-
Posts
5,665 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by kloubek
-
I hope so. The amazing thing is that we're not relying on any one of our prospects to live up to their potential nearly as much as we have in the past. I think we have plenty of prospects which WILL be NHL players at some point... ranging from 4th liners to potential 1st liners. But with Boeser looking crazy good that goes a long ways to shoring up the elite talent we have been lacking. If we hit on Dahlen and Pettersson, we're going to be golden in a 2-3 years. So I'm not even concerned.... let Lind and the others develop naturally and show us what they can do. Some will be studs and some will be duds but we're going to be just fine in the end.
-
That's precisely the opinion I had as well. Boy were we ever wrong.
-
I am not sure what to make of Vanek. If he works out well somewhere, then great - but he's an aging guy and it remains to be seen if he even wants to stick around. I wouldn't want to get rid of anyone this season just because of our temporary glut. Then as far as Goldobin goes - who knows how he will turn out. To me, he is one of our biggest wildcards. He has obvious skill and it would make sense to try him out with the Sedins for several games, but I think it might be too early in his development so far to make any personnel changes based on Goldy. I believe if we hold onto Baertschi that he will either prove to be a very worthwhile player for us regardless of what his ceiling is. He plays the left side which we are weak on and I believe he is (or will be) a solid 2nd liner. Is that something we really want to give up?
-
I think your assists might be slightly high there, but if he is playing with Boeser (and if Boeser continues to kill it) then I imagine that would be entirely possible. Horvat is likely to be a bit better this year as well, and as what is effectively our first line I'm sure they'll get good ice time as well. I really don't know what to think of Baertschi. He's playing top minutes but honestly he's not a 1st line player and would be better playing 2nd line minutes. We just don't have anyone for the left side so he's handed more ice time than he really SHOULD be getting. But another offseason has passed and I expect him to continue developing as he has been. Last season he wasn't leaps and bounds better but he seemed more physical and willing to get into the dirty areas, as well as better defensively, along with a bit more scoring. All good stuff. I'd like to keep him around - but I just don't believe he has legit 1st line potential. What I see in 3 years is this: Dahlen Pettersson Boeser Baertschi Horvat Eriksson (Now I say this knowing full well that Boeser is likely to take the top RW spot with Baertschi and Horvat, and if that line has chemistry it would make sense not to break it up)
-
There is no doubt that Biega isn't a particularly talented player. But his work ethic is terrific, he's super consistent, and he comes cheap. In my opinion he remains as the first or second call-up on our D. Great to have around for depth.
-
Likewise. I honestly didn't see the upside in Granlund's game, and after his first season here it only perpetuated that belief. But last season he made huge strides. Though he did gain an extra two minutes per game of ice time last season over the one prior, that's because he was actually contributing. Even on a per minute basis he was far more productive, and that wasn't only when playing with the Sedins. I hope last year was not an anomaly and he's able to continue developing even remotely at the same pace. If so, he looks to be a minimum elite 3rd liner if not a solid 2nd liner. Really - I am hoping and see him to be our next Hansen: Equally versatile, more dynamic, but just not quite as quick.
-
Boeser has more elements to his game than his shot - that's just the standout attribute. He's also sturdy on his feet, mobile, and isn't afraid to drive the net - all of which are clear. Henrik isn't just a good passer either. He's good at faceoffs, is hard to knock off the puck, leadership skills and also has an exceptionally high hockey IQ himself. All of these other attributes are also clear. My point being that in the highlights I've seen of Lind - he doesn't have many standout abilities. Not to say that positioning and playmaking isn't an awesome talent to have but when facing NHL-class defensemen I am not sure it will translate to success. It also means that unless he steps it up in another aspect of his game he is likely to require a certain kind of linemate; one who can finish the plays that he helps put together. Since a center tends to be more of a playmaker himself, that means for him to be successful he most likely needs an elite LW scorer and aside from the potential of Dahlen I'm not sure we have anyone else in the system who is likely to fill that role. Don't get me wrong. I like Lind quite a bit. I've always been a huge fan of players who play a cerebral game. I just hope he can hone another element or two to round out his game.
