6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft

[Derp...]

Of course this is correct. People forget you don't draft players based on their accomplishments, you draft them based on their potential. A high scoring guy who is under 170lb is a huge risk. That is why in every draft, unless the player goes in the top 3 and has overwhelming talent, smaller guys drop on draft day.

But aren't we all measuring potential based on accomplishment?

Some have accomplished growing

Some have accomplished skating, shooting, passing, etc

Some have accomplished leadership

Some have accomplished Defence

Potential is always measures by what's been accomplished.

[TOMapleLaughs]

"Individual potential is like a glass of water. The size of your glass determines your capacity or the upper limits of what you can achieve in a particular area."

The growth potential of undersized players is always a concern. Most would peak at 180-185lbs, up to 10 years later. So you have to ask yourself if the players' other qualities make this lack of NHL size to be worth a draft selection.

In Ehlers' case, where he is below 170lbs and has a frame that doesn't advertise decent growth potential, you have to hope that his skill is elite for him being worth a 6th overall selection.

But is it?

From what I've watched extensively, it is not. He is at least a notch below Drouin in terms of skill and I'd like him to be above Drouin in terms of skill to make the size risk worth it. To be fair, i'd consider other sources than just my own eyes to value skill, and on that end I don't think there have been any reports that he's just as skilled or more skilled than his star teammate, nor any other comparables from the past like Kane, MacKinnon, etc. That, not his size, is what has him well outside top-5 rankings.

I can only conclude from what I've seen and can project using all info at hand is that Ehlers simply will need wide-open space to be an effective scorer. Since he hasn't shown any other significant attributes, like defense, or being able to sustain checking, at least from what i've seen from him, it means that he'll be a boom or bust one-dimensional scorer with good, but not elite peak ability. This will make him a floater and perimeter-type, esp. in playoff games where it's a lot harder to get to the net unless you have size. Basically, he's not a go-to guy. He'll need great linemates who can provide him the space he needs.

imho He needs to go to a team that will embrace that style and be patient with him while he gets as strong as he can possibly get. Since the Canucks already have their own similar project in Shinkaruk, I see redundancy here. I think Ehlers should go to the east, myself. Jeff Skinner has had some immediate success there.

[higgyfan]

Could someone please write up a comparison between Shink and Ehlers? Thx in advance.

["Bull" Horvat]

Shinkaruk is currently recovering from injury, so it's hard to view him as a player at the moment. However, him being Canuck property means we don't have this lack of skill in the prospect pool. Shinkaruk oozes skill. So does Horvat. So does Jensen. So does Cassels. etc. etc. etc.

So I'm not sure why people think we lack skill so much that we have to select an all-skill, nothing else type of player.

As for Hemsky not being a comparable to Ehlers, I'm pretty sure I recall the use of Hemsky as a direct comparable by multiple sources, but don't quote me on that. They've accomplished similar things at the prospect level by the looks of it.

Same goes for those guys that want size.. we have plenty of size. Especially when our team ain't suited for a LA Kings team.

Size & IQ is another thing. which Ritchie/Virtanen doesn't have.

I rather go with IQ and an improving player than seeing this one guy playing the same game for the next 10 years if he even makes it to the NHL Worse comes to worse, Virtanen = Jeremy Welsh & Nick Ritchie = Tom Wilson

So I'm all for Ehlers/Draistrl/MDC/Kapanen if any of them are available

[baumerman77]

But aren't we all measuring potential based on accomplishment?

Some have accomplished growing

Some have accomplished skating, shooting, passing, etc

Some have accomplished leadership

Some have accomplished Defence

Potential is always measures by what's been accomplished.

Some accomplishments, or aspects of said accomplishments, can be useful for aptitudinal measurement. Because ultimately, when drafting a player you want to draft them based on aptitude not accomplishment. The problem becomes how do we tease out accomplishments that should not be considered aptitudinal measurements.

[TOMapleLaughs]

Same goes for those guys that want size.. we have plenty of size. Especially when our team ain't suited for a LA Kings team.

Size & IQ is another thing. which Ritchie/Virtanen doesn't have.

