HighOnHockey
-
Posts
1,874 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by HighOnHockey
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Someone was talking about player comparisons a couple pages back. I've never been the biggest fan of player comparisons. Feels sort of like a crutch to real analysis, and every player is so unique, comparisons tend to be very superficial... but I have to admit it is pretty fun. Rather than doing a single comparison, I like to do one for ceiling, and one for a more moderate projection.
Brandt Clarke - Drew Doughty, Josh Morrissey
Owen Power - Brent Burns, Dougie Hamilton
Matt Beniers - Mike Richards (before the oxy), Dylan Larkin
William Eklund - Paul Kariya, Johnny Gaudreau
Luke Hughes - Roman Josi, Jake Gardiner
Cole Sillinger - Joe Pavelski, Elias Lindholm
Kent Johnson - Claude Giroux, Kyle Turris
Dylan Guenther - Max Pacioretty, Kyle Palmieri
Fabian Lysell - William Nylander, Kevin Fiala
Chaz Lucius - Kyle Connor, Jeff Skinner
Simon Edvinsson - Victor Hedman, Filip Kuba
Fyodor Svechkov - Logan Couture, Travis Zajac
Carson Lambos - P.K. Subban, Cody Ceci
Mason McTavish - Nick Foligno, Charlie Coyle
Nikita Chibrikov - Artemi Panarin, Clayton Keller
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
10 hours ago, hammertime said:
My main takeaways from the U18 regarding this years draft elligable kids.
Tuomaala, Lysell, really impressed me.
Svechkov further solidified himself as a top 10 pick on my board.
Clarke is still 1st over all for me.
McTavish moved the needle a bit I now have him just outside my top ten and just inside from a Canucks perspective.
Heimosalmi, and Ceulemans were very nice surprises.
I don't think Samu Salminen lost a single faceoff all tournament obviously that's an exaggeration but not much of one. He knows how to slide into open space and has a wicked shot. He plays a power fwd game. If he can improve his pace he could potentially be a second round steal.
Dissapointments:
Guenther, Edvinsson, I'm still high on these 2 players (Top 10) however I expected a more dominant performance from them.
Can't say there's more than two words here I would disagree with. Svechkov top ten is a bold call though. He's the player I've seen the most of any in this draft. Probably upwards of 15 viewings between the three international tournaments, MHL and VHL. I actually suggested at one point last season that he might be a top five pick. So much to like about him - great shot, sky high hockey sense and playmaking ability, elite two-way acumen. But I've just seen him fumble too many puck plays when his time and space is limited, and at least he is smart enough to recognize his lack of high-end puckhandling, but it means he rarely challenges defenders one on one to the inside. Time and space are the most precious commodity in the NHL, and it's really tough to be a top six line-driver if you can't make high end plays without them. Very safe pick to be at least a third line center, and best case scenario is Logan Couture. Interestingly enough, Couture went 9th overall in another fairly weak draft, and they look eerily similar to me.
-
5 hours ago, Sp3nny said:
So I've been going deeper on Johnson and watching some shift-by-shifts to specifically to see the decision making/defensive play. I as actually surprised with his effort level, as he usually tries to get in on the backcheck, on offensively he protects the puck well and wins quite a few board battles which I thought was going to be a deficiency.
Where I think the decision making comes into question is he is always looking to make a play, which I love, but I can see where coaches question it. A number of times in his own end, instead of going glass and out or off the boards, he will be patient and look for a breakout pass or to make a move. Sometimes, this resulted in excellent 2 on 1 opportunities for his team, but when he didn't pull it off, the pressure was coming back on his team. I think this is just the risk you run with a player like this, and having Beniers on his line who is such a motor guy can help to cover those mistakes when they happen.
Personally, I love this type of patience shown in a player, as it's only shown by confident, smart players who are thinking ahead. Yes, it can get you into trouble at times, but if the player has the IQ for it, they learn the time and place to utilize this skill. A player who I think is one of the best in the league at this and who I absolutely adore is Sebastian Aho. He constantly makes dead plays into something, and it makes him such a special player. Aho obviously has significantly better defensive ability at this point, but seeing how Johnson engages in board play and backchecking right now shows he could develop in the same manner of Aho or Giroux.
