Hedman
-
Posts
848 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Hedman
-
-
Nylander is not the guy to bank any kind of positive future on. He's not in the top-5, of which one may fall. And he's not the best beyond the top-5 either. He's below Kapanen, another flash in the pan smallish euro, in terms of skill (see that fancy through the legs goal he scored? wow!), and Nylander simply isn't built for this division, if even the NHL.
I don't know how you can get excited about those highlights when it's either perimeter power play passing or floating up the ice waiting for a pass, but yeah, he's good when no competition is around him. Is it reasonable to expect that kind of competition level in the NHL? Nope.
He needs to go to a team where the fans are still amused by fancy-looking preseason trash like Sergei Shirokov. I think the majority Canucks fans are done with it. Those kind of players don't win jack unless they're sheltered and carried.
His dad was nothing but a perimeter-style powerplay specialist in the NHL until he was on a line with Jagr. We don't have a Jagr.
I want nothing to do with that girlie boy being on my team. PASS. If the Canucks pick him up, then the future with Linden in charge is just more of the same crap. That's not good.
I guess Marek Malik is more skilled than Nylander too in that case
Why ban tsn when we should just ban you? Just a typical Virtanen-fan on CDC with tunnel-vision. -
Question yourself on how the story would even arise in a USA today article if it did not exist?
That's a great source man!
-
Google it yourself.
And do you really want to turn this into a Coho thread? There are more comparables to Nylander than just attitude.
Well that way, i guess you haven't got any proof that there are any attitude problems.
Then tell me about these comparables instead of just talking bs. Hodgson and Nylander are in no way similar players.
-
He's constantly moved to wing in Sweden, so chances are he'll be one in the NHL until he improves his two-way game, of which he has a very limited ability. But at wing he'll be pulverized on the boards in the NHL.
In this regard, along with reported attitude issues, he kinda reminds me of Coho. An ultra-entitled right-shooting LW that needs to be fed the puck and sheltered while you don't expect him to play defensively.
There is a lot of skill there though. Esp. for the powerplay. So a team will roll the dice on him, but at 6th overall? Doubt that.
please provide a link of Nylanders "reported attitude issues", or Hodgson's for that matter when he was drafted.
-
I agree on Lindholm and Zibanejad so far, and it's not like Gagner and Brassard are slouches either, but Connelly has some question marks. He was passed over by other prospects in the Lightning's system this year. It doesn't mean he still couldn't be a good NHL player, but I'd say it's too early to tell other than to say he has potential.
Yeah i wouldn't judge Connelly yet. Sure there has been other young players making the jump to the Bolts instead of Connelly. But he's still young, so it would be unfair to count him off already. He's been good in the AHL for two years now, which is a good sign at least. He's no Scott Glennie. Right now, maybe you wouldn't say that he's an amazing pick at 6th. But he has the potential to be a good player for sure.
-
For what it's worth I just went back and looked at the 6th overall pick since the 2004 draft, honestly not alot of talent taken at this spot over the years.
2013- Sean Monahan
2012- Hampus Lindholm
2011- Mika Zibanejad
2010- Brett Connolly
2009- OEL
2008- Filatov
2007- Sam Gagner
2006- Brassard
2005- Brule
2004- Montoya
OEL was by far the best player taken. Brule was the biggest bust. Too early to tell on Connlly, Zibanejad and Lindholm. Monahan looks like a solid pick. Filatov showed flashes of ellite talent but looks to be a bust as well. Brassard had a good rookie year but is a 2/3c and will never be a game breaker so many of us hope the Canucks can get with this pick. Montoya is finally getting a chance in the Peg but looks like a 1B goalie at best.
How can you say there's hasn't been a lot of talent at this spot, especially after the last 5 years? How is it too early to judge Lindholm? The guy had a 30 point season and was +29 in his first NHL season. Zibanejad is making progress. Connolly will probably get a fair chance in the NHL sooner or later. One shouldn't complain if the 6th overall at least turns into a good top6 forward/top4 defenceman/starting goalie.
-
Why no love in the poll for Haydn Fleury? He's still raw, but IMO he's got a 50/50 shot at being the best D in the draft.
He's an outstanding skater that just needs a bit of time to develop and look out.