I rather go with IQ and an improving player than seeing this one guy playing the same game for the next 10 years if he even makes it to the NHL Worse comes to worse, Virtanen = Jeremy Welsh & Nick Ritchie = Tom Wilson

So I'm all for Ehlers/Draistrl/MDC/Kapanen if any of them are available

Plenty of "Bull" in this post, Horvat.

[Bure_Pavel]

Ritchie actually has a really high hockey IQ not sure about Virtanen though haven't seem a lot of him. Ehlers looks like a very interesting propect that could have great upside what scares me about him is that to be effective in the nhl he while have to throw on a good twenty pounds or so and that could have a big effect on his speed which is the component that makes him so electrifying. The other thing is the Droiun factor as playing with the best player in the chl on the powerplay where he has a significant amount of goals and points is inflating his stats and is getting a lot of cross crease feeds to shoot on the open net. Even if they don't play on the same line sometimes you would thing the opposing teams shutdown players are focusing on droiun.

[NucksCup2015]

"Individual potential is like a glass of water. The size of your glass determines your capacity or the upper limits of what you can achieve in a particular area."

The growth potential of undersized players is always a concern. Most would peak at 180-185lbs, up to 10 years later. So you have to ask yourself if the players' other qualities make this lack of NHL size to be worth a draft selection.

In Ehlers' case, where he is below 170lbs and has a frame that doesn't advertise decent growth potential, you have to hope that his skill is elite for him being worth a 6th overall selection.

But is it?

From what I've watched extensively, it is not. He is at least a notch below Drouin in terms of skill and I'd like him to be above Drouin in terms of skill to make the size risk worth it. To be fair, i'd consider other sources than just my own eyes to value skill, and on that end I don't think there have been any reports that he's just as skilled or more skilled than his star teammate, nor any other comparables from the past like Kane, MacKinnon, etc. That, not his size, is what has him well outside top-5 rankings.

I can only conclude from what I've seen and can project using all info at hand is that Ehlers simply will need wide-open space to be an effective scorer. Since he hasn't shown any other significant attributes, like defense, or being able to sustain checking, at least from what i've seen from him, it means that he'll be a boom or bust one-dimensional scorer with good, but not elite peak ability. This will make him a floater and perimeter-type, esp. in playoff games where it's a lot harder to get to the net unless you have size. Basically, he's not a go-to guy. He'll need great linemates who can provide him the space he needs.

imho He needs to go to a team that will embrace that style and be patient with him while he gets as strong as he can possibly get. Since the Canucks already have their own similar project in Shinkaruk, I see redundancy here. I think Ehlers should go to the east, myself. Jeff Skinner has had some immediate success there.

interesting comments since many of the scouting reports i have read have said he is more than willing to play in traffic and in fact initiate contact to gain possession.

he is not a 'perimeter player'

many on cdc are scared this kid is MayRay part two, and ya I get it, post traumatic stress disorder does things to people.

he's not MayRay part 2

the other issue people keep harping on is size and this is now the 30th time i have said it

1. The CURRENT issue on our team is lack of offensive talent that can skate and has size

2. This years draft will not address a CURRENT issue, it will address FUTURE issues, since this years first rounder will likely take 3-4 years to make it to the NHL, unless somehow we get Ekblad

3. Therefore, a logical conclusion is you look at our prospect pool and see what is lacking.

4. In our prospect pool, size is not lacking, players who can battle through and have the size to protect pucks win board battles etc (Kassian, Horvat, Jensen, Matthias, Guance, Archibald, Grenier, Lane, Cassells is gritty enough as is Fox).

5. What is clearly lacking in that group is not size it is elite talent. You may argue and fair enough its your view, that Ehlers doesn't have elite talent, I beg to differ given what I have seen of him play, his scouting reports and his point totals), he certainly has much higher point totals than any of the said prospects above have achieved, even after adjusting for league differentials - and by a wide margin, this not something you can simply dismiss.

6. He is the same size as Markus Naslund, Yzerman, Sakic, Giroux, on and on. If the kid played a permiter game and was scared to go to the net, sure I'd buy the arguments, but he's not. That in combination with the size in our prospect pool therefore becomes a non issue.

7. 2 way players with size are very easily found in the second and third rounds, projects so to speak, and many second / third rounders have turned out well. Jamie Benn was taken in the second round.

8. One seldom gets a chance at elite skill unless you're Edmonton or Florida, don't waste that pick on something we have as much of a chance of developing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

9. Players like Ehlers are not going to be found late in the first / second/ third very often, players with size who can put up 20 goals and maybe break through like Benn are.

[TOMapleLaughs]

interesting comments since many of the scouting reports i have read have said he is more than willing to play in traffic and in fact initiate contact to gain possession.

he is not a 'perimeter player'

many on cdc are scared this kid is MayRay part two, and ya I get it, post traumatic stress disorder does things to people.

he's not MayRay part 2

the other issue people keep harping on is size and this is now the 30th time i have said it

1. The CURRENT issue on our team is lack of offensive talent that can skate and has size

2. This years draft will not address a CURRENT issue, it will address FUTURE issues, since this years first rounder will likely take 3-4 years to make it to the NHL, unless somehow we get Ekblad

3. Therefore, a logical conclusion is you look at our prospect pool and see what is lacking.

4. In our prospect pool, size is not lacking, players who can battle through and have the size to protect pucks win board battles etc (Kassian, Horvat, Jensen, Matthias, Guance, Archibald, Grenier, Lane, Cassells is gritty enough as is Fox).

5. What is clearly lacking in that group is not size it is elite talent. You may argue and fair enough its your view, that Ehlers doesn't have elite talent, I beg to differ given what I have seen of him play, his scouting reports and his point totals), he certainly has much higher point totals than any of the said prospects above have achieved, even after adjusting for league differentials - and by a wide margin, this not something you can simply dismiss.

6. He is the same size as Markus Naslund, Yzerman, Sakic, Giroux, on and on. If the kid played a permiter game and was scared to go to the net, sure I'd buy the arguments, but he's not. That in combination with the size in our prospect pool therefore becomes a non issue.

7. 2 way players with size are very easily found in the second and third rounds, projects so to speak, and many second / third rounders have turned out well. Jamie Benn was taken in the second round.

8. One seldom gets a chance at elite skill unless you're Edmonton or Florida, don't waste that pick on something we have as much of a chance of developing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

9. Players like Ehlers are not going to be found late in the first / second/ third very often, players with size who can put up 20 goals and maybe break through like Benn are.

I'm basing my post on watching the entire final series the Mooseheads were in and focusing on Ehlers. If he played better in less important games or against weaker competition, then so be it. I feel that it is important to see what he'll do against his top peer group in the Q. Because if he's worthy of a top-6 pick as an offense-only force, he'll need to show it at that level.

The first thing I noticed was that Jonathan Drouin, not Ehlers, was the offensive force on the Mooseheads. At least in that series. Ehlers' skill was not at that level.

Ehlers showed a lot of perimeter play and floating when I watched him extensively. He cheated up the ice a lot and on the power play he was used on the point. Typically he's on the right boards, but I suppose against better competition in this series it wasn't working.

Honestly I see a lot of Raymond's style in Ehlers' game. Ehlers may be more skilled, but both need wide-open ice to succeed. And we all know that won't be there in playoff games.

1. Jake Virtanen has tremendous offensive talent, a-rated skating and size.

2. You draft for the future? You don't say...

3. We lack right-shooting forwards and left-shooting defensemen in our prospect pool. Ehlers shoots left. Virtanen right. Fleury is an option on defense, but only if we trade down.

4. Size is not lacking, but size with speed and skill is. Virtanen's speed and offensive skill beats out our best offensive prospects', esp. with Shinkaruk down with a major hip injury.

5. Ehlers is a notch down from Drouin, so if he's not on par with Drouin, who's a notch down from MacKinnon, then how is Ehlers' skill elite?

6. He was 162lbs 3wks ago according to NHL.com. It's possible he puts on weight, but I don't think that will change the type of player he'll be.

7. Jamie Benn was taken in the 5th round, and no, that kind of luck is not typical. All successful NHLers these days are capable of some sortof defensive play. Wasn't going to mention this until now, but Ehlers showed me nothing in terms of defensive play when I watched him extensively. In fact he turned over the puck too much for my liking. Esp. at a key moment at the end of the series down a goal. Fell down. Turned over puck. Attempted pass in traffic, turned it over again. It happens, but truly elite guys make something special happen in these moