DJ Kreuzberg
-
Posts
174 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by DJ Kreuzberg
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
As some requested. I've included a couple of good passing plays, a hit and some shots, along with the goal.
who was he playing with?
He started the game on the RW of Reinhart and Klimchuk. After he returned from the Scherbak hit, he was then lined up on the LW of Quenneville and Hawryluk. On this line, he really began to shine. I thought that line as a whole was the best for Team WHL; generated a lot of chances, forechecked hard and played the body hard.
-
7
-
Due to many ppl on other boards asking for the hit, I uploaded it last night.Anyone have the hit everyone keeps talking about?
-
2
-
-
Question is if he'd be good enough. He looks like a total wildcard on defense and times and his shot is erratic at best. But at least dude's big.
Wildcard on defense? That is simply not what i saw. He was very steady and played it very safe. Tryamkin is not a wildcard on defense... Subban is a wildcard on defense.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Just finished
Based on that highlight package it seems like he like to jump into the play a lot which is a good thing but I hope his defensive game is there first and foremost. Also looks like he has a strong wrister and likes to use it a lot from the point. My guess is his slapshot accuracy is horrible which I think Benning alluded to.
He does not jump into the play too often. More often, he is the guy furthest back because he prefers the safe play.
From the games i have watched, his defensive game (next to his size) is his biggest strength. This is a very smart player defensively, always in position, active stick, plays the body when necessary, and as you will see in the video, he makes players pay in front of the net. His reach knocks away a lot of pucks and thwarts many entrances into his zone. He is nearly impossible to move once he has body position on the opponent.
Also from what i can see, his shots get blocked a lot, which may also be what Benning is referring to when he commented on the lack of frequency the puck reaches the net. I'd say its edler-esque in the frequency of blocked shots. Something to work on for him. The wrister from what i can see has a higher probability of making it through and is quite deceiving.
-
12
-
Go to 2:35, Nikita is number 88, shows he is a pretty decent skater, extremely small sample size, only thing I could find, anyone else has vid on the kid pls share
And I doubt benning would mis speak but is he right, is he 6 7.5 265 lbs or 6 7 230, because thats a big difference lol either way kid must eat like a horse
I am working on a video for his play during the WJC, maybe Tuesday night?
-------------
I have watched a couple of games so far, here's my takeaway:
I never thought someone could make Zadorov look like rather small. But Tryamkin does. I don't believe he is 265, if so, i do wonder where weight has gone. He is not scrawny like Chara or Zadorov, but he isn't a really thick man like Big Buff is either. The 240lb listing seems much more accurate based on what i've seen.
He moves fairly well for his size. Average accelerating, straight line speed is actually good. Mobility is good, but there are some times when i notice some balance issues. He'll have to work on that. Tranisitons and backwards skating is good for his size.
He is a defensive D man, but saw some time on the 2nd PP as the point man and trigger man. Not a PP QB at all, not that its surprising. He has very good positioning and is always the guy who is hanging back to cover his partner. What i liked about Tryamkin is how he was always the first guy to the puck to gain body position and once he has that body position, he is hard to move and he boxes out very well. He actively uses his stick, and with that size/reach he is fairly effective.
His first pass... is not that great. On numerous occasions, he has made a hard pass out of the zone, missing its target and has led to icing.
He is not what i would call a physical defender. As i said, he uses his body well in terms of positioning and boxing out. But not a guy going for hits. I don't see this "mean" people are talking about.
I am indifferent/somewhat optimistic on this pick. I can see what they like about this guy, have to wait and see how he develops and whether or not he comes over.
-
2
-
-
I have Ehlers above Dal Colle, Ehlers has more offensive skill and doesn't play with Drouin, Dal Colle plays on a line with 2 draftees in Cassels and Laughton. Dal Colle is a great player but Ehlers is individually a better hockey player.
At even strength, MDC only played with Cassels and Laughton for a brief period of time, a month and half. MDC spent most of his time with Smith and Sterk, or Latour and Cassels. In fact, he had more success and chemistry with Sterk and Cassels than he did with Laughton.
I think anyone who actively watched MDC would say he made those around him much better instead of leaching off of them.
IMO, MDC is a better hockey player than Ehlers.
-
I really doubt that is true. He plays in a mens league, i'm sure he can do a pull-up.
Nope, it is true. He confirms it and TSN has footage of it.
But what does that ultimately mean? Pretty much nothing.
