Jordan Staal status for next season

[Maaaasquito]

again with not bothering to read posts

Alright, so then write it out in plain english for me then, why is it that you think that Staal is a 70+ point threat again?

[lucifer316]

Isn't this what you're arguing? that because he gets ice-time of a top 3 forward that's why he'll be a 70 point threat?

What I'm questioning you on is that ice-time doesn't not 100% correlate with point production...

they are two separate statments i am not drawing a correlation between the two

[lucifer316]

Alright, so then write it out in plain english for me then, why is it that you think that Staal is a 70+ point threat again?

66 point pace with suspect linemates and pp icetime which was cut from the prior season

considering he is going to turn only 24 next season there is no reason to think that healthy he cant improve enough to get 70 points

thats my argument for him getting 70

[Maaaasquito]

66 point pace with suspect linemates and pp icetime which was cut from the prior season

considering he is going to turn only 24 next season there is no reason to think that healthy he cant improve enough to get 70 points

thats my argument for him getting 70

Ok my rebuttal to that would be that he has also spent the majority of the season without Crosby in the line up...

If you look at my posts, I've shown many statistical arguments to demonstrate that without Crosby in the line up, Staal is much better statistically... Now if Crosby and Malkin plays a full season, how can you expect Staal to keep playing at that high level of standard let alone surpass that standard as well. That's what I'm questioning...

Couple of things with your argument is that the 66 point-pace is pro-rated, so there's no guarantee that it's an achievable pace over the course of a full season. That's like me arguing that Marcus Foligno picked up 13 points in 14 games, so he must be a 76 point player... It just doesn't work that way...

Also that point pace was without Crosby, with Crosby in the line up, his offensive roles decreases as I've demonstrated with the stats in my other posts.

Another thing with your argument is that "with better line mates" he can... the problem is team structures aren't built that way... Most teams have a clear top-six, then a third line comprised of 3 30-45 point players. I mean you can't have a third line of 3 50-65 point players can you? In this salary cap world of the NHL, it just doesn't exist. So when you argue with better line mates he can be a 70+ point player, or a point-per-game player, I'd argue where are they gonna pluck those players from? Also most 50-65 pointers are there because they garner a decent amount of TOI on their respective clubs. You can stick a 60+ pointer in a 3rd line role and give him 3rd line time and he won't be a 60+ pointer. So giving him "better line mates" would maybe sway a couple of points here or there, it wouldn't make him a 70-point because of it.

In regards to ice-time, the overall ice-time is there (averages 20+ mins per game), I won't dispute that, but you've gotta break it down further to get a better understanding. Of that 20 mins, 15:25 is ES, 2:38 is SH, and 1:59 is on the PP. The major problem is over 13% of his overall ice-time comes from SH, which generally speaking is played in a much more defensive role (you rarely score while SH as opposed to being on the PP). Now if you compare that to Neal's TOI, 19:08 overall, 15:11 on ES, 0:01 is SH, and 3:55 is on the PP. the overall TOI you could argue is the same between Neal and Staal, but the PP TOI is where the major difference is. PP TOI is generally a much more offensive role, you score close to 17% of the time you're on the PP. So even though the overall TOI might dictate Staal has a "top 3" role in Pittsburgh, Neal is the much more productive offensive player.

Now a couple of things that you stated does make sense, he's only 24, so he has room to grow. Agreed with that statement, but what I will add is what areas do you think is it that he needs to grow in? I would argue that it's not growth that he needs but opportunity.

If healthy his points should increase. Agreed with that as well.

Better line mates, as highlighted before where would they come from? and if they're given Dupuis, Kennedy ice-time, how effective are they going to be anyway?

PP ice-time, once again I would argue that with Crosby/Malkin in the line up, there's no more time to spread around. Logically speaking, you have to give Malkin/Crosby 4+ mins a game, Neal has done well enough to maintain his top-PP unit spot, Letang is the the PP QB, so you wouldn't replace Letang with Staal... which kinda leaves the Sullivan/Kunitz spot up for grabs. Sullivan is a UFA, so let's assume that he's out of the picture for next season. Kunitz racked up 18 PPP on that unit. You can't boot him off to the 2nd line and insert Staal onto that top unit cause who would then be the center on the 2nd unit? You couldn't use Kunitz as the focal point of the 2nd unit cause that would reduce the effectiveness of the 2nd unit... So logically speaking, Staal is the best candidate to stay on the 2nd unit and average 1-2 mins on the PP to keep him fresh for PK duties... I mean you can't give him 15 mins ES, 3 on the PK and another 4 on the PP, he couldn't stay healthy/fresh all season while averaging 22 mins a game...

So while I do agree with you that he has the talent to be a 70-point player next season, the only way that he's going to get there is if Crosby/Malkin is injured which increases his offensive role with the team. To say that he's a lock for 70 with an upside of point-per-game is pulling something out of thin air and that there's a lot of assumptions in your line of thinking to get him to 70-points, which I don't think is feasible... That's like me saying Hall can be a 120 point scorer if he gets traded to the Pens... Well sure, but he ain't gonna be traded so that's a useless statement to make.

Anyone can come out and make bold statements without justification, but be prepared to be called out on it. There's too many "knowledgeable" people around these woods that they'll call your bluff...

[lucifer316]

Anyone can come out and make bold statements without justification, but be prepared to be called out on it. There's too many "knowledgeable" people around these woods that they'll call your bluff...

first of all a bold statment is saying the guy gets 90 points 70 points is hardly a bold statement and there is plenty of justification he has gotten better every single season and is quite young and likely to continue to get better its called development

as for you considering yourself knowledgable let me tell you something you know no more than i do what he will do next season so get off your high horse

[plug]

How about we get a mod to move the Stall argument/ 20,000 words to a different thread so we can read about what the thread was started far?

[Dakkster]

Wall of text is boring.

[Dakkster]

first of all a bold statment is saying the guy gets 90 points 70 points is hardly a bold statement and there is plenty of justification he has gotten better every single season and is quite young and likely to continue to get better its called development

as for you considering yourself knowledgable let me tell you something you know no more than i do what he will do next season so get off your high horse and kiss my ass

what a pompus douche bag you are

Our dear Ryan loooooooves to jerk off to all sorts of hockey statistics, almost to the point where you think that he doesn't actually watch any games.

[Maaaasquito]

first of all a bold statment is saying the guy gets 90 points 70 points is hardly a bold statement and there is plenty of justification he has gotten better every single season and is quite young and likely to continue to get better its called development

as for you considering yourself knowledgable let me tell you something you know no more than i do what he will do next season so get off your high horse and kiss my ass

what a pompus douche bag you are

70 points is a top 20 player... So when you say Staal is a lock for 70 points, you're essentially calling him a top 20 player, that's pretty bold IMO.

I'm not saying you're not knowledgeable, what I'm saying is that anyone under the sun can formulate an opinion, it's whether they can justify it or not, and in your case I don't think you've justifiable defended it enough to convince me otherwise... I would argue that with my history on this site, and the posts/columns that I do write along with my achievements in my fantasy hockey pools, that I do consider myself quite knowledgeable in terms of fantasy hockey. At least knowledgeable enough to formulate and defend a statement made by someone that I don't think is necessarily correct or defended properly... You are correct that I don't have a crystal ball to forecast what will happen next season, so I don't know any more or any less about next season as you do, but in my experience you can't just base your decisions on your opinion alone, you've got to have some logical explanation for it. Just cause someone says so and so has the potential to be a xx point player, doesn't mean that they're right. If they can justify it with reasoning and a point of argument then fair enough. But to just justify it with "well I think so..." doesn't fly with many people...

So go ahead and go into petty name calling, but I think I've reasonably defended my argument with concrete stats and figures, can you say the same?

[Maaaasquito]

Our dear Ryan loooooooves to jerk off to all sorts of hockey statistics, almost to the point where you think that he doesn't actually watch any games.

Damn right, still effective enough to sustain a point of argument and provide evidence to back it up. Funny enough that it's relatively effective in winning/doing well in fantasy hockey leagues too...

Funny how it works out like that.

There's plenty of worst things to jerk off to, so I guess you thinking that I do it to hockey stats probably isn't the worst thing in the world...

[lucifer316]

70 points is a top 20 player... So when you say Staal is a lock for 70 points, you're essentially calling him a top 20 player, that's pretty bold IMO.

I'm not saying you're not knowledgeable, what I'm saying is that anyone under the sun can formulate an opinion, it's whether they can justify it or not, and in your case I don't think you've justifiable defended it enough to convince me otherwise... I would argue that with my history on this site, and the posts/columns that I do write along with my achievements in my fantasy hockey pools, that I do consider myself quite knowledgeable in terms of fantasy hockey. At least knowledgeable enough to formulate and defend a statement made by someone that I don't think is necessarily correct or defended properly...