Last point I wanted to touch on is offensively, when this guy gets a chance, he finishes it. Shot in the slot, one timer, rebound, the guy gets it done, and I love it. Also in one of hi interviews, he says he watches Canucks hockey and his favorite current player is Pettersson, so brownie points there lol. I will not be disappointed if we end up with him.
Good stuff. Love that you made the Giroux comparison, as that is exactly who I've compared him to in the past as a ceiling. I hadn't thought of Aho, but it makes sense.
To clarify, I never said anything against his defensive game, which I don't think is anything special, but I've never seen it as an issue either. There can sometimes be a tendency to conflate poor defensive ability with poor risk management. A great example is I saw some folks on this board criticize Luke Hughes and Brandt Clarke's defensive game because they like to join the rush and spend time deep in the offensive zone. I don't know Hughes as well as Clarke, but I actually consider Clarke a stud in his own zone, in addition to the obvious offensive ability. From what I can tell, Hughes seems very solid in his own zone too. But the point is, a player can be great defensively, and also take risks offensively. Obviously it is difficult to do both at the same time (unless you're prime Erik Karlsson or Bobby Orr), but one does not exclude the other. If a junior player is great defensively but manages risk poorly, that's a lot easier to teach than a player who is just bad defensively.
But yes, I agree with much of your assessment of Johnson, which is why I need to rethink my position on him a little bit. Some comments I made elsewhere early in the season:
"Watching the Michigan game now. Wow Kent Johnson is something else. Two assists so far tonight after the second. At one point he drew a penalty, and then on the powerplay 40 seconds later he drew another penalty, but before MSU could touch the puck, he threw it on net, it ended up going in and he was credited with an assist. He makes things happen every time he touches the puck. So skilled, so dynamic, so creative. "Creativity" is a word that gets thrown around pretty freely in hockey now days, but it's pretty rare to actually see. Johnson is truly creative.
He's a bit risky at times, because he's constantly trying to make things happen. A lot of this stuff wouldn't work in the NHL, but it does feel like he is measuring the risk vs. reward quite well."But as I watched him more, I would see the occasional play where I thought he went a little too far, where he took too much risk when it wasn't clear that it was necessary. I dunno, I was really critical of Cole Perfetti last year for some of the same type of stuff and ended up ranking him lower than most lists. I've said on a number of occasions that I think Johnson is significantly more responsible with the puck than Perfetti was (and with the AHL season he's having, maybe I was wrong about Perfetti anyway).
I also agree with you that Johnson is far from a primadonna - I've always liked his work ethic. and second effort.
All in all, I'm pretty set on my top five of Clarke, Beniers, Power, Hughes, Eklund. I think they all bring a lot of upside with less risk. After that, I currently have Cole Silligner a step down but sitting fairly comfortably at number six. Next I have a group of Johnson, Guenther, Lysell and Lucius that I feel are all really close. Before the U18s I had Guenther at seven, but now I'm not so sure. Lysell has taken major steps forward over the past year, and Johsnon's upside is hard to pass on.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, smithers joe said:
is there any prospects that are nhl ready for next year?
Power and Benier would be most likely, both being late birthdays, already with a year of NCAA, and both play a pro-style game. Not sure if either is a lock, but I'd say the odds are better than not. Brandt Clarke would be a pretty good bet too. Outside chance for Sillinger, Guenther and Eklund.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, TGokou said:
Personally I don't see why Edvinsson would go any higher than 5-6. To me he doesn't scream high offense. Sure the guy is big and can skate and he may eventually put it all together but he's still very raw and can't really be compared to a Hedman / Ekblad / Seider who had the offense as well. If Canucks are drafting in 7-8 range and he's still available I might take a look at him depending on who is still available as I feel the range of 7-10 is more where he deserves to sit.
Interesting. I've seen him upward of 10 times (U17s, 5NU17s, U18s and SHL) and and this has not been my impression. I'm not a fan of Edvinsson (I have him ranked 11th), but his offensive talent is tremendous. The skating is obvious, and it is not just speed, but agility too. But also his hands are ridiculously high end for a defenseman. The problem is his defensive play, which was absolutely brutal when I first saw him at 2019 U17s. It does look like it has improved somewhat, but I'm worried he just doesn't think the game at a high enough level so that he's easily baited into making bad reads and reactions by elite players. If that's the case he has no chance in the NHL:. Of course I may be wrong, and it could be some specific things that are easy to fix, and if that's the case and he can put it all together, then yeah, he could end up the best player of the draft, but personally I wouldn't touch this player anywhere near the top five. Even top ten I'd be hesitant.