-
I'm hopeful for Lind but I'm concerned that his point totals appear to be inflated by his positioning. He is excellent at it. He's a high IQ player and reads the play exceptionally well. This is fantastic, and elite players almost always have this ability. ... But the elite players also usually have standout skill. I'm just not generally impressed with the skillset ive seen so far. He looks... "alright" in the highlights ive seen. Doesn't seem to have high end skill in any area other than positioning. When he moves into the pros where the defensemen are generally more aware and better positioned themselves, I'm interested to see how he will fare.
-
I think there is some extremely solid competition for the Calder. Dont get me wrong... Boeser looks amazing so far but I said it before about Chatfield and Ill say it here again.... the sample size is still small. His development could falter, he may lose confidence, he may be overachieving. I have little doubt he will be an important piece of our team, but lets try to moderate our expectations so we are happy he is in contention as opposed to upset if he isn't.
-
I cant say I knew much about him when drafted. I was surprised to say the least but I believed right away that Benning must have seen greatness that others missed - despite him being skinny. I figured that maybe some GMs passed and scouts downgraded him largely because they were more focused on 1-2 year entry players as opposed to 2-3 years players. No doubt hes the latter. He has the height and there is no reason he couldn't bulk up. Heck... I was 160 when 18 and 205 when 22 - all natural muscle from good diet and simply keeping in shape. Then I thought about the way the NHL is heading and if a truly tiny guy like Gaudreau can make it then he would be fine. So I watched highlights and saw elite skill there right away, and changed my tune. One never knows for sure how a guy will develop but I rather like the pick now. I truly think he is first line material and we are going to be stoked as we watch him progress.
-
Ok... two game sample size. You might be onto something.:) Still early to tell but man he's showing well this preseason so far.
-
Ill agree that he seems to have more upside than Tanev for sure. But I will reserve overall judgement on him until I actually get to see him play a decent sample size. Even then its almost a guaranteed Comets spot for him, and therefore against when lesser competition than this preseason. Still, I'm looking forward to what he can do and how he develops. I never even had him on my radar up until a couple of weeks ago. He may be a nice surprise.
-
....in an exhibition game. Besides - are you saying you believe he is likely to be anywhere even remotely close to that good/lucky every game? One NHL game to his name is hardly an appropriate sample size to dispute what has been his entire hockey career up to today.
-
Yeah, I thought it was a pretty weak call. Proof positive they're trying to take the physicality out of the game.
-
I haven't been high on Virtanen since we drafted him. But one thing I always knew is that with his skillset and size that he would be an NHL player soon enough in some capacity. While 4th line minutes are not ideal for development, it doesn't mean a player can't work their way up the roster if and when it is warranted. Ie: Burrows. I still maintain, however, that Virtanen is not the player we were hoping he would be; he's probably a solid 3rd liner at best as opposed to the 1st/2nd line Lucic-type player we were dreaming of having. And similar to what you said, I hope he proves ME wrong.
-
True enough - but as he is expected to play more of a stay-at-home game, he's halfway down the ice when anything happens. I think the point was more in reference to the forward lines and a tough forecheck.
-
He absolutely is. He has decent speed so he is not a detriment there, and plays with more grit than virtually any of our other players. He is really quite an ideal 4th liner, and I'm happy to have him on this team. I think where many fans (myself included) raise their eyebrows is to the fact that he makes over 2 1/2 million to do what he does. It could be argued that his salary is a little on the high side for what he brings, and it's simply a fact that you can't ice a competitive team if you are paying 50-100% more than other teams are for players in your bottom six.
-
Haven't seen recent pics/video of Hutton so I couldn't say. I suppose that always is a risk of bulking up, but if true hopefully he cuts weight before the season starts.
-
Re: Hutton: I have high hopes too. His rookie season was very good, and similar to the rookie season of some big defensive stars in the game today. Yes, he took a step back last season but I'm still high on him and confident that his slump was indeed due to figuring out how to play the game with his added weight. In the end, that will likely be a beneficial element in his game. I believe we will all be at least satisfied with Hutton this season. As for Stecher - he has so much potential. His mobility is outstanding and far better than any other defenseman we will have playing. I predict that in the next couple of years he will be a solid top-4 blueliner. His size is still a bit of a detriment, but I think he will overcome that thanks to his drive (as you say) as well as his ability to dodge checks - which has already proven to be very good.