And it's not like the Canucks are loaded with great defenceman either.
Good prospect, but not 6th overall worthy IMO. Would rather grab a defenceman like Glover or Jacobs in the 2nd round and pick a forward with our 1st rounder.
-
I look at those 4 names and frigging cringe....the likelihood of us picking a guy who pans out as poorly as those 4 is very slim but uggghhh
Kucherov is a solid prospect. He's been good this year and he's only 20 years old.
-
playing in a mens leauge, so is Patrick White, he too is playing in a mens league what's your point??? Draft him ahead Ritchie then? Hell, Ekblad is not playing in a mens leauge. I guess Kapanen and Nylander should go number 1? Anton Rodin too was playing in a mens leauge in his draft, how that go?? yea bro.....
You're wrong about Rodin. Rodin played 6 games (0 points) in the Swedish 2nd league (men) in his draft year, he played the rest of the year in the Swedish u20 league. So you can't compare him with Kapanen and Nylander.
-
Really? I think the big ice benefits him but nonetheless he is still lighting it up.
I think he was being sarcastic.
-
1
-
-
Ok i read the last 10 pages and here's what I'm going to say.
we need to address our needs. Skill is necessary in every division, conference, league. However, why not take a guy that has skill and size? Everyone here is arguing and defending the guy they want, but are making stuff up to make the other guy look bad.
I'm just going to say that I'm all for Ritchie. It seems to me that everybody is saying his dominance won't translate to the NHL. I would like to point out that Lucic was 220 when he was in the WHL. Whether Ritchie loses weight or gains weight, he will most definitely get stronger. He has skating that does not hinder his ability to get to where he needs to be. He is a good skater for his size. He has very good vision and is a good passer. He also has a very good shot. On top of that, he runs guys over. And guess what? When he goes to the NHL, he'll continue to run guys over because he is only going to get stronger
I like the fact that people are talking about the lack of potential in Ritchie, that he's a risky pick. There's a lot to like about his game IMO. As far as potential goes, how many thought that Lucic would be an important 60 point guy in the NHL when he was drafted, after putting up 19 points in 62 games in the WHL? Even the thought of it at the time would've been ridiculous. Ritchie is way more talented than Lucic ever was in junior, and i'm not saying he'll be better than Lucic or even as good as Lucic, i just think it's worth taking into consideration here. Ritchie led his team in scoring this year. He scored more goals than anyone on his team, by margin. Also led his team in scoring in the playoffs. Again, he had more goals than anyone on his team. Apart from that, his game is not all about putting up offensive numbers. It's tough to NOT like Ritchie. If Ritchie turns into a 50 point guy that can also bring physical presence, then i'd be perfectly fine.
-
Haha. Ticket proceeds will go to "the support and development of internet trolls"
That would be awful... then people would have to deal with tougher internet trolls than you..
-
You read into comments far too much. Making up things that are not there. I really don't want to waste my time with you anymore. I know you want to have the last word so say whatever you want. I'll see you after the draft.
Really? What did i made up? You've already stated that you don't know much about European hockey, which anyone can tell really, based on your lack of knowledge.
-
Thanks for doing the heavy lifting and embarrassing yourself. You read into my comments what you want. Lets recap:
Hedman says - that I claimed "Nylanders offensive numbers wasn't impressive (what a clueless statement), the guy that thought CHL goalies were better than professional goalies or the guy that thought junior players are more physical than professional hockey players in Sweden"
Baumerman77 says "Never said any of that"
Hedman uses the following as evidence:
Baumerman77 says "did anyone else notice how far out of position some of those goalies were?"
----This does not mean that I think CHL goalies are better than the goalies in that Swedish league. Talk about reading into a comment.
Baumerman77 says "It is a lost easier to play European hockey against men."
----This does not comment on whether or not I think playing European hockey is easier than playing against CHL players. I meant it is easier to play that style of game (European hockey) against men than it is to play North American hockey against men.
Baumerman77 says " His offensive numbers don't look that impressive. He played the majority of the year in a weak league"
-----His numbers did not impress me that much. Sorry maybe they impressed you.
I'm sorry I had to embarrass you like this. But you need to stop reading-in your own ideas into other peoples comments.