-
see him getting taken in the late first, don't see how he drops to 36 honestly
Goalies for the most part are always an uncertainty in the draft; partly due to a riskier development path and seasoned NHL goaltenders nowadays don't carry a terribly high value.
I can see him at 36 and i can see him taken in the top 20. In any case, i think he has the mentality and pedigree to become a very solid starter.
-
If that is the case I think I pass on Pastrnak. Yes he has talent but these injuries are very iffy and there are so many other good players to draft, why take a risk?
I think the risk lies in the the uncertainty of how the injury has affected his play. Can he return to pre-injury form? The U18s are a small sample so something the scouts will have to assess and see if the injury is still lingering.
Reading the hockey news addition and it said it was a back injury. Partly due to the fact why he was not as good as peopel were expecting in the U18's tourney.
Pastrnak plays a very reckless style of game much like Taylor Hall. Where he just goes all out but ends up hurting himself in the process because he is playing that style of game where he will do just about anything to get the puck on his stick. He isn't the biggest player either at 6 ft and only 168lbs, he isn't the most sturdiest of players.
His skill you can't deny and if at the draft he falls to our plate in the second round, you can't pass up on it. However you will have to try and teach him to play a game that won't make him self destruct himself in the process.
All i've seen confirmed is an upper body injury. Yes, the injury may have affected his play in the U18s. Which as discussed above is the risk teams will have to assess - how much did the injury affect his play there and will it affect his play in the future. Rodin who was also reckless at times, suffered injuries that seemed to really hinder his play in NA; the similarities to me are not lost.
I think at #36, he makes a very good case to be picked. First round talent. I was just pointing out why he may have slipped on a few rankings and pointing out some other issues with his game.
-
Very interesting. I am not too sure about the accuracy of his size. Eliteprospects says he is 6'4" 205 and it says his twin brother is 5'10" 174 that seems kind of funny if true.
The 6'4" 205lbs for Sanheim is correct, as far as I am concerned.
Sanheim participated at the U18s and under iihf, they have to take measurements prior to the tournament. That measurement matches what the iihf released.
-
he was ranked much higher earlier in the season wasn't he? Could be a steal if the only reason he dropped is because some chl kids took flight.
I heard he's got major heart. Could be a pretty good player if he's as skilled as they say he is and has a Hansen like heart. I'd take him with our second for sure if he's there.
Pastrnak is generally ranked in the 1st round. The reason why he is slipping a bit is not due to CHL players rising, its due to his season ending injury sustained in February. He got absolutely blown up and sustained a pretty bad upper body injury and i've heard rumours of a possible concussion. Then he comes back for the U18s and he simply did not look like the same player.
He was truly a frustrating player to watch at the tournament. He was reckless with the puck, so many turnovers. I'm not sure he is seeing the ice very well, so many shots blocked, passes intercepted. But he had some dangerous rushes and a few of those shots made it to the net. Poor performance, IMO.
Vrana has also been a very mixed bag. I don't think i was impressed by him even once in any viewing of him prior to the 2014 U18s. Didn't impress much in the SHL. Then exploded and surprised me at the U18s. Plays a very mature game, was dynamic off the wing, showed some great speed. Good understanding of the game. A stark contrast to what Pastrnak brought who was wild with his decisions with the puck. Was it just a few good games or is he wildly inconsistent? Its such a small sample size so its tough to tell.
-
But I think you'll see the Canucks taking a lot more Canadian talent at the draft.
The Bruins have 16 Canadians on their roster. Not sure if that's the most, but I bet it's close.
Another reason this might be a continuing trend is the restructuring Gillis did with the scouting staff last year. The scouts are now focusing on WHL/Ontario/USA. Can't say i disagree, the OHL and NCAA are our strengths.
-
I'm not sure their attitudes are the same.
Personally, I feel Ho-Sang has made enough strides throughout the year to dispel some of those concerns. He showed the ability to be coachable and to lead his team when they were without a leader. He has also worked hard to improve his game from what it was last season.
As someone who values attitude higher than most, I do find Ho-Sang cocky, but i haven't heard it rubbing teammates the wrong way or any other issues this season. Ho-Sang is cocky in the same way Domi is; in many ways, it feeds into their game and helps them play the way they do.
I still think if he is there at 36, i would take him without hesitation. His ability to adapt showed that there is definitely more here and couple that with his skill, which is top 10-15, i think he would be a great pick, although with some risk (same risk as i see in Nylander TBH).
Justin Kirkland in Kelowna is a guy I'd like to see in the 2nd or 3rd rd.
Big guy, with some skill and one of the nicest kids in the draft.