-
I'm one of the ones who didn't see a lot of value in Granlund, so my opinion isn't worth much.... But regardless, my concern with Baertschi is lack of progression in his game. I know there are other elements to consider like offensive zone starts, etc - but I took a look at his stats. I considered the amount of games played in a season and extrapolated it to 82 games from 2012 to 2017. I then took his amount of time on ice per game, then adjusted his points to consider same amount of time on ice per game of 15 minutes. That gives us his average production level over the 5 year span if he were to play 15 minutes a game, and 82 games per year. This is what I found: 2012-2013: 47 points 2013:2014: 35 points 2014-2015: 43 points 2015-2016: 37 points 2016-2017: 39 points I do think he is a legit 2nd liner, but besides perhaps being a bit more defensively responsible, he really hasn't developed any since he has been in the NHL since his arrival. In fact, his rookie year was by far his best considering the amount he played. I'd expect his average will probably be about 40-41 points per 15 minutes this coming season - so given the likelihood of an increased role to about 17 minutes a game, that alone would have him end up with around 46 points overall this season. That's a slight improvement in ability ability/chemistry, but more likely to do with increased ice time. Add in the fact that he will likely have an even better Horvat and maybe a better-scoring right winger on his line in Boeser, I'd say it will probably be closer to 50-52 points total if he plays the full 82 games. That actually IS good enough for low-end 1st line scoring statistically. But at the end of the day, any team needs more out of their 1st line than that and I think he has been and will continue to appear better than he really is playing with Horvat and perhaps at some point Boeser. In summary, I feel he hasn't really shown an ability to improve much beyond his raw skill, which translates to a low-end 1st liner, or an elite 2nd liner with little upside beyond that. Nothing to scoff at, really... especially considering what we paid to acquire him, but I also believe the risk of trading him now is relatively low for us since I believe what you see is what you get.
-
Rodin being in the lineup should require him basically being a standout at camp. I am not keen on Dorsett's contract for what he brings offensively, but as a 4th liner he plays the role well. Always stands up for his teammates (even if he loses most fights), is a decent hitter, has good speed still and can chip in here and there. Let's face it - our team isn't the biggest or the toughest around so if you take DD out of the picture we have even less to work with.
-
It is so hard to say, given the competition. I might be wrong, but I feel that if he is put up against NHL-class defensemen he will have a harder time scoring. The kid certainly has good vision though - I'll give him that - but he doesn't strike me as being a fancy highly skilled player as opposed to a good opportunist.
-
Agreed. I was surprised that he regressed, but that was likely due to a multitude of factors like adjusting to his new body, etc. I know a rookie year doesn't determine a ton, but he had some really decent numbers which leads me to believe he has a lot more to give than we've seen so far.
-
Oh I get it. He's young, and anything can happen. I just don't see the hockey IQ in effect with Jake. He has tools - no doubt about that, but he SHOULD be scoring more than we've seen... at least in the AHL. As for comparing him to Baertschi and Granlund, I don't think they were considered "write offs" at all. They were just considered to be guys who had skills but it wasn't believed they were ready to translate those skills to the NHL level, and that it is unlikely either were destined to be 1st liners. And ultimately, that appears to have been exactly the case for both of them - it appears their ceiling is 2nd line players imo. Also, you should note that both had almost a point-a-game seasons in the AHL 2-3 seasons before coming into the NHL full time. (Granlund moreso... Baertschi closer to about .75ppg, but that's why most of us feel Granlund has the bigger upside) What has Virtanen accomplished? About a point every 3 games, or .33 or so. Now, I'm sure there are other aspects to this, such as the possibility that Virtanen was told to ignore scoring in favour of working on the weak areas of his game. And if that is the case, perhaps he should get a break from the fans. I don't know if this is true or not, and I'm not interested in looking through this entire thread as to gain knowledge as to whether it is believed he was told that. But assuming that is not the case, his numbers look extremely low to me and almost certainly guarantees we don't have the next Lucic on our hands.
-
I can't say I disagreed with you, but turns out he did indeed get a one-way. But it is for 687,500 so there is minimal risk in that.