shiznak

I’m not going to filter through their entire program list, but arboriculture management literally says it’s a two year program. Also, athletes who decide to leave to play in the major league, could finish up their program once their career are over. Makar had the third highest PPG as a freshmen in the his division. Could’ve possibly been the top scorer amongst defensemen, if he didn’t play in the World Juniors. The Avs expected him to join the team next season, and he easily could’ve made the team or further his development in the minors.

It’s not hard to get an associate degree within a year or two.

Well there goes all their runs for the rest of the week.

That chart doesn’t show the importance of the player though. Also, the rise of the US players has more to do with the population of the country compare to Canada. Look at how many American players that have Canadian roots, because their parents worked in the US and decided to stay there. It isn’t a disrespect saying the college route is a lower development league, because it is. The only benefit of playing college hockey is, you’re playing guys 2-3 years older than you, but doesn’t that mean much? For example, if Bedard plays in a beer league against men would that make him a better player? Makar even mentioned why he choose the college route over the CHL. It was because he thinks it would have better prepared himself, playing against men, but all the tools he learnt was playing in the AJHL. I also want to point out with his talent, Makar could have easily turned pro, after just one year of college, but he decided to stay the extra year to finish off his degree.

Hockey player who take the collegian route do so because they want a degree after hockey, or it’s an insurance if they don’t make it into the NHL. It really has nothing to do with a better program. The CHL focuses 100% on hockey development. Whereas, college hockey is more academic driven. It’s not arrogance calling Canada, number one in hockey. Just look around the league, Canadian almost double the amount of American players. While having over 20,000+ more points. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nhl-players-by-country#

I feel the current US crop is sorta like the Russians in the 2000s onward. They have the skill, speed, talent, and goaltending over the Canadians, but depth/winning mentality wise. Canada always seem to triumph over them. I think that’s why Canada will always be the number one hockey nation in terms of competitive hockey amongst the best.

You’re marching into unknown territories with that defensive group. You don’t exactly know how well they will mesh together. Everyone is good in their own rights, but you don’t know well they are when they don’t have their regular defensive partner with them? At least with the Canada, you have two of the best defensive pairing the last three seasons, who have played together in Toews-Makar/Pelech-Pulock (if they make the team). Then you have Theodore and Pietrangelo, who also have played together before, and recently won a Cup. On the forward side, you have the two best players in the league right now, and the best player of the last two decades, who still going strong. The US might be younger, faster and have the goaltending, but Canada has that winning mentality. I mean, just look at how many Cup winners on Canada compare to the US.

How does US have more depth on defence? This was my team Canada defensive core. Which doesn’t even include guys like Doughty, Hamilton (in the top 6), Chychrun (in the top 6), Chabot, Dunn, Morrissey, Montour, Ekblad, Burns, Dobson, Nurse, Letang, Reilly, Spurgeon, Weegar, etc who all can make a case on the team.

Not for a 34yrs old. Factor in, he hasn’t been full healthy since 2019, has been playing on a rebuilding team, and has always produced 50-70 points, in his career. 30 points in 53 game is pretty decent for a top 6 player at that age.

That’s 45-55 points in a full season. Toews would have been 6th in scoring on the Knights and Panthers, if he played a full season.

He scored 31 points in 53 games. Pretty sure that’s top 6 production.

The Reds averaged 5 runs against, and the Jays managed to squeeze out 0 runs against them, with only 3 hits. A great third basemen once said, “This isn’t a try league. It’s a get-it done league.”

McDavid - MacKinnon - Marner Stamkos - Point - Hagel Marchand - Crosby - Marchessault Tavares - Stephenson - Stone Verhaeghe Toews - Makar Theodore - Pietrangelo Pelech - Pulock Chychrun - Hamilton Jarry Hart Kuemper

I mean, he’s not wrong. The things is, he never puts himself in positions to lose those puck battles, because he’s too elusive with his skating. But when he does, it’s almost certain he’s going to turn the puck over.

The Marniers have some sort of ill will against the Jays. They could possibly knockout the Jays out of the playoffs, again.

I mean, Lemieux had that “6th sense” too, just not in the same tier as Gretzky. I think someone posted that “no look, no touch assist” from the Olympics against the US. That was some 6th sense hokey, there. There’s also one assists I vaguely remember where he pretty much deked the entire Bruins team, made a no look pass, cross ice pass from the blueline to a wide open Olczyk.

Not really, because he even mentioned in the Lemieux video that his preference is Gretzky, on who is the greatest hockey player. But he understand why people would think it’s the other way around. Again, people are confusing themselves with greatness and talented/skillful. They’re two entirely different things. You can be the most talented hockey player in the world, but you still need to put the work in to be great.