What was even the point of commenting on the goalies in that case? The way you've been ripping on euros, i saw it as a way of dishonoring Nylanders offensive numbers.
Yeah i totally thought that European men hockey=NHL hockey. You do know that the CHL=Canadian Junior hockey? Just because Nic Petan had 120 points last year doesn't mean he'll ever put up 120 points in the NHL, or even make the NHL. So how does CHL numbers weight in higher? The answer is easy: You have absolutely no insight in European hockey, so you shouldn't act like you know anything about it, or for that matter Nylander.
Again, it's because you have no insight in European hockey whatsoever.
Bauerman, you will probably never ever embarrass me because you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
-
3
-
-
Would you like me to go back and quote those statements?
Nervermind, had to do this anyway.
Sure he could grow to 6' he is either 5'11" or 5'10" we will find out at the draft combine. I doubt he will put on more than an inch if he does grow at all. The issue is his weight coupled with his style of play. It isn't that easy to put on 15-20 pounds of muscle that takes years. He put up good numbers in Europe because 1. it is less physical (which complements his game) and 2. the big ice complements his speed.
Do you really want to see Nylander in a Canucks uniform going up and taking a faceoff against Kopitar, Thorton, Getzlaf, etc?
As a side note: Nylanders highlights videos are not that impressive. He holds onto the puck far too long and did anyone else notice how far out of position some of those goalies were?
To get to my original point 6th is way too high to draft Nylander. Maybe some team gambles on him at 9 or 10 but I wouldn't be on it. Are you saying he is a top 5 or a top 10?
It is a lot easier to play European hockey against men. He also plays WITH men.
You make a common rookie mistake when looking at prospects you look at their numbers. When teams draft players they don't draft them based on what they have done they draft players based on what they are projected to do.
His size. His defence. His offensive numbers don't look that impressive. He played the majority of the year in a weak league (difficult to judge his competition. Unknown if he could adapt his game to the smaller rink.
Never said any of that. You can go ahead say whatever you want. I am here to discuss prospects with knowledgeable Canucks' fans. I'll talk to you after draft day.
Sure you didn't. I guess it was just your little brother who wrote all this.
-
Never said any of that. You can go ahead say whatever you want. I am here to discuss prospects with knowledgeable Canucks' fans. I'll talk to you after draft day.
Would you like me to go back and quote those statements?
-
So I say outside the top 10 and you freak out but you don't think he'll go top 6? So why are you making sure a big deal if you think he will go 6-10? I never said the CHL is a better league, I never said Nylander was a bad prospect or that he will be a bust. All I said was that it is highly unlikely that he will go in the top 10. You need to calm down and wait until the draft. Hopefully you will use it as a learning experience.
I think he has the offensive upside to be 6th overall-worthy. That being said i never said we SHOULD take him. What do you even base your "highly unlikely" opinion on? Since it's obvious you barely know anything about him. The only thing you're still looking at, the ONLY thing, is that "historical list", you take nothing else into consideration, which says a lot about you. Yeah i should totally listen to the guy that thought Nylanders offensive numbers wasn't impressive (what a clueless statement), the guy that thought CHL goalies were better than professional goalies or the guy that thought junior players are more physical than professional hockey players in Sweden. Why would i ever want to learn something from you?
-
You're right I don't know much about European hockey. But I do understand NHL hockey and drafting. This will be a good learning experience for when Nylander doesn't go in the top 6
Then stop acting like canadian junior leagues are better as far as competition goes. It's another thing to speculate if he can transition his game to the NHL or not. No it actually seems you're quite clueless when it comes to drafting, you just think you know what you're talking about putting up historical results, acting like Einstein. Quote my post when i said it's guaranteed Nylander will go top6. Or when i said we should draft him with the 6th overall.
-
Nice strawman. You obviously don't agree with me so why don't you leave it there and we will find out on draft day.
It's one thing to have an opinion. It's another thing to be completely wrong. You obviously don't know a lot about European hockey at all.
-
Please, no deals for Yakupov thank you very much- the kid looks un-coachable (I live in Edm. so am constantly subjected to their games). What's the general consensus regarding taking Perlini at 6-7 ?