He is ranked seemingly between our 2nd and 3rd. Not sure if i'd reach a tiny bit on him for our 2nd. But i'd be ecstatic if he's there at our 3rd.
-
With Benning as the GM, Ho-Sang won't even be on Vancouver's draft list.
Super talented, but there's a bit of a Robbie Schremp vibe to him. That kid has bust written all over him.
How can you be so sure though? Boston drafted Khoklachev at #40 and they are actually very similar players, except HoSang is perhaps even more skilled.
Koko probably isn't the best or most shining example of success, but it does show that Boston (perhaps Benning) doesn't shy away from these kind of players.
-
he also obviously watches a ton of video of these players, so yea you have to take his view with a grain of salt, but it's also another perspective and I very much welcome that. As we know, year in and year out there are a lot of surprises on draft day, and it never seems to follow the "consensus".
I don't think my issue with his rankings is that he doesn't follow consensus, i question his methodology and values (regarding prospects). Even if i may not agree, Button certainly does not follow consensus, but i still respect his opinion. He watches these kids and makes his judgement. It's as simple as that. A method that makes sense. But Pronman on the other hand, has in the past said he combines advanced stats, which are terribly difficult to track in junior leagues as I mentioned, hearsay from his supposed sources, and very limited viewings. How is this different than say a typical HF poster going off of scouting reports from the scouting agencies available and watching a handful of games on the players in the 1st round? I don't see much difference once you throw the bogus advanced stats cred out the window.
So what you're saying is my CHL Media pass puts me ahead of this guy. lol
Not so. It's not simply being at games that is my issue here, perhaps more of theminister's bone to pick. It's the basis of his opinions, which as Ossi mentioned are well out there at times.
-
I think any half quality researcher can do the same. Fair enough if that's his angle but it bothers me that he's put up as a draft expert and evaluator if he doesn't watch live games. There are countless Canadians who should be considered above his qualifications. He's done a good job self promoting on the web but it doesn't equal doing the work required of an actual scout IMO.
Talking to scouts is one thing, scouting is another.
Someone... someone finally sees it as i do... I have spoken out about him but received flack for it on HF.
I once compared his opinions as equivalent to just another poster on a hockey forum; and i got some push back, saying it was insulting to say that about him. But let's be serious here. In 2010, this guy came out of the wood works with no hockey background, went to school for programming, and set up a website to rank these prospects. Promoted himself as an advanced stats guy, who gathered advanced stats on all of these prospects, goes off about Corsi this, corsi that, when guess what? The OHL/WHL/high school leagues don't even track shots on net, the utter basis of corsi. Laughable.
And then when you go into his "explanation" of his evaluation criteria, its the basis of these advanced stats and hearsay he gets from his sources, supposed scouts he knows. Where did he meet these scouts? Why would they befriend a programmer who runs a website? In addition, he once wrote, there are players he has never seen ever, but is only going off of what he hears, in some cases he says he has seen some guys 1-5 times a year, which i assume is through video.
Like you, I feel he is a misrepresentation of a scout. He is a writer and if he passed himself off as such, i'd be fine with it. Except he doesn't. He passes himself off as a scout, but no, he is not. Now all of a sudden that ESPN has hired him as a writer, he has become a legitimate source to some, which is entirely faulty. Now he's going on national radio to promote his ideas. Its a sham. /rant
-
1
-
-
ho sang will definitly fall because of that 15 game suspension he receive in the playoffs because it proves the report about him having a crappy attitude weren't just reports
This is faulty logic.
Ho Sang did get a suspension, but it was highly criticized (cannot over-state how highly) by many at all levels of hockey, even former players came out to speak against the suspension, and many many people believe he did not deserve any suspension. The play is on youtube if you are interested.
In one game, Ho Sang was clubbed in the back of the head by Stolarz with his goalie stick, who only gets 6 games. But next game, Ho Sang makes a play around the boards that happens every single game but the resulting play led to the player falling awkwardly, who then slid into the boards and broke his leg. Unfortunate result, but that is not a dirty play and that simply does not prove that he has a "crappy attitude". I can't even see the link between the two. IMO, this was a suspension on the result, rather than the act itself.
Ho Sang's attitude concerns stemmed from when he was 15-16, during the OHL draft, and him rubbing Hockey Canada the wrong way, leading to continual snubs from national teams. He was considered cocky (still is), selfish with the puck, didn't commit to the team game, and had questions about his coachability. However, he has come a long way since his OHL draft season. This year showed he can carry a team, even after Rychel was traded away. Showed he can play a team game, can be coached, and was the leader of his team. On most reports, his teammates like him, in comparison to DeAngelo.