As I've mentioned somewhere before, he's a great case study of what if Jeremie Poirier was 6'5. Poirier from last year's draft, was a very similar player, where he has all the skill in the world, but just doesn't think the game at a high enough level defensively. After being ranked top 20 in McKenzie's pre-season rankings, Poirier ended up falling to the 3rd round. But scouts see Edvinsson's combination of size, skating and puck skills, and they must be thinking that if he can even learn to play half decent defense, his size and reach will go a long way in his own zone.
-
12 minutes ago, Sp3nny said:
We must see the game the same, I agree with many of your thoughts. I also was watching for Guenther to stand out, but he just didn't wow me. I get Dal Colle vibes from him for whatever reason. I think he will end up better as Dal Colle has seriously underwhelmed. And same with Pinelli, he just doesn't do it for me, he almost looks awkward out there to me?
McTavish compete is really nice, and I like his overall package, but I very much want skill with our pick, so I would also be a little disappointed depending on where we pick.
I'm still all aboard the Clarke, Johnson and Eklund train. I feel each of these guys has that 'it' factor that can let them be legitimate stars in the league in their prime. They each have their weaknesses as well, but I feel the upside is too great with these 3 in particular.
Overall, the young guys dominated the U18's in impressive fashion. I've noted the other players who stood out to me in my other posts, but you can just tell with some of these young guys that there is some serious talent coming up in the next few years.
Yup. Sounds like you also see the game the right way. I can't make up my mind on Johnson though. I love so much about his game, but see the occasional stupid/risky decision and I think maybe I blow them out of proportion. Early in the season I had him top three or four, but after watching closely and picking apart his game I dropped him down around eight or nine,but after watching a couple shift-by-shifts recently, I think I may have over-corrected and need to meet in the middle somewhere.
-
McTavish top five would be a mistake. I see a very good NHL player, little doubt there. But there's much higher upside players available at that point. Around seven, I guess I wouldn't be too shocked, but depending who else is on the board, I would most likely be pretty disappointed if the Canucks picked him there.
Some finals thoughts on the U17s from me:
Corson Ceuleman stood out in the gold medal game. Love his evasive maneuvering and decision making under pressure. I was slightly disappointed with Guenther throughout the tournament. I've had him ranked around seven for a while now, but I was kinda expecting him to move up my list with this tournament, and I just can't say that was the case. Still a great prospect, but he didn't do enough to pass any of the guys I have ahead of him. Brennan Othmann was the biggest surprise for Canada for me. I've had him ranked towards the end of my first round, but he'll be moving up a ways by the time I figure out my final rankings. I've always known he has skill, but I was really impressed with his physical play. I know some people are really high on Francesco Pinelli, but I just can't say he stood up much to me, despite the offensive numbers. I also liked Nolan Allen and Guillaume Richard on the back end - Allen can really skate for a big kid, and Richard has some serious skill and isn't afraid to use it. What a stacked D that was for Canada - hell, what a stacked team altogether.
I've had Brandt Clarke number one on my list for a while now, and to be honest I was watching closely for mistakes to see if maybe I've made a mistake there. Nope. He's my guy. I only watched two Sweden games, but I didn't notice Simon Robertsson much, which was disappointing as I was pretty high on him. Still a very solid NHL prospect but not sure about the upside. Lysell will likely be moving up my list. His skill has always been obvious, but I've had major concerns about his team concept in the past; seems like he's really maturing as a player over the past year - my only real concern now is with his size and physical play. I already have Svechkov quite a bit higher than most rankings, but I might just have to move him up after that gold medal game performance. Talk about clutch. I don't even know if he had any points but it was easily his best game of the tournament, probably one of the best games I've seen him play. I haven't usually thought of him as that much of a physical presence, but he looked like he was battling for his life in this one, and driving the puck into heavily contested areas of the ice like I've never seen from him before.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, DontMessMe said:
Along with Simon Edvinsson, I'd say he's the biggest boom/bust type prospect in the draft. Crazy skill level. Fast and highly dynamic skater, elite hands. The type of player who can make something out of nothing. But lots of question marks. He struggles to win puck battles, both from a lack of size and what seems to be a lack of aggressiveness. His effort level away from the puck is pretty inconsistent, especially in the defensive zone.
