HomeBrew

Just because you have low expectations for our prospects doesn't mean you have turn the entire forum it into a version of "Lowered Expectations." Nobody is getting hurt by having high opinions of players - maybe eventually let down, but thats it. Ok Sargent? Thanks.

Why do you care so much who players are compared to? You seem to waste so much time and room on this forum trying to position yourself as the player comparison police Sargent. Just state your view on the player and relax man.

Bo goes from being drafted and known not to have exceptional speed to a few years later skating in the Fastest Skater competition at the All-Star Skills Competition versus Tarasenko. That I would say is a major accomplishment! Can't we get all of our prospects on the same program?! https://www.nhl.com/news/2017-nhl-skills-competition-list/c-286186836?tid=277751912

I would say that the analysis is pretty fair for the most part and mostly what we have gathered here in the forum as well. Basically that his role and teammates have changed slightly and he has made some progress, but not a lot of progress and he has yet to take it to that next level offensively. I find this the most interesting of the post: "Given that Juolevi is not on loan from Finland, he is bound by the NHL/CHL agreement - thus it's the NHL or CHL next year. I would expect that unless there are some drastic changes to the back-end this summer, Juolevi will start his NHL career next season." I am hoping by "start his NHL career" he means given 9 games and then sent back down to the CHL. There is no point in rushing this kid and we already have a solid group of defensemen to continue groom here like Stecher and Tryamkin. Let him learn to be dominant offensively where he has the freedom to do so in the OHL.

I would suggest to you and everyone else that it is not worth the time or effort to respond to guntrix. He is not looking for a decent discussion, only trolling for reactions. I agree with the notions that people have been saying that the greatest f*ck ups will lead to the greatest opportunities to learn and grow. This is true in almost every field - even in music. We will have to see what he learns from this and that will indicate more about his character as a player and a professional than any one incident.

Fuel for the fire: Utica loses 1-2 in OT against Springfield - Virtanen on for both goals against.

There often seems to be an understanding by trolls like Big Head that criticism = being negative and writing off the prospect. Where as, I think for a lot of us our criticism stems from discussing what needs to be improved upon and not necessarily writing off the prospect entirely. That is the difference between "constructive criticism" and just out right being negative. For instance, Juolevi from what I have seen still has a lot of room to grow. What we would like to see from him is to take over games and dictate the play more, but we are not really seeing that yet. He has been able to take advantage of the offensive opportunities while they have been there, but he has yet to really make those opportunities for himself. I find myself saying "oh that was a good smart play," not "wow did you see that move!" when I watch his highlights. I would liken his offensive instincts right now to be similar to the former Alex Edler (circa 2009-2011) - he could get hard shots on net and make cross ice passes when he sees them, but he never really dictated the offensive push like a Drew Doughty or Duncan Keith would. I think it would be a mistake if we brought him up next season before he can develop this side of his game more. Give him another shot at the World Juniors as well and see if can redeem himself along with the rest of his team.

It seems as though some people have the mentality of "throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks" type of prospect development. If they don't stick, aka put up big points as soon as possible, then to trash bin with the lot of ya! I am, however, going to hold firm that there is positives in Virtanen's game that if made consistent and well rounded could be quite dominant at times and exactly what this team needs. I don't think you can say after watching the video below of Virtanen that we wouldn't want to see that every game.

I actually like this post, even though I don't agree with most of it - other than Horvats Big Head needing to be banned. +1

I think generally I agree with this... Excuse if I missed it because I am tired, but where do you actually define what the "ceiling" is? You seemed to misrepresent the idea of ceiling being used in your first point based on my previous comment as I was using it just as you proceeded to later in your post (which I agree with). If you use Burrows as an example, we never thought he could be a first line player when he was playing in the ECHL, so I seem to not understand the point your trying to make. In the case of Burrows, and guys like him, their projections, floors and ceilings are always changing - as in, his project was different when he was in ECHL, to when he was in the AHL, to when he made the NHL. Just like how Horvat has changed his projection and ceiling with his continued evolving game. Just like how Gaudette's projected range has gone up since his draft and may go down or up upon going pro. My question would be to clarify how you actually define what a players "ceiling" is within a projection (ceiling/floor range)?

I would agree with Gaudette having the better chance. At this point it seems like Gaudette also has the size to step into the pros more easily. Gaudette kind of reminds me of Kesler when he was just beginning and will need to put in the same effort as him to be successful at the next level. With Lockwood, I think it is more about whether his skills can translate while he tries to add the strength that he will need to make the same things happen in the pros. His speed and drive so far is definitely enticing to watch.

Saying it could be anything doesn't really position you in the discussion at all and thus makes it look you are indeed confused yourself - as your conflating of points demonstrates. I would say Gaudette at this point has raised his ceiling to a solid 3rd line center. But, as we have seen with Cassels, that ceiling might change once he hits the next stage of his career.

If you say "he could end up anywhere from an elite number 1 to just a solid 3-4 guy" that means you are conflating the two ideas. If you think he could end up as an elite number 1, then that is his ceiling. Whether he reaches that ceiling is another point. If you don't think his ceiling is a number 1, then make that point, but don't conflate the two different ideas. Anyways, how about this Gaudette kid? What's his ceiling at these days?

