70-80 assist (100+ points) in your lineup?
Is playmaking worth more, less or equal to goal scoring?
2007-08-21 13:43:51 · 9 answers · asked by xtrabigs 2 in Sports ➔ Hockey
A player that has the ability to turn nominal players into 35+ goal men is worth more than a goal scorer who can turn nominal players into 70+ assist players- hockey games are won by scoring goals. Whether those goals are highlight reel individual efforts or mere cash-ins by teammates on highlight reel passes doesn't matter.
In addition, a superb goal-scorer is a lot easier to shut down than a superb playmaker. A playmaker has four other players he can utilize to create goals; a goal-scorer has only himself.
2007-08-21 14:17:13 · answer #1 · answered by mrbugg1 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'll take the 70-80 assist man, his 70 assists = 70 goals for his team + 30 of his own goals = 100 goals for the team. The goal scorer only has, 40 goals + 45 goals for the team from his assists = 85 goals. Playmakers make the other players around them score, but goal scorers only score themselves.
2007-08-21 20:51:24 · answer #2 · answered by N/A 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i would take the playmaker with 70-80 assists and more than 100 points because someone else had to have scored the 70 -80 goals right so it helps the whole team and it also looks like he would be more of a team player
2007-08-21 20:51:51 · answer #3 · answered by rac531 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'll take Sidney Crosby, both a 35-45 goal scorer AND a 70-80 assist man.
I will take some offense to your theory as most 100 point scorers in NHL history have been pretty balanced in goals and assists, and the high assist/low goal man has been a rarity in NHL history (Bobby Clarke, Bernie Federko, Adam Oates and now Joe Thornton).
2007-08-21 21:09:32 · answer #4 · answered by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Kind of a chicken or egg question. Who does the playmaker set up if you don't have at least one decent trigger man?
I suppose it depends on what you got already. Put in context. Leafs added Blake to most likely play with Sundin. This has a double effect. It gives Mats a finisher to work with and it gives him more room on the ice so he can take more shots without two guys hangin off him.
Can't have one without the other really but given a choice I'll take the playmaker. He will find the open guy and then it's a matter if that guy has ham hands or not.
2007-08-21 21:23:02 · answer #5 · answered by PuckDat 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They're equally important.
A trigger man can't score if he's not getting the puck and a set up guy is not getting assists if passing to poor shooters.
Given the numbers you posted, I'd take the playmaker because his team scored 15% more goals.
2007-08-21 20:50:28 · answer #6 · answered by zapcity29 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends who your talking about. Its not just Scoring and Passing. Its grit and faceoffs and defence and offence and penalties and leadership and attitude and puck handling. So many aspects to the game of players that you must take into consideration. But if 2 players were exactly the same but one passes and the other shoots, I take a goal scorer. Its clutch goals that make your team win.
2007-08-21 22:15:10 · answer #7 · answered by Pmunny 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look what Joe Thornton did for San Jose and Jonathan Cheechoo. I'd say the playmaker is more important.
2007-08-21 20:49:40 · answer #8 · answered by alwaysmoose 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Playmaking...they usually end up making the players around them better..increasing the total lines stats
2007-08-21 20:48:53 · answer #9 · answered by iceviper97 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