in their old age Jumbo and Marleu are still high caliber players as is Coture. Add in Vlasic and for my money the Sharks have one of the best pure cores in the league. They've certainly drafted well and filled out their supporting cast with good players such as Braun, Donskoi, and Hertl and the Sharks have a solid chance at contending again this year.
- Victoro311

Burns is awesome.....The point is the Sharks havent had any top 3 draft picks in the past 10 years that I remember and they still have a good team. His claim that the Leafs are unlucky is just stupid. There are lots of teams that make the playoffs every year and not have top 5 picks. Quit coming up with excuses for failures.

I think the 'why are you supporting 'that' team', is just an easy shot at the organisation. Who are you supposed to support? Real fans support 'their' team no matter what - even through the most extreme cases of mismanagement they're still your team. In saying that the best way to make changes is boycott the (frank)ers!!
- Aussiepenguin

Dumbest argument. Pens fans quit showing up during the bad years and management paid the price and took action. Makes no sense to constantly waste money and time on crap.

I would actually say that if you honestly think that Nash, Stepan, Zuccarello, Kredier, Zibanejad, Fast, Miller, Hayes, Vesey is 1 of the deepest forward groups in the NHL, you may be the person that needs to start watching more hockey outside of your team. It's by no means a bad top 9 but it's realistically slightly above average and would probably sit in the 7-10 range overall.
- jaydogg1974

1. You forgot Buchnevich, Fast is not a true top 9 player.
2. If they are in the 7-10 range, that would mean they're a top 10 forward group out of 30 teams. You wouldnt consider that as one of the best in the league?

I certainly don't think they're THE best. But while they might not have any 80-90 pt guys, everyone in their top 9 is capable of at least 50 pts while being defensively responsible for the most part. Maybe I should rephrase, they have one of the most balanced, well rounded forward groups in the league. And if some of their young forwards pan out/continue progressing, they could very well become a top 5 forward group.

You're mistaking having a 'lot of forwards' with a 'lot of quality forwards'. Big difference.
- Aussiepenguin

I think you're mistaking having "alot of quality forwards" with having "alot of Hart trophy candidates". Big difference as well lol

Sharks dont have a super star. They have an old Thornton and Marleau, yet they made it to the finals, they have drafted well.

You sound like my sister in law. Majored in art, works as a barista, pissed at everyone else that's doing better than her and blames it all on corporate America for her own mistakes. Leafs have been poorly managed for a long time. The fans/media create an environment that nobody wants to be a part of.
- sammy87

ok