A "projected ceiling" is far different than where he actually ends up in the end. He can still be a solid 3-4 guy with a "#1 ceiling" that he never met in the end - much like Edler never truly met his ceiling. You seem to be conflating the two.

We should go for Mittelstadt - great speed, hands and awareness. He would be my pick if we go in the 4-8 range as he is gonna be a helluva player. Otherwise, if we deem that Tryamkin needs a friend, then we should go for Kostin - I wouldn't mind some more Russian pizzazz on this team either.

whiners

You mean 19 going on 20 for Gaudette and 18 going on 19 for Kreider, but ok... I guess I should just take you word for it... do you have a real argument yet?

If 23 points in 38 is "very good numbers for College Hockey" for you, then what does that make our prospects like Adam Gaudette who has 34 points in 23 games? You are bad at this.

Kreider only had one good season in College and that is because he had "Johnny Hockey" feeding him pucks all season. I don't think 23 points in 48 games in the AHL is anything to brag about either, but here you are - doing exactly that. We could just as easily say the players that have instant success are the "outliers" on your little made up graph there, but you would rather live in a perpetually negative world I guess. Keep reaching? Says the person who wants to compare our hockey draft pick to the Prime Minister of our country. Comeback with a real argument next time and not fake graphs and misconstrued evidence.

Are you trying to displace the relevancy of comparable NHL development paths by using our Prime Minister as an example? That seems very strange to me and kind of laughable so I won't go into detail why your way off base with your logic. The reason why comparables are being used is because people are stating that players just don't develop into top 6 players if they struggle in the beginning. If you need another example, a more current one, what about Chris Kreider (drafted 2009, left wing)? Draft +1: College, 23 points in 38 games Draft +2: College, 24 points in 32 games Draft +3: College, 45 points in 44 games Draft +4: AHL, 23 points in 48 games, NHL 3 points in 23 games Draft +5: NHL, 37 points in 66 games Kreider is now one of the leaders on the Rangers with 34 points in 41 games. Again, the argument people are making with these examples is that this can and does happen to players, not that it necessarily will happen with Virtanen. Not every case is the same, but the naysayers on here really need to clam up until its proven beyond a doubt that he will not make it because the negativity really is not helping anything - not even the discussion when Trudeau becomes the counter argument.

2 GAME POINT STREAK! haha Speaking of trajectories though... how about Shane Doan (drafted 7th overall, right wing) as a comparable? Draft Year: 37 goals and 57 assists in 71 games in the WHL Draft +1: Makes an early jump to the NHL and puts up 17 points in 74 games Draft +2: Sophomore slump for 12 points in 63 games Draft +3: Puts up 11 points in first 33 games in NHL and gets sent down to AHL Draft +4: Returns to NHL tallying 22 points in 79 games Draft +5: Finally shows his potential with 26 goals and 51 points in 81 games This goes to show that not everyones trajectory is so clear cut - some develop their game and some fall off the radar. After 4 years of not making an impact at the NHL level, Shane Doan went on to being one of the best hard nosed scorers in the NHL putting up 400 goals, 960 points and 1339 PIMs to date. I just wanted to put this out there because I don't remember Doan being mentioned in terms of comparable power-forward development timelines.

Virtanen is actually looking pretty good in that highlight reel! He is using his speed really effectively, as the announcers themselves point out, to the point that he is making other players look quite slow out on the ice. He is getting several good looks at the net with his shots, but is not converting yet. It is evident though that he does not have good chemistry with his line-mates yet, and he still has not figured out the positional game entirely. However, if he can keep this up, the game will turn in his favour pretty soon. For a 20 year old in the AHL, I would say I am still pretty excited about what he can bring in the future.

I agree 100%. It's like buying a lottery ticket, losing and then calling the whole thing rigged, turn and point to a winner and say it must be the corner store they bought it from... they obviously have a more competent corner store, I'm going to change corner stores. Lose, rigged, so on and so on... Thats an embellishment but it definitely feels that way with a lot of people. It's all about instant gratification. Mike Gillis in his time here drafted 3 fringe NHLers (Cannauton, Schroeder, and Gaunce), 1 ok NHLer (Hutton) and 1 decent NHLer (Horvat).* Jim Benning in his first draft already produced 4 current fringe NHLers (Virtanen, McCann, Tryamkin and Forsling), and 1 high quality propsect (Demko). At least 2 of these players are going to become ok-decent players in the NHL. *you might consider Hodgson also a fringe-ok NHL player but he retired earlier after being a disappointment to everyone. To say the least, I am much happier with our direction and prospect development than what it used to be.

This article from Friday might of been lost in all of the Tkachuk whining around here, but these are Green's recent thoughts on Virtanen (source). By his account he is working hard at improving his game and is not necessarily lacking at anything in particular - just needs to improve his overall game. This probably means having that constant compete level that the pro level requires to be successful that most people here have pointed out.