So go ahead and go into petty name calling, but I think I've reasonably defended my argument with concrete stats and figures, can you say the same?

sorry but your knowledge automatically becomes suspect when you equate extrapolating based on 62 games with extrapolating based on 14 games

you can consider yourself what ever you want and you can flex your internet muscles anyway you please and insult me then cry when i insult you in kind

we will see what happens if he is healthy next season and i have no problem admitting i am wrong if it turns out that way

[Maaaasquito]

But that's what I'm saying you can't just extrapolate data as if that's the expected outcome... 62 games isn't the same as 82 games... It's more concrete than 14 games, but you can't assume that what he did in 62 games is exactly what he would do in 82 games, that's a big assumption...

I've never once insulted you, but if you've interpreted that way, I apologize... I'm calling you out on your justification of your statement that you think Staal is a 70-point player nothing more nothing less... And I'm not flexing my internet muscle at all, I'm just wanting you to justify it, there's no difference between my opinion and your opinion in terms of value... I don't have a crystal ball to tell me exactly what's going to happen next year, nor do you (I think), so both of our opinions are weighted the same. What I feel that I've done a better job at is justified it with facts and figures to prove my side of the argument. I don't think you've presented your case well enough to convince me otherwise.

Trust me when I say I've been around the block long enough to see my fair share of arguments that are unjustified... as I said previously anyone under the sun can formulate an opinion, but when they justify it with "well that's my opinion... and can't back it up with anything substantive or concrete" that's when I'll question you as I have in the past with quite a few other forumers (ahem, MT319)...

Trust me I can take my fair share of lumps, I teach for a living, and get called much worst by the kids than a "pompous douche bag" so I can handle that, what irks me is I was assuming that we're having an "adult" conversation, and I expected better than name calling as your justification of your opinion.

But you're right, we'll just have to wait till next season and see what happens...

[lucifer316]

But that's what I'm saying you can't just extrapolate data as if that's the expected outcome... 62 games isn't the same as 82 games... It's more concrete than 14 games, but you can't assume that what he did in 62 games is exactly what he would do in 82 games, that's a big assumption...

its not a big assumption it is somehthing that is done in here all the time and something that is rarely questioned

I've never once insulted you, but if you've interpreted that way, I apologize... I'm calling you out on your justification of your statement that you think Staal is a 70-point player nothing more nothing less... And I'm not flexing my internet muscle at all, I'm just wanting you to justify it, there's no difference between my opinion and your opinion in terms of value... I don't have a crystal ball to tell me exactly what's going to happen next year, nor do you (I think), so both of our opinions are weighted the same. What I feel that I've done a better job at is justified it with facts and figures to prove my side of the argument. I don't think you've presented your case well enough to convince me otherwise.

your calling me unknowledgable is an insult im not sure how it is to be taken any other way

there are plenty of other predictions in here as well as in many posts on this board yet you decide for some reason mine is the one that needs justification

whatever

you jumped into a thread and took a post of mine out of context and when i responded you decided to criticize my statement while ignoring the hundreds of other predictions that go on in here every day of the week

i got offended when you misrepresented what i posted so you decided to hold me to a standard that few other predictions get held to in here thats your right but that seems as petty as my deciding to insult you in return

Trust me when I say I've been around the block long enough to see my fair share of arguments that are unjustified... as I said previously anyone under the sun can formulate an opinion, but when they justify it with "well that's my opinion... and can't back it up with anything substantive or concrete" that's when I'll question you as I have in the past with quite a few other forumers...

im sure you have as i said the forum is full of them right now none of which i see you taking exception to other than mine

Trust me I can take my fair share of lumps, I teach for a living, and get called much worst by the kids than a "pompous douche bag" so I can handle that, what irks me is I was assuming that we're having an "adult" conversation, and I expected better than name calling for the justification of your opinion.

shit your doing a good job if your students pull off pompus douche bag

i assumed it was adult as well also until you equated my extrapolation of 62 games with 14 games when this kind of extrapolation goes on all the time and when you decided to infer i was unknowledgeable

But you're right, we'll just have to wait till next season and see what happens...

of course remember going into this season price was going to be the best goalie in the league i would imagine plenty of people got that one wrong

look im sorry for my end of letting this get out of hand so whatever

[Maaaasquito]

its not a big assumption it is somehthing that is done in here all the time and something that is rarely questioned