Again, Jagr and Francis played with him when he was already hampered with back problems and never really played a full 84 game season with him. They never had the luxury of playing with Mario when he was remotely healthy. Gretzky had the luxury of playing with Hall of Famers, for the majority of his career; Anderson, Messier, Kurri, Coffey, Robitaille, Blake, Hull, Leetch, etc Heck, that Oilers team even won a Cup without the Great One leading them. I think if you take away Mario away from those back-to-back Cup winning Pens teams. I doubt they would have won. Both times they barely snuck by the first round. That Oilers dynasty was just too good and not because of Gretzky. Mario was the epitome of North-South hockey. How many times have you seen him get the puck in transition and just deke through both defenders and the goalie? One of the best hands during that era. There’s a reason why he got the magnificent one moniker from his peers. Dude could just stick handle in the offensive zone for days. Here’s a video from The Hockey Guy, who does a great overview of Mario career. He even mentioned why people would think Mario is better than Gretzky.

I don’t really need to “watch him play” live. My brother is a huge Oilers fan/Gretzky fan and he shown me videos he stored over his Oiler days. I would watch it regularly and that’s how I got into hockey. Of course, Gretzky isn’t Crosby with Toews mentality. No one would ever be the “next Gretzky” because he’s the smartest hockey player to ever played the game. I don’t know how many times I have to say it for you to understand that. That is why he was a God amongst men, but he was never the most skillful guy in the league. He would even admit to that. The Crosby/Toews/Gretzky was simply a comparison between the two eras. Prime Crosby, wasn’t the most talented one in his era, but he was head and shoulders above everyone in with his hockey IQ. That was Gretzky. Malkin and Mario were definitely alike. Mike Lange who covered both players, made the comparison. Malkin would just be a physical/dominate force in his early days. At one point many people in Pittsburgh said, he was better than Crosby, when he finally got to show the hockey world how truly good he was, once Crosby had his concussion. I don’t think I can change your mind, but imo Lemieux was better than Gretzky, simply because he was so dominant with less surrounding him and much more skillful. That article I posted pretty much confirms it. People don’t have to agree it to, because it’s just one’s opinion. Last thing I would say is, you don’t need to be the most talented guy to be the greatest. Just look at Brady, Jordan, and Messi at their respective sports.

No, I was born in the late 80s, but every legends in the game who played with/against both players, said Lemieux was far more talented than Gretzky. The Great One himself said Mario was more talented than him. It’s like the Ovechkin vs. Crosby debate, in modern day. Crosby is clearly the better player, with his accolades and accomplishments, but Ovechkin is clearly the more talented one out of the two.

Mario never really played a full season with either Francis or Jagr. By the time they came in he was already hampered with back injuries. He only played like one season, over 60 games, with both players. He then abruptly retired in Francis’ 4th season with the team. Read the article I posted, it summarizes how talented Mario was compared to Gretzky, with less surrounding him.

This article pretty much summarizes that Mario was more talented with less surrounding him and better offensively. https://theathletic.com/1733945/2020/04/09/marshall-revisiting-the-mario-lemieux-vs-wayne-gretzky-debate/ It’s not a knock on Gretz, I just think Mario is way more talented than him.

You can’t compare Gretzky’s teammates to Mario’s the first 5 seasons, and say they’re comparable. All those guys you mentioned aside from Coffey were supporting players, who Mario made relevant. Like I mentioned, none of those guys even came close to those marks after they left Pittsburgh. Recchi was a rookie when Mario was at his peak scoring. Lemieux is pretty much Malkin with Patrick Kane hands. While Gretzky is Crosby with peak Toews mentality. There’s nothing wrong with being the smartest player to ever play the game; that was Gretzky, and that is why he was so great. Talent wise, Mario was way better and I’m pretty sure, every legend who played with/against them would agree.

Huh? Gretzky didn’t miss any games when he broke the record. A full season was only 80 games, at the time. While Lemieux missed like 8, when he was in pace to break Gretzky’s single season goals and points record. When he came back missing months with treatment, he was still at top of the points leader board, only trailing behind LaFontaine. He ended up re-taking the scoring lead by like 50+ points. Weird you mentioned Gretzky playing with misfits, in LA. When you ignore that Mario pretty much was playing with nobodies the first 5 season of his career, and still put up 120+ points seasons. Mario never had the luxury of playing with Hall of Famers, at the beginning of his career, not until Coffey joined him. You don’t need to be super talented to hold records, you just need the longevity. Like I said, Gretzky wasn’t as talented as others in his era. He was just ahead of the curve with his hockey sense, which made him unstoppable.

But Gretz played way more games compared to Mario. From age 19-30 Gretzky - 927 games, 718 goals Lemieux - 669 games, 563 goals Mario has never played a full season throughout his career. His highest game played was 79 and he only did that once. Gretzky played 75 or more games 14 times in his career. Compare to Mario who only had 4 seasons of 75 games or more.