Posted by andru2797 on 4/1/2011 7:57:00 AM (view original):
Well to be fair I don't think a player necessaily has to be a top end scorer to be an "elite" player. For example, I consider Bob Gainey an elite player simply because no one even comes close to being as good defensively. Rod Brind'Amour, in my opinion, is an elite player because he did everything very well, a very rare trait in the NHL today. Mike Richards and Jonathan Toews are two guys who remind me alot of the Rod Brind'Amours of the 90's. They may never lead the entire NHL in scoring, but they will lead their teams some years, and be excellent defensively and on faceoffs, play in every situation, are unquestioned leaders and good role-models as well. That to me should be considered "elite" as well. Not many of those in the NHL today.
I guess we will have to differ there - (although agreed elitism doesn't only refer to scoring). Elite is 'best in league' for me. Not 'best on team'. While I agree Brind'Amour, Toews, Richie, etc are/were fantastic 2 way players and dynamic team leaders they still are not in that 'elite' status of a Gretzky, Messier, Lemieux, etc to name a few centers. These guys were UNSTOPPABLE. In today's league Ovechkin and Crosby are 'elites' imo --- would you seriously at this point put Toews in that category with them? I think if you did I could make the argument that Malkin, Stamkos, Backstrom, Sedin, and Kopitar also are elite centers in the NHL..... but then if 8 centers in the league are considered 'elite' I would suggest we really have low standards for 'elitism'. jmo. I do think Toews is an outstanding player in the league and will continue to be one... just right now he is not an elite imo. Neither was Brind'Amour (whom I always enjoyed watching in Philly). Actully heard a great story from a client of mine (who is well connected with the NHL) about Rod, Rod's wife, Lindros, and Tocchet.... but I'll save that one for another time ;)