-
Since we're off topic talking about future drafts, here's my early 2022 list for anyone interested:
1. Shane Wright - Not a prototypical power forward but a sturdy kid who excels below the hashmarks. Best assets are his hockey sense, hands in tight spaces, and his shot. Exceptional status but he's more Tavares/Stamkos/McKinnon level prospect that Crosby/McDavid/Bedard.
2. Ivan Miroshnichenko - A bit more of a traditional power forward than Wright. Powerful skater and shooter, protects the puck well down the wing, loves to shoot the puck, likes to throw his body around. And he has some of the best passing vision I've seen from a prospect in years.
3. Brad Lambert - Smooth skater, slick stickhandler, and loves to carry the puck and make things happen offensively. A wizard coming through the neutral zone, making forecheckers miss with uncanny regularity.
4. Matthew Savoie - Ridiculous all-around skill level, but some question marks around consistency and trying to force plays. Speed is the name of the game - lighting quick hands and feet, but he is highly proficient in all the technical skills.
5. Simon Nemec - Big, strong, smart, skilled. The offensive numbers speak for themselves, but one play that spoke volumes was at the U20s where 19 year old 5th overall pick Alex Turcotte was coming at him one on one and the 16 year old Nemec made it look easy angling him off, stripping the puck and making a quick transition play.
6. Danila Yurov - He reminds me so much of Vladimir Tarasenko. Thick, sturdy body, incredibly pro-style player. He never seems to lose a 50-50 battle at the MHL level. Hell, put him one on two in the corners and he'll often find a way to come out with the puck. And then there's his shot, skating, stickhandling, playmaking, puck protection...
7. Tristan Luneau - He's a standout defensive defenseman; separates pucks from bodies and makes quick plays to relieve pressure. But he is at his best on the breakout, where he beats forecheckers primarily with exceptional hockey sense, luring them in and then using brilliant change of speed or direction, although he can also beat guys with pure speed.
8. Gleb Trikozov - The enigma of the draft. On pure natural ability, he looks like a top three pick. Incredibly skilled, loves to carry the puck and make plays, good size and can play a power game, and he shows flashes of brilliance defensively, hustling to break up scoring chances, skating through pucks. At his best he reminds me a ton of Marian Hossa. But he makes highly questionable decisions with alarming regularity.
9. Elias Salomonsson - Another excellent two-way defenseman. Salomonsson may be the most offensively gifted of the three, with outstanding skating and puck skills. He also looks intelligent, dedicated and poised in his own zone. Could end up being the best defenseman of the draft, but I just haven't seen him as much as the other two yet.
10. Isaac Howard - He's a little on the small side at 5'10, but remarkably skilled. Smooth skater and he's a genius at finding holes in coverage, and then he has an elite shot on top of it all.
-
3
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, HockeyHarry said:
Right now Michkov isnt able to be drafted til 2023 and hes already khl signed til 2026. So theres nothing you say or post matters at all. Its 2021 right now .. or have you forgotten that.
Maybe in 2023 you can revist this Michkov discussion.
Calm down, you're gonna have a stroke.
-
7 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:
His draft year is 2023, so the earliest he can play is 2024. So a team needs to wait 3 seasons for him. I mean we waited 2 seasons for Pod. Its unlikely his KHL team will let him off his contract
Yeah I'm not buying it. I don't know anything about the transfer agreement situation, but we've seen it enough before, with Malkin jumping ship, or Radulov ditching his NHL contract to go back to Russia. This isn't Podkolzin or Kaprizov we're talking about, this kid looks borderline generational. Not to mention a late birthday so he'll be almost 19 by the time he is eligible to play in the NHL. If he is able to make the jump right in and be a star player, you really think he's not going to jump at the opportunity to come to the best league in the world?
-
1
-
-
Just now, HockeyHarry said:
Hes Signed already til 2026 with St Petersburg
So what?
-
OK, so about Samu Tuomaala... what the hell? This kids' skill level bonkers. I've consistently cited Johnson, Lysell and Chibrikov as the most purely skilled players in the class, but Tuomaala has to be considered somewhere in that ballpark. Plus his hockey IQ and tenacity look high end. This is only my second game watching him, plus a shift-by-shift on youtube, but kid looks like a possible top 20 pick. How has he flown so far under the radar?
-
3 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:
IT IS WORTH THE &^@#ING WAIT.
Would u not wait for Ovi??
You guys are kidding, right? You really think he's going to stay in KHL until 2026?
-
A couple guys who caught my eye in the quarterfinals yesterday that I hadn't paid much attention to before were Isak Rosen, Samu Tuomaala, and Aleksi Heimosalmi. Rosen showed he wants to be a difference-maker, shooting the puck, making plays. He has a great shot and likes to use it. Tuomaala, holy smokes, that kid oozes skill. Hopefully I get a chance to watch him at least one more game (and/or a shift-by-shift video), because based on yesterday, that kid could fly up my draft rankings, well into the first round. On Heimosalmi, I remember seeing one list that had him in the top 15, and while I didn't see anything that would convince me of that, I saw some impressive skills, hockey sense and poise. I wouldn't be surprised to see any of the three picked in the first round.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:
I'll take 3rd overall and be happy with it.
@HighOnHockey it sounds like you're describing a Philip Danault then when talking about Beniers? Canucks right now have a bunch of converted centers in Lind and Jasek, some mediocre ones in Graovac and Michaelis, and a couple of veterans that may or may not be back in Sutter and Beagle. Besides Carson Focht, we're pretty thin in the middle (Zlodeyev and Costmar and long long shots to ever make it).
Well, I already mentioned Fisher and Kesler, but if Danault resonates more with you, then sure, same idea. But I want to emphasize that I believe that is more of a "floor". I hate that term because the imagery implies a worst case scenario. Of course there is a chance, however minuscule, that any prospect can flop. But my point is there is a very high chance that Beniers reaches at least Danault level. But he also has a dynamic element that Danault never had (I don't remember much about Kes or Fish as prospects, but I don't believe they did either). That element came in flashes with the NTDP program, and came out in spades at the U20s, but he tends to play a safer game against older players in NCAA. So we know he has it in him, the question is just whether his skillset can continue to keep up as he moves up levels. Another way to put it is, based on watching him at NCAA, essentially everything he does will translate to the NHL level, but that's more of a safe, dependable two-way center a la Danault; but based on watching him at U20s, he was doing things that he was able to do at that level, that he may or may not be able to do at higher levels, depending on whether his technical skills can keep up.
-
58 minutes ago, hammertime said:
I think we agree??
I have both Eklund and Guenther ahead of Johnson because if we draft Johnson the guy he is going to have to compete with for ice time is Cap Bo Horvat or play 3rd line and I don't think that will suit him very well. Where I think both Elkund and Guenther have a better opportunity to thrive on the Canucks. Or crazy thought we could actually draft the 3C we really need in Fyodor who's game couldn't possibly mesh better with Podkolzin.
Oh, yeah I think I misunderstood you just a little bit. We come to the same conclusions, but our reasoning to get there is different. You're thinking more specifically to Canucks, I'm just thinking about my list in general. For now that's all I'm focused on.
A little closer to the draft, once the order is set, I'll do my mock draft, which is based not on team needs but GM and scouts' tendencies. It's usually the most accurate mock draft I see online anywhere. Two years ago I had my personal best 8 picks dead on. Last year wasn't quite as good, it was either 5 or 6. Doubt I can beat 8 this year with all the mystery surrounding this draft, but I'll give it my best shot.
Honestly, I'm about as hardline BPA as you can get. For starters, it takes four or five years for prospects to start reaching their potential, and team needs right now might not be the same as team needs in five years. And perhaps more importantly, value is everything - if you pick the best, most valuable player, then you can trade him for team needs later one.
-
9 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:
Why don’t I see much talk about Beniers? The regulars in this thread watch way more junior and euro hockey than I do so I’m just looking for opinions. Beniers looked awesome for a draft eligible at the WJC and everything I read about him sounds great.
I know a centre isn’t our top need but you can never have too many quality pivots.
He's number two on my list, but it's so close right from one through six or seven that I wouldn't be surprised or upset if my teams (Vancouver and Ottawa) get any one of them. Beniers is an elite two-way center first and foremost. Arguably the best defensive forward in the draft. Great hockey sense, hustle, tenacity. Forechecks and backchecks hard and smart. Good in the corners and around the net. He's always above the puck. Offensively, his skating and hockey sense are his best assets. He's not what I would call creative, but he sees the ice well and his mind is quick enough to keep up with his hands and feet, which are impressive. His skating is great in that he's not just fast, but shifty and deceptive. Pretty smooth, but I've seen him blow a tire trying to spin off a check in the corner on a couple occasions. Hands are quick and pretty good in tight spaces, but he's not much of a deker - more likely to try to beat defenders with his speed, or he also likes to do this move where he'll slow up and do a pivot side to side while he waits for reinforcements, and then he'll either pass it off or cut laterally.
I've seen comparisons to Jonathan Toews and I don't mind that one, but he doesn't have Toews' hands. The best comparison I've been able to think of is Dylan Larkin. Some will say that the upside isn't high enough to warrant a top three pick, but the way I see it, he's pretty much a lock to be a second line center a la Ryan Kesler or Mike Fisher, and there's enough offensive upside that he could develop into a two-way franchise center a la Toews/Bergeron. I look at other players in the top ten like Guenther, Sillinger, and I see similarly safe top six forward picks, but not the same possible upside, and then I look at guys like Luke Hughes, Eklund, Johnson, Lucius, Lysell with similar or better upside, but more risk factors. Beniers is a nice combination of safety first plus upside. There's almost certainly going to be better players picked in the top ten, but you can't go wrong with Beniers with any pick, including first overall.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just watched the Russia-Belarus game. Chibrikov was a little disappointing in this one. He obviously has a ton of upside, but something always seems just a little bit off. In this one his line was stuck in the defensive zone an awful lot, which maybe shouldn't be too surprising. I've always thought Ilya Kvochko was a pretty good two-way center, but he is underage. And the other player on that line is Michkov, who is practically double-underage. I really like Michkov's hustle on the backcheck, but he is still a little lost in his own zone at this level. And I'd really like to see a little more hustle from Chibrikov away from the puck.
I'm calling that one the top offensive line, but Russia's actual top line, and the one that commanded the offensive zone possession was, of course, Miroshnichenko-Svechkov-Yurov. I currently have Miroshnichenko ranked number two for 2022 behind only Shane Wright, and Yurov is a 2003 late birthday, currently number six on my 2022 list. The only 2021 draft-eligible on that line is Svechkov, who showed exactly what I've come to expect from him - phenomenal 200 foot hockey sense, excellent playmaking abiity and when he has the puck with time and space he is brilliant at using deception to draw defenders out of positions to open passing plays, but he still lacks high-end stickhandling ability with limited time and space.
I like Katelevsky quite a bit too. Great on faceoffs, excellent skater, good hands, good defensively, fairly pro-style game. He'd be a good second round pick. One more player I quite like is Vsevolod Gaidamak. Good size and strength, and he's not the most highly skilled forward, but he always finds ways to create scoring chances due to elite hockey sense.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, hammertime said:
Thanks for your reply. This is where we run into trouble. IMO I see Johnson as a Tyson Jost comparable. Now I'm a big fan of Jost. However if we look at our team needs as you said we need a C or a RHD. If we peg Johnson at a potential offensive sheltered 2/3C VS Guenther Eklund as potential 1/2 wingers we may be better off drafting the wingers and flipping them or one of our other wingers they out perform later for a defensive 3c ++
I have to disagree with some of your assessment on Johnson. For starters, Jost was a highly skilled junior player, sure, but what made him a top prospect was all of the intangibles. To give an accurate scouting report on Jost you would talk about his skating, hands, passing, shooting, but you also had to talk about his work ethic, 200 foot hockey sense, tenacity on the forecheck and backcheck, faceoff ability, penalty killing. What made him such a great prospect was that if all the skills panned out you would have an elite two-way center, but if not you'd still have a solid depth center.
Johnson is a more purely skilled offensive center. Nothing against his work ethic or defensive ability - I actually really like his effort level with and around the puck. But he's not exactly what you would call a two-way forward. Not so much due to a weakness in his defensive play as to questionable decision-making with the puck. His creativity with the puck is easily the best in the draft in my opinion, and his skillset is in the top three of four in the class. So for one thing, no team is going to draft him in the top ten if they think his upside is a sheltered 2/3 offensive center. The team that drafts him will be a team that thinks he has a legit chance to be an offensive superstar. I have said myself that I see some Kyle Turris in him, but teams who think that is all he is will wait until outside the top ten. Most likely there is some team in the top ten somewhere that thinks he is a legit offensive dynamo. So basically where we disagree is that you seem to be just looking at their upside and saying that Eklund, Guenther have better upside. This is a weak way of thinking about things. Johnson has better upside than Guenther, but Guenther is a safer pick. But of course even that is an over-simplistic way of looking at it.
One thing I like to do for fun is break prospects into three or more categories of potential. So lets say Kent Johnson has a 25% chance to be a top line superstar, a 50% chance to be a 2/3 offensive center, and a 25% to bust outright. Guenther might have a 15% to be a top line winger, a 75% chance to be a 2/3 winger, and a 10% chance to bust.
-
1
-
-
What's the deal with that Finland line? I haven't had a chance to watch them yet. But I've learned over the years that that kind of production has to be taken seriously at a major international tournament. 1.5 p/g doesn't always mean anything, but history has shown us that if an entire line keeps up at upwards of 2 p/g for the whole tournament, at least one of them has to be legit, probably two. With Yakupov-Grigorenko-Kucherov, everyone thought Kucherov was the tag-along - wow did that ever make people look stupid. At U20s with Puljujarvi-Aho-Laine, everyone figured Aho was along for the ride. Tkachuk-Matthews-Bracco. Keller-Brown-Yamamoto. Stuetzle-Elias-Peterka.
-
2 minutes ago, Isam said:
Dude i love drafts like this cuz putting a label on this draft as lacking can be huge mistake. Who would have thought that 2017 would actually produce all star talent like heiskennen, makar and hughes. Factor in vilardi and that draft could be killer.
As for this draft, i think you under rate power. What he did at michigan as a true freshman was super impressive. Yeah, he has some work to do the offensive side, but the way he moves right now and how closes the gaps and his stick checking reminds me of weber.
Overall still good analysis
Yeah, I've made the comparison between this draft and 2011 before, as it was supposed to be a really weak class, but ended up producing really good players with almost every pick in the top ten - only a bunch of those took a long time to reach their primes. 2017 is another solid comparison, in that it lacks the clear superstars at the top, but will have real good players in the top ten. I like my 2011 comparison better because I see more emphasis on the safe but limited upside players - I think guys like Lysell, Chibrikov, Johnson and Lucius will be towards the end of or outside of the top ten.
On Power, you may be right that I'm underestimating him. I do have him at hovering at 3rd or 4th on my list right now, but I just do not see anything remotely resembling the upside many people say they see. I've heard Hedman, Pronger, Weber, but I can't help but see Dougie Hamilton. Reminds me a lot of Byfield last year, when I kept seeing comparisons to Malkin, which was absolutely astounding to me. I saw something closer to Eric Staal, Mark Scheifele, maybe even Mike Modano, and that's pretty high praise and something to be excited about, but Malkin? Come on.
I have to admit, I haven't seen Power as much as some of the other players in this draft (four full viewings to be honest), but for me it's actually been the offense that has impressed me. The defensive side is what I'm more worried about. He's really fast for a big man when he gets going, but I have major concerns about his agility and quickness. When he has to turn quickly or stop and start - I've seen him get beat to the outside and on retrievals way too much. And he uses his size and reach quite well, but I don't see anything resembling the physicality of a Shea Weber, forget about Chris Pronger.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, KKnight said:
Why couldn't we be bad next season or the one after. Had to be this draft year. I'm only keen on a few prospects and I don't know much about any else. Next season Wright, Savoie, Lambert, Miroshnichenko are very elite.
I agree, the four players you mentioned are better than any player in this year's class. And beyond that, there's upwards of 10 players who would have to be considered in the same tier as the top handful of players for this draft - Danila Yurov, Rutger McGroarty, Simon Nemec, Elias Salomonsson, Tristan Luneau, Gleb Trikozov. Watch out for Trikozov in particular; on pure natural abilities he looks like a future NHL gamebreaker - reminds me a lot of Marian Hossa - but he has major issues with decision-making, forcing plays, trying to do too much. Could be mostly just over-confidence, and if he can settle it down he'll be either a top five pick or the steal of the draft.
Anyways, I doubt the 2021 draft will be as bad as some people think. I guess I'm not sure quite how bad people think it is, but seems that some are exaggerating it. There will be very good players, even superstars, you just have to find them. If anyone keeps tabs on my posts, they may notice one thing I keep saying about players in this class - that I'm not sold on his upside. And it's true for most players in the draft. Guys Power, Guenther, Beniers, Sillinger, McTavish, Svechkov, look like safe bets to be really good NHL players, but I doubt any are franchise-altering perennial all-stars. There are a few who may potentially turn out to be that, but bring a lot of risk - Fabian Lysell and Nikita Chibrikov could end up being superstars, but have a long way to go to handle the physical rigors of the NHL, Chaz Lucius has very curious hockey sense - he sees the game differently than most, and it's difficult to determine how that will translate to the pro game. Kent Johnson is very creative, but I have to question some of his decision-making, in some ways he reminds me of Kyle Turris. Simon Edvinsson could be an offensive superstar, but as things stand right now, he is abysmal defensively.
There are three players in the class that, in my opinion, fall somewhere in the middle - they're safe bets to be at least good NHL players, but also have at least some chance to be franchise-altering superstars - those would be William Eklund, Brandt Clarke, and Luke Hughes. I believe that the level of security that they're getting a good NHLer a team will get from a guy like Beniers, Guenther, Power, could very well make them top three picks, and a team may look at Edvinsson's upside and take him top three, but overall, Eklund, Clarke and Hughes will be tough to pass on for the top three spots.
-
1
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
I have had my eye on this guy for awhile. 6 ft 179 lbs
His offensive game has developed, along side his defensive game
He is moving up the Draft board........best Russian
Well, certainly his game has improved, but that's not why he is moving up the draft board. I've had him in my top 15 since the 5 Nation U17s spring of 2020. I remember being baffled when the first media lists started coming out that summer and nobody had him in their first round. People just weren't paying attention. Usually happens with defensive specialists (see Mukhamadullin or Jake Sanderson last year), as flashy skills are more readily noticeable. Along with Matt Beniers and Cole Sillinger, he's one of the best defensive forwards in the draft. His offensive upside isn't among the best of the class, but I think best case scenario he could be something like a Logan Couture.
On the other side of things, I've been sleeping on McTavish since the 2019 U17s. I didn't see much more than a thick, sturdy NHL body. Still not at all sold on his offensive upside, but he brings enough skills, hockey sense, and aggressiveness to crack my top 20, maybe top 15.
-
1
-
Would u not wait for Ovi??
2021 NHL Entry Draft
in Prospects / Farm Team
Posted · Edited by HighOnHockey
I think you underrate Nick Foligno then. Dude had 73 points one year, was named to the all-star team. I know it was just one season, but the point is, it proves he is capable of it, but ideally on a good team, that's not what he's there for. He can play center or wing on any line, plays PK, PP. When he was traded to Toronto, I told my friends this could be the thing that finally puts the Leafs over the top. They have all the skill in the world, but he brings a huge chunk of everything else they're missing to go somewhere in the playoffs - leadership, grit, competitiveness, heart, toughness.
Not even sure what the Petes could have to do with anything. I've never seen him play for them. I've seen him at U17s, U18s and a shift-by-shift in the Swiss League.
Yeah I don't really think Edvinsson will be as good as Hedman, point was just that if he lives up to his potential he could be really, really good.
Would you be able to elaborate a little on your comparison between Pietrangelo and Lambos? I don't necessarily disagree, but I'm curious what you see there? I tend to think of Lambos as a more offensive-minded defenseman than Pietrangelo.