 |
|
 |
|
Next: Move the Capitals to Winnipeg
|
| Author |
Message |
External

Since: Oct 08, 2003 Posts: 15
|
(Msg. 16) Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Ovechkin [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: alt>sports>hockey>nhl>wash-capitals (more info?)
|
|
|
Comment on Mario:
The guy was truly amazing to me. He seemed to exert some kind of force
field around himself, which kept anybody from getting within ten feet of
him. I was always amazed to see him standing still, wide open by the side
boards, and no player would approach him closer than ten feet, and there
they'd stand waving their stick back and forth ineffectively while Mario
calmly handled the puck and looked for his next assist. It was the same
thing in front of the net, too, where often he was so wide open as to have
been wearing a kryptonite uniform and surrounded by opposition "supermen."
I contrast this to other great players and power-forward scorers, who seemed
always to accomplish their objectives with people hanging all over them. As
someone else mentioned, Jagr scored brilliant goals while maneuvering
through a whole team and getting his brains beat out, but Mario was rarely
touched. It's curious.
Despite his gaudy stats, I'd place Mario right up there with Eric Lindros in
the NHL Crybaby Hall of Fame.
"Jeff Rudacille" <ghghgh.DeleteThis@gjgjgjg.com> wrote in message
news:D5JHc.10639$R36.1385@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I looked it up. Got into a "Scrap" with Todd Kryiger...which was the one
I
> was thinking of.
>
> Lemieux hadn't been ejected from a game for fighting since April 24, 1996,
> when he mixed it up with Washington's Todd Krygier in Game 4 of the
Eastern
> Conference quarterfinals. Thursday's fighting major was his first in a
> regular-season game since March 20, 1987 at Washington, when he tangled
with
> Bobby Gould.
>
>
>
> >> Stay informed about: Ovechkin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 10, 2003 Posts: 19
|
(Msg. 17) Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Ovechkin [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <n%THc.13791$mz5.4371@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>,
"Tack" <none-now.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Comment on Mario:
>
> The guy was truly amazing to me. He seemed to exert some kind of force
> field around himself, which kept anybody from getting within ten feet of
> him. I was always amazed to see him standing still, wide open by the side
> boards, and no player would approach him closer than ten feet, and there
> they'd stand waving their stick back and forth ineffectively while Mario
> calmly handled the puck and looked for his next assist. It was the same
> thing in front of the net, too, where often he was so wide open as to have
> been wearing a kryptonite uniform and surrounded by opposition "supermen."
I seem to recall seeing this kind of scene as well. On the other hand,
my most vivid visual memory of Mario - other than jamming an opponent's
stick in his own crotch in front of the ref - is a play when he was
getting held all over the place and then managed to shoot the puck from
behind his back through his own legs and into the net. Simply amazing.
He clearly had the talent and physical presence to deal with that kind
of opposition. Apparently he just didn't have the stomach for it.
> Despite his gaudy stats, I'd place Mario right up there with Eric Lindros in
> the NHL Crybaby Hall of Fame.
Frankly, I don't think even Lindros is on Mario's level in that
department.
--
Stephen Mack
Arka Music - Engraving, Copying, Transposing
www.arkamusic.com
"Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber >> Stay informed about: Ovechkin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 10, 2003 Posts: 19
|
(Msg. 18) Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:30 am
Post subject: Re: Ovechkin [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <he6dnQ690Nf8Ymbd4p2dnA DeleteThis @comcast.com>, "MSP" <none DeleteThis @none.com>
wrote:
> How many "can't miss" prospects/draft picks have flopped? Plenty. There's
> no guarantee of anything.
True.
> Maybe Ovechkin has the tools to be a star.
No "maybe" about it. He has the tools and, barring injury, is likely to
become an outstanding NHL player.
> Whether he becomes one is something else altogether. We'll see.
Yes, but it's not quite as random as you make it out to be.
--
Stephen Mack
"Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber >> Stay informed about: Ovechkin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Sep 08, 2003 Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 19) Posted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 1:38 pm
Post subject: Re: Ovechkin [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Alot of guys have talent but there are many variables that play a part in
whether one of them becomes a "star". Sure, God-given talent is essential
but so is staying healthy and playing with quality teammates. In the latter
area, Ovechkin will be at a disadvantage to start.
Part of the problem, too, might be one's definition of a star. A guy like
Paul Kariya probably has as much talent as most anybody in the league. He's
an excellent player but he's not a star. Luc Robitaille has 600 goals but,
again, not a star. IMO, true stars are rare. Over the last decade or so,
I'd count Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Hull, Sakic, Messier, Roy, Bourque and
a handful of other guys. Among up & comers, Kovalchuk jumps to mind but has
a way to go. True stars are proven out over a career, not a season or two.
Ovechkin may become one. We'll just have to wait and see.
"Smack" <smack.RemoveThis@arkamusic.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:smack-A55FEE.00302424072004@news.east.cox.net...
> In article <he6dnQ690Nf8Ymbd4p2dnA.RemoveThis@comcast.com>, "MSP" <none.RemoveThis@none.com>
> wrote:
>
> > How many "can't miss" prospects/draft picks have flopped? Plenty.
There's
> > no guarantee of anything.
>
> True.
>
> > Maybe Ovechkin has the tools to be a star.
>
> No "maybe" about it. He has the tools and, barring injury, is likely to
> become an outstanding NHL player.
>
> > Whether he becomes one is something else altogether. We'll see.
>
> Yes, but it's not quite as random as you make it out to be.
