Game 1 - Habs @ Leafs - Thursday Oct 6th 2011 - 19:00 EST - 2-0 Win

[ZBBM]

Pretty much.  Even if everyone was in the lineup and healthy, the forwards are a pretty suspect bunch after Mac/Grabs/Kuli.

Kessel and Lupul are suspect?

Very.

Sarcasm? At least on the Kessel front?

Every scorer is streaky, even Almo was streaky. I think we should let the season play out for a few games before we dump on our team.

Just being (as I see it) realistic.  I am hoping to be wrong, believe me.

 

[bustaheims]

Just being (as I see it) realistic.  I am hoping to be wrong, believe me.

Only 15 players have scored more goals than Kessel over the last 3 seasons. He may not be spectacular defensively, but, he's far from suspect. Inconsistent, maybe, but not suspect.

 

[Kin]

Only 15 players have scored more goals than Kessel over the last 3 seasons. He may not be spectacular defensively, but, he's far from suspect. Inconsistent, maybe, but not suspect.

I think it's a pretty fair statement if you look at things aside from goal scoring. That's not to diminish the impact his scoring has but overall I think there's legitimate questions as to his value.

 

[ZBBM]

Only 15 players have scored more goals than Kessel over the last 3 seasons. He may not be spectacular defensively, but, he's far from suspect. Inconsistent, maybe, but not suspect.

I think it's a pretty fair statement if you look at things aside from goal scoring. That's not to diminish the impact his scoring has but overall I think there's legitimate questions as to his value.

And I would say one thing that lessens the value of his scoring is its streakiness.  Again not a problem on an elite team, but for us, more consistency (which would hopefully translate into a few more GWGs, say) would be useful.

 

[bustaheims]

I think it's a pretty fair statement if you look at things aside from goal scoring. That's not to diminish the impact his scoring has but overall I think there's legitimate questions as to his value.

I'm not so sure that's true. Kessel's job is to score goals, and he's been among the best in the league at doing so. That's what he gets paid for, that's why he gets the ice time he gets, it's  why Burke paid so much to go out and get him. It is far and way the single biggest point of him game by which he should be judged. Everything else has its place in analysis, sure, but, when you're looking at a sniper, it's all secondary to his offensive production - specifically his goal scoring. That's not to say there aren't areas of his game that can be improved, but, he's doing exactly what he's paid for, and, as far as I'm concerned, that makes him pretty far from being "suspect." He may not be a superstar, but, he's a 1st line winger on pretty much every team in the league - and, I fail to see how that can be considered "suspect."

 

[Stronger Than All]

let's win!

GO LEAFS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Habs Suck!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kin]

I'm not so sure that's true. Kessel's job is to score goals, and he's been among the best in the league at doing so.

Yeah, I don't think there's a point in a player's career where you just arbitrarily label him a "sniper" and decide that other elements of his game don't factor into his overall evaluation. There are lots of guys who score a bunch who we all are able to evaluate critically for their shortcomings elsewhere(Semin, Heatley, Ribeiro) and question their overall value/worth to a team.

In fact, it almost seems as though it's an attempt especially to penalize a well rounded player and reward a player for being one-dimensional. Like his failings render those failings moot because he's a "sniper" and not an overall player who still scores goals like a Brenden Morrow or Dustin Brown and can be judged on what they're contributing in all aspects.

Kessel's job is to play hockey. At issue is how good he is at it.

 

[puckinthehead]

Any Game feeds?? Thanks in advance.

 

[AvroArrow]

Only 15 players have scored more goals than Kessel over the last 3 seasons. He may not be spectacular defensively, but, he's far from suspect. Inconsistent, maybe, but not suspect.

I think it's a pretty fair statement if you look at things aside from goal scoring. That's not to diminish the impact his scoring has but overall I think there's legitimate questions as to his value.

And I would say one thing that lessens the value of his scoring is its streakiness.  Again not a problem on an elite team, but for us, more consistency (which would hopefully translate into a few more GWGs, say) would be useful.

Well, in fairness, is it Kessel's fault that we lack the scoring punch or defensive prowess of an elite team?

I still think you need to drop your expectations of Kessel.  I think he's a frequently dangerous, yet streaky 30 goal man.  If he does more, it's just a bonus.

 

[Number 5]

Any Game feeds?? Thanks in advance.

Doesn't the CBC stream their feeds?

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Any Game feeds?? Thanks in advance.

Doesn't the CBC stream their feeds?

Only if you're in Canada.

 

[bustaheims]

Yeah, I don't think there's a point in a player's career where you just arbitrarily label him a "sniper" and decide that other elements of his game don't factor into his overall evaluation. There are lots of guys who score a bunch who we all are able to evaluate critically for their shortcomings elsewhere(Semin, Heatley, Ribeiro) and question their overall value/worth to a team.

In fact, it almost seems as though it's an attempt especially to penalize a well rounded player and reward a player for being one-dimensional. Like his failings render those failings moot because he's a "sniper" and not an overall player who still scores goals like a Brenden Morrow or Dustin Brown and can be judged on what they're contributing in all aspects.

Kessel's job is to play hockey. At issue is how good he is at it.