I would be fine with Perlini. People here claim his stock has risen too fast, but that's not a unique situation really. Mark Scheifele had 1 great season in the OHL and went 7th overall. Now he's playing in the NHL and will most likely end up being a very good top6 forward. Perlini did have a weak playoff performance this year, which might cause some concern i guess. But the guy is only 17years old and he will obviously improve in numerous way.
-
I don't quite get the lottery
for example:
in 2011 New Jersey won the draft lottery but only permitted to move up 4 spots from where they were (8th) to (4th) to select that year Adam Larsson.
Why is that btw? If they won the lottery does it not mean they won the first pick and could have selected Ryan Nugent Hopkins?
And would that possile rule apply to us as well that we are only permitted to move a few spots up, or do we actually literally get the first pick of the draft?
They changed the rules last year, right after the Oilers had 3 straight 1st overall picks.I believe that's the reason why they changed the rules.
-
Sure he could grow to 6' he is either 5'11" or 5'10" we will find out at the draft combine. I doubt he will put on more than an inch if he does grow at all. The issue is his weight coupled with his style of play. It isn't that easy to put on 15-20 pounds of muscle that takes years. He put up good numbers in Europe because 1. it is less physical (which complements his game) and 2. the big ice complements his speed.
Do you really want to see Nylander in a Canucks uniform going up and taking a faceoff against Kopitar, Thorton, Getzlaf, etc?
As a side note: Nylanders highlights videos are not that impressive. He holds onto the puck far too long and did anyone else notice how far out of position some of those goalies were?
He's 5'11 as i have told you numerous times. Also listed at 170 lbs. And stop speaking your mind about the Swedish Leagues because ,as usual, you're way off. "Less physical". Lol. I'm sure the CHL would be sooooo tough for Nylander. It's not like you will find players far under 6'0 dominating those leagues (Nic Petan, Tolchinsky for example).
Yeah the goalies in that league (professional goalies that play hockey for a living) are obviously worse than most of the goalies in the CHL. Totally.
-
1
-
-
I am not saying he is a bad player. I am not saying he is going to be a bust. I am not saying the scouts are wrong. I am saying that 6th is far too high to draft him and in all likelihood he will be drafted outside of the top 10 even in though this draft year isn't deep.
If you think he is going to be a top 5 pick we will see on draft day.
I never said Nylander will go top5. I never said we should pick him with the 6th pick. I just said that there are a few rankings that have him inside the top5, which says a lot about him since the projected top5 are seen as "low-risk" picks. I'm just arguing against the fact that you believe that there's no doubt Nylander will drop out of the top10, which is pretty laughable. You have no arguments why it will happen, except him being "small", even though he's actually not that small. You're making a really big deal out of it. Especially since you don't really know anything else about him.
-
To get to my original point 6th is way too high to draft Nylander. Maybe some team gambles on him at 9 or 10 but I wouldn't be on it. Are you saying he is a top 5 or a top 10?
It is a lot easier to play European hockey against men. He also plays WITH men.
You make a common rookie mistake when looking at prospects you look at their numbers. When teams draft players they don't draft them based on what they have done they draft players based on what they are projected to do.
How is it easier to play European hockey against men? Are you saying that junior hockey is better/more difficult than senior hockey?
Hahaha i'm literally facepalming all your posts against Nylander. Is this your way to defend yourself, since you thought his stats wasn't good? You clearly don't know what you're talking about. I'm not only looking at his numbers. I guess mr Baumerman77 on CDC knows best, better than any hockey scout out there who's claiming the kid has elite-vision and tremendous upside. In fact YOU are the one who's only looking at one single thing, which is his height. That's the only thing you're looking at, and then you put up some historical results and think you're some kind of genious even though you obviously haven't seen anything of him. As i have mentioned plenty of times he's 5'11 at the age of 17, he's no freaking Jordan Schroeder size-wise. He will likely be 6'0, because, you know, people actually grow..
Why ban tsn when we should just ban you? Just a typical Virtanen-fan on CDC with tunnel-vision.
6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft
in Prospects / Farm Team
Posted · Edited by Hedman
Nice, i also found this the other day
http://video.flames.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=581632