>
> --
> Stephen Mack
>
> "Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber >> Stay informed about: Ovechkin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 10, 2003 Posts: 19
|
(Msg. 20) Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 5:24 am
Post subject: Re: Ovechkin [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <3KGdnbQRyPATA5_c4p2dnA RemoveThis @comcast.com>, "MSP" <none RemoveThis @none.com>
wrote:
> Alot of guys have talent but there are many variables that play a part in
> whether one of them becomes a "star". Sure, God-given talent is essential
> but so is staying healthy and playing with quality teammates. In the latter
> area, Ovechkin will be at a disadvantage to start.
Yet you mention Kovalchuk below. ;)
Anyway, your last statement is pretty much pointless as far as the Caps
are concerned. Having a lousy group of teammates may hurt one's star
status in the eyes of the public, but it doesn't change the value one
provides on the ice. It's not really important whether Ovechkin's
contributions on the ice get talked about by Barry Melrose and Darren
Pang because his teammates don't provide enough support to translate it
into wins and sexy statistics. That's certainly not an argument for a
team not going after and investing in exceptionally talented youth. You
gotta start somewhere, and there isn't much better place to start than
Ovechkin.
If Gretzky had been drafted by a horrible team and hadn't played on such
great teams in Edmonton, he might not have the same star status he
enjoys today. That doesn't change what a presence he was on the ice,
and wouldn't make him a less valuable player for a franchise to take
interest in (in his youth/prime, that is).
> Part of the problem, too, might be one's definition of a star. A guy like
> Paul Kariya probably has as much talent as most anybody in the league. He's
> an excellent player but he's not a star. Luc Robitaille has 600 goals but,
> again, not a star.
Well, yes, then I would consider that an overly strict definition of a
star.
> IMO, true stars are rare. Over the last decade or so,
> I'd count Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Hull, Sakic, Messier, Roy, Bourque and
> a handful of other guys.
Well, by my definition, at any given time there's always atleast a
handful of stars, because it's relative, not absolute. A star is
someone who stands out relative to his peers. Granted, one generation's
stars may not be as good as another generation's, but that's not really
the point. If someone is dominant against the competition of his time
(and someone always does), he'll emerge as a star.
Your criteria for a star seem to be Hall of Fame credentials (even
stricter, actually). I think there are more stars over time than Hall
of Famers, not less.
Anyway, it's not really an issue. By any definition, Ovechkin's got the
tools.
--
Stephen Mack
"Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber >> Stay informed about: Ovechkin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Sep 08, 2003 Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 21) Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:50 am
Post subject: Re: Ovechkin [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
I'm not suggesting that the Caps shouldn't have drafted Ovechkin or that he
doesn't have talent. Only that alot goes into the making of a star player
and we shouldn't be assuming anything yet, especially in light of the Caps'
woeful draft history. In my view, stars often singlehandedly control games
and are always a force on the ice, hence my mention of Kovalchuk, albeit
he's on a fairly poor team.
As for Gretzky, he turned around a moribund LA Kings team and took it to the
finals. If anything showed his impact on hockey it was that accomplishment.
Sure, he couldn't save the Ranger trainwreck but the guy is only human.
Granted, playing in Edmonton didn't hurt but he was going to be a superstar
regardless.
"Smack" <smack.RemoveThis@arkamusic.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:smack-CF01D2.05245525072004@news.east.cox.net...
> In article <3KGdnbQRyPATA5_c4p2dnA.RemoveThis@comcast.com>, "MSP" <none.RemoveThis@none.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Alot of guys have talent but there are many variables that play a part
in
> > whether one of them becomes a "star". Sure, God-given talent is
essential
> > but so is staying healthy and playing with quality teammates. In the
latter
> > area, Ovechkin will be at a disadvantage to start.
>
> Yet you mention Kovalchuk below. ;)
>
> Anyway, your last statement is pretty much pointless as far as the Caps
> are concerned. Having a lousy group of teammates may hurt one's star
> status in the eyes of the public, but it doesn't change the value one
> provides on the ice. It's not really important whether Ovechkin's
> contributions on the ice get talked about by Barry Melrose and Darren
> Pang because his teammates don't provide enough support to translate it
> into wins and sexy statistics. That's certainly not an argument for a
> team not going after and investing in exceptionally talented youth. You
> gotta start somewhere, and there isn't much better place to start than
> Ovechkin.
>
> If Gretzky had been drafted by a horrible team and hadn't played on such
> great teams in Edmonton, he might not have the same star status he
> enjoys today. That doesn't change what a presence he was on the ice,
> and wouldn't make him a less valuable player for a franchise to take
> interest in (in his youth/prime, that is).
>
> > Part of the problem, too, might be one's definition of a star. A guy
like
> > Paul Kariya probably has as much talent as most anybody in the league.
He's
> > an excellent player but he's not a star. Luc Robitaille has 600 goals
but,
> > again, not a star.
>
> Well, yes, then I would consider that an overly strict definition of a
> star.
>
> > IMO, true stars are rare. Over the last decade or so,
> > I'd count Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Hull, Sakic, Messier, Roy, Bourque
and
> > a handful of other guys.
>
> Well, by my definition, at any given time there's always atleast a
> handful of stars, because it's relative, not absolute. A star is
> someone who stands out relative to his peers. Granted, one generation's
> stars may not be as good as another generation's, but that's not really
> the point. If someone is dominant against the competition of his time
> (and someone always does), he'll emerge as a star.
>
> Your criteria for a star seem to be Hall of Fame credentials (even
> stricter, actually). I think there are more stars over time than Hall
> of Famers, not less.
>
> Anyway, it's not really an issue. By any definition, Ovechkin's got the
> tools.
>
> --
> Stephen Mack
>
> "Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber >> Stay informed about: Ovechkin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You can edit your posts in this forum You can delete your posts in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|