There's a world of difference between being able to be a more well-rounded player and being "suspect," as the initial series of posts referred to. Of course Kessel could be better. There isn't a player in the history of the league who hasn't had areas where they could have been better. Nor does the fact that Kessel's not suspect make him better than a Morrow or a Brown - no one here has said he is, nor would they say that they didn't wish he could exhibit some of those missing aspects of his game with some regularity. No one is saying he's without his flaws, either, or saying you can't question his value or worth to the team. These are all separate discussions. we're simply saying that calling him suspect is a pretty significant overstatement and really minimizes his impact on the team. Teams win hockey games by scoring more goals than the other team, and, over the last 3 seasons, Kessel has been among the best in the league at helping his team score goals. I fail to see how anyone could look at that and consider him to be "suspect" in an overall sense. Aspects of his game as suspect, sure, but he's not a suspect player in the grander sense of things.

 

[Derk]

Go Leafs Go!

5-1.

 

[puckinthehead]

CBC? Nice. Thanx

Leafs break out fast with 2 goals...win 4-2.

 

[Kin]

There's a world of difference between being able to be a more well-rounded player and being "suspect," as the initial series of posts referred to. Of course Kessel could be better. There isn't a player in the history of the league who hasn't had areas where they could have been better. Nor does the fact that Kessel's not suspect make him better than a Morrow or a Brown - no one here has said he is, nor would they say that they didn't wish he could exhibit some of those missing aspects of his game with some regularity. No one is saying he's without his flaws, either, or saying you can't question his value or worth to the team. These are all separate discussions. we're simply saying that calling him suspect is a pretty significant overstatement and really minimizes his impact on the team. Teams win hockey games by scoring more goals than the other team, and, over the last 3 seasons, Kessel has been among the best in the league at helping his team score goals. I fail to see how anyone could look at that and consider him to be "suspect" in an overall sense. Aspects of his game as suspect, sure, but he's not a suspect player in the grander sense of things.

First of all, you know as well as I do that "suspect" isn't a synonym for "bad" so to base that strong an objection around the definition of a vaguely defined term isn't an argument you're going do terribly well in or interest a lot of people in. Saying his value as a player is suspect, that perhaps his statistical record, in the most basic sense, doesn't paint the most accurate picture of his value to a hockey club is not the same thing as saying "Kessel suckz!"

You say "...over the last 3 seasons, Kessel has been among the best in the league at helping his team score goals" which is something that Kessel boosters do a lot. They'll group him in with goal scorers who've scored nearly twice as many as he has while trying to exclude guys who've scored one or two fewer than him and paint an unrealistic picture of Kessel's offensive prowess. Kessel, over the past three years, has scored significantly more goals than Henrik Sedin but nobody in their right mind would suggest that Kessel has done more to help his team score goals than Henrik Sedin. Helping your team score goals is not simply a tally of goals scored. Setting them up, forechecking, making that good outlet pass, those are things that help a team score goals. If we're going to be judging these players on how much they help a team put a puck in the back of a net then it's more than goals scored and Kessel doesn't hit the top of the list simply by virtue of being relatively healthy over the last three years and scoring 30 or so a year. Is goal scoring an important component? Absolutely but it's not close to being the total picture of a player's offensive value, to say nothing of their total value as a player.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Yeah, I don't think there's a point in a player's career where you just arbitrarily label him a "sniper" and decide that other elements of his game don't factor into his overall evaluation. There are lots of guys who score a bunch who we all are able to evaluate critically for their shortcomings elsewhere(Semin, Heatley, Ribeiro) and question their overall value/worth to a team.

In fact, it almost seems as though it's an attempt especially to penalize a well rounded player and reward a player for being one-dimensional. Like his failings render those failings moot because he's a "sniper" and not an overall player who still scores goals like a Brenden Morrow or Dustin Brown and can be judged on what they're contributing in all aspects.

Kessel's job is to play hockey. At issue is how good he is at it.

There's a world of difference between being able to be a more well-rounded player and being "suspect," as the initial series of posts referred to. Of course Kessel could be better. There isn't a player in the history of the league who hasn't had areas where they could have been better. Nor does the fact that Kessel's not suspect make him better than a Morrow or a Brown - no one here has said he is, nor would they say that they didn't wish he could exhibit some of those missing aspects of his game with some regularity. No one is saying he's without his flaws, either, or saying you can't question his value or worth to the team. These are all separate discussions. we're simply saying that calling him suspect is a pretty significant overstatement and really minimizes his impact on the team. Teams win hockey games by scoring more goals than the other team, and, over the last 3 seasons, Kessel has been among the best in the league at helping his team score goals. I fail to see how anyone could look at that and consider him to be "suspect" in an overall sense. Aspects of his game as suspect, sure, but he's not a suspect player in the grander sense of things.

Agreed.

How MacArthur isn't suspect with such a limited track record of success but Kessel is......well that's just beyond me.

 

[bustaheims]

First of all, you know as well as I do that "suspect" isn't a synonym for "bad" so to base that strong an objection around the definition of a vaguely defined term isn't an argument you're going do terribly well in or interest a lot of people in.

You're right, it doesn't mean bad, but generally it used to mean "unqualified for the role he's being used in" which is simply not true of Kessel.

 

[iwas11in67]

5-4 Leafs.

 

[Kin]

You're right, it doesn't mean bad, but generally it used to mean "unqualified for the role he's being used in" which is simply not true of Kessel.

If someone is using it to express doubts about the level of Kessel's value to the team, which is A) a perfectly valid concern and B) an entirely correct use of the word, they're pretty safe and, personally, I'd think the response should be more "in what way" as opposed to a strict yes or no.

 

[Tigger]

No Betts for the habs? Sounds about right...

Was kind of looking forward to comparing him to Steckel.