I don't spend 24/7 on the website (as opposed to what my fiance thinks...) so I don't scroll through every post and question every single thing that I disagree with. Your's was one that I felt strongly about so I commented... and I thought it was worthwhile to argue against. Just cause there are many around doesn't mean that I'm obligated to have to argue against it. Doesn't change the fact that my opinion is completely different than yours...

your calling me unknowledgable is an insult im not sure how it is to be taken any other way

Anyone can come out and make bold statements without justification, but be prepared to be called out on it. There's too many "knowledgeable" people around these woods that they'll call your bluff...

I didn't call you "unknowledgeable". If you read my statement, it reads that you can't just go around making bold statements and justify it with "well that's my opinion", there's too many people (like me) who will call you out on it... Just like in my weekly columns, I write something that isn't to the liking of Pengwin and he'll be the first to jump on my back about it... When you write something out in a public forum, if it can be questioned it will be...

there are plenty of other predictions in here as well as in many posts on this board yet you decide for some reason mine is the one that needs justification

whatever

you jumped into a thread and took a post of mine out of context and when i responded you decided to criticize my statement while ignoring the hundreds of other predictions that go on in here every day of the week

hahaha this is exactly what my students say back to me... "Mr. Ma you're always picking on me..." so and so is doing it too and you're not doing anything to them... Just cause others are doing it doesn't make it acceptable for you to do it... I just so happened to stumble upon your post and decided to question it. I didn't stumble to others that I thought deserved to be questioned...

i got offended when you misrepresented what i posted so you decided to hold me to a standard that few other predictions get held to in here thats your right but that seems as petty as my deciding to insult you in return

There's no need to be offended, it's just an internet forum at the end of the day, don't need to be so serious about it. I was just curious as to what was your reasoning behind thinking that Staal is a 70-point player that is all. Obviously I care about the matter or else I wouldn't have spent the last 2 hours digging up stats and stuff to justify my opinion... I guess I'm just too passionate about fantasy hockey that when someone makes a statement that I don't think is true/feasible, I'll go out of my way to try to prove them wrong or convince them otherwise...

shit your doing a good job if your students pull off pompus douche bag

I'm the PE teacher, so I don't really go that terribly with them... But I am the "Nazi" of the school supposedly hahaha...

i assumed it was adult as well also until you equated my extrapolation of 62 games with 14 games when this kind of extrapolation goes on all the time and when you decided to infer i was unknowledgeable

Honestly I apologize if you interpreted that way... I'm not saying you're unknowledgeable, everyone has knowledge and can formulate an opinion, just like anything else in the world, there are some that hold more water and there are some that you brush aside. It's how well you defend/justify it that's where the value of the opinion comes from. There are lots of "knowledgeable" people here on the boards and probably the best in terms of fantasy hockey knowledge on the net, that they will call you out to justify it if it doesn't make sense to them. Like Pengwin, he'll call me out every week if he finds something he doesn't like with my columns... On DH, you can't just go around making senseless claims anymore is what I'm trying to get across.

of course remember going into this season price was going to be the best goalie in the league i would imagine plenty of people got that one wrong

Don't get me wrong there's tons and tons of opinions that are outright wrong and many that are absolutely spot on. Many of them I've called them out on as well, so it's not just you I'm "picking on". If you have some spare time, search up MT319 and look up a few of the epic battles I've had with him in the past...

look im sorry for my end of letting this get out of hand so whatever

Naw nothing to be sorry about, it's a internet forum, if you aren't allowed to have an opinion on here where else can you have one...

[lucifer316]

it doesnt matter if crosby and malkin are healthy or not staals job doesnt change he is the shutdown center

it doesnt matter if crosby and malkin are healthy or not staals wingers are likely to be shitty hell most of their career crosby and malkin have been stuck with shitty wingers thats just the pens thing shitty wingers

even when all three have been healthy staal has gotten around 2 min on the pp it went up to 3 the season all three missed considerable time however when all three have been healthy he has gotten 2 min and when two of them have been reasonably healthy he has gotten 2 min so the 2 min is likely not going to change

the guy is 23 years old i dont see him as having his development offensively end at this age as this flies contrary to what we tend to see on players around the league

hell only 7 of the guys points came on the pp this season so even if his pp time disappears im not sure that isnt overcome by his natural development