Should Ho-Sang make it 36, he would be a no-brainer for me. He has some of the best hands in this draft. He can beat you in so many ways, a multi-faceted threat in the offensive zone.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
What's the deal with this sanheim guy? He pretty good or what?
I mentioned him earlier in this thread. He is a very good player, who has shown improvement throughout the year. He was still playing in midget last season and many have said his trajectory and learning curve has been steep.
What I like about him is that he plays a smart game; can make a good first pass or carry the puck, can skate the puck out of his zone and shows patience while doing so. Makes smart pinches. He is a very good skater and at times has reminded me of how Edler moves on the ice. By the end of the season, i found him much more aggressive in his puck movement and on the PP, where he was constantly moving down for back-door opportunities. He can also walk the line well, uses a wrister more often than a slapper.
When i first posted on him, i thought he would be available for our 3rd rounder, but his U18s should have made every team take notice. Craig Button said he will be a 1st rounder. Not sure if i believe him, but i do believe he has garnered much more attention. He was arguably Canada's best and most consistent defenseman in the tournament.
I don't know much about Pollock to really know if I would want him or not
I'll help you out. You want Pollock =D
This is a great player and my top target for our 2nd round pick. I hope he will still be available, his playoff run has opened up some eyes.
Pollock is a natural centerman, who has played his way up the Oilkings lineup with hard work (not injuries), but he has had to move to wing to get that chance. He is now on the LW with Lazar and Kulda. Pollock was actually a defenseman in Bantam hockey, until his coach moved him to C since they needed offense. I don't see the defensive concerns noted by Derp. He actually shows good understanding in the defensive zone. He supports his D and has good positioning with an active stick to disrupt plays.
Pollock can be trusted defensively. That is why he is on Lazar's line. Together with Kulda, they form a shutdown line. I have compared this to Horvat's situation in last year's playoff run. Horvat was often used in a shutdown situation, but was also able to score and provide and consistent stream of offense. Same thing has happened with Pollock/Lazar.
What stands out about Pollock is that he is a smart player at both ends of the rink. His shot is very good and he has a natural goal scorers' knack of finding open spaces to unleash his shot. But he also goes to the tough areas, works well on the cycle, and is physical on the forecheck. But he also has good vision and makes some nice passes.
-
5
-
YOU HAVE TO STOP GENERALIZING BLOG SITES AND SCOUTING SERVICES ON THE BASIS OF OPINION. Jesus man, why do I even try? This is so far over your head.
Here's what a draft report looks like: http://www.redlinereport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Nov.-13-Spotlight-Virtanen.pdf
Here's what your blog sites look like: http://www.hockeyprospect.com/
There's a stark difference. But w.e you'll be loud again, you have 11k posts after all, so continue to hijack the thread and manage to throw an "I think" or "on my list" into every post and I'm sure you'll feel fulfilled by the end of the day. Back to the ignore list for you.
Hockeyprospect is not simply a blog site and should not be neglected simply based on their website. Although, they are newer on the scouting block, they put out a great product and i've never met a single person who has been dis-satisfied with their Black Book. Just because RLR provides a sample page and hockeyprospect doesn't, it doesn't mean it isn't good. In fact, it is very thorough and in-depth; i've gotten it every year. I've also spoken with Mark Edwards who is the head scout for hockeyprospect and he is a very knowledgeable man, who is often in the rinks and flies across the world and country to watch these kids, much like RLR, McKeens, or CSS scouts do. They do have scouts on the payroll, but the main revenue streams are through their year end books and subs.
RLR is a well known publication and based on Woodlief (their head scout), every NHL team subscribes to them. But RLR is not infallible, just like every scouting publication, they have made mistakes and misread players. For example, they had David Perron ranked 58th in 2007. Every other publication had him ranked at least 25 spots higher. In 2008, they had Erik Karlsson ranked 41st. The only publication that had him lower was THN.
What i'm trying to say is that going over past lists, no one publication/ranking service stands out as being more right than another. All of them have hit homeruns, and all have had duds. Although, i'd have to say, you get what you pay for with THN ($5). I think they are the only ones that stand out as completely off on their lists. Every other publication is $30 or more.
----
And since you brought up William Carrier, RLR had Carrier ranked 25th on their list last season, whereas hockeyprospect had him ranked 75th. Early evaluation would have hockeyprospect reading this player better.
-
1
-
-
100% of the time the GM makes the final Decision, that said, I do believe our team already have the list completed, and they will draft off their top of the list. I'm going Roland Mckeown drops to the 36th pick.
I certainly don't think they have the final list completed. Perhaps a working list, but they still have the combine before they finalize their list as well as the conclusion of the CHL playoffs and the memorial cup still to come.
Based on a GIlman interview, they usually meet the week after the combine for a weekend or a couple of days (i think in previous years, they went to Penticton/Kelowna area) and there, they will finalize the list.
-
4
-
-
guys like Glover and Dougherty leave you wanting more but they are also getting the job done. Not asking for a flashy dman out of the 2nd but either of these 2 wont leave you disappointed either. Both have been steady and been a part of the wrecking ball squad (USNTDP) that has been playing together all year and playing college teams and currently kickin ass at U18
Not to mention both are RH....not sure if we have many of those in our system
I don't know about you, but i wouldn't select players, who are playing just good enough, in the top half of the draft. That's a poor drafting mentality. Don't you want your prospects to have a stand out quality and impact the game other than simply eating minutes? Take a look at Sanheim, who has been Canada's most consistent D man, who has continually impacted the game by creating offensive chances.
Catch phrases like being a part of a wrecking ball squad or kickin ass might sound nice, but they don't particularly tell the whole story, or any story.
Glover leaves me disappointed, such a pedestrian kind of D man. Is neither here nor there, neither elite defensive thinker (like Santini last draft) and definitely does not have strong offensive instincts. Outplayed by his D partner Belpedio all tournament long.
Dougherty played better today but still made mistakes in his defensive coverage, pinching to high and allowed a two on one the other way today. But he makes nice passes, has a good wrister and skates well. LIke i said, i prefer Dougherty to Glover. But still i'd prefer Sanheim to both.
Handedness does not matter to me in a draft. It might matter when they are in the NHL (if they reach the NHL). But in a draft, you have to take the player that you believe is the better player. So RH, LH doesn't matter. Take the best player.
That's pretty cool, I'm gonna have to check that site out next season. Do they have play by play too?
Yes, they had play by play, it wasn't great, but it was better than nothing.
-
You rock, Kreuzberg. Filtering through the stubborn opinions on this board can give a guy a headache but it's always a pleasure to read your detailed breakdowns on these kids.
Just curious, where do you watch NDTP and all these hard to hard to see players? Internet streams?
Thanks!
There were a couple streams of the NTDP against the NCAA during the season, and for the U18, fasthockey.com has been streaming all USA games for free. So i've been watching that as well. Their final game is tomorrow (well now today since its after 12), gold medal. But you can watch it on there or on TSN2.
-
What would you say for Dougherty? To me he seems like a steady,smart type of guy who can chip in some offense. I like his credentials: HS state championship, USNTDP training, and about to get some quality ice time at the D factory that is Wisconsin
Not the biggest fan, but definitely like him more than Glover.
Again after watching him, i am left wanting more. I feel the defenders from the NTDP team (besides Hanifin) lack the ability to control the game and really standout. I agree Dougherty plays a steady game, skates well and flashes skill with a nice outlet pass and shows some good offensive instinct on the PP. He has a lot of tools but i wish he would take full advantage of them to take his game to another level. Sometimes just blends in.
But Wisconsin is a good school and if anyone can mold D men, its Eaves.
-
I don't know, from my handful of viewings of Glover, i've yet to be impressed. I've been more disappointed with aspects of his game. Someone brought up the word "pedestrian" and it fit like a glove (pardon my pun) in terms of what i've seen of Glover.
I've seen Glover ranked as high as a late 1st rounder and I simply don't see a 1st or early 2nd round calber player here. Seems to be a polarizing player; some people love him, but i also know a few who are unimpressed like me.
I like his size and skating. But he always leaves you wanting more and really doesn't use his frame to his advantage. Calling him physical is a misnomer; don't think i saw him throw the body more once (you want physical, look at his team-mate Ryan Collins, that guy is physical). Limited offensive capabilities; not that good of a passer (i can safely say Dougherty is a better passer). To me, Glover does not project as a guy who can play on your PP and hasn't shown the smarts to be a standout defensive D-man either. At least with Dougherty, you can see some flashes of skill. With Glover, not so much.
I'm not the biggest fan of Dougherty either, but if i had to choose between the two, it would be Dougherty.
Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW
in Alumni
Posted
Here is his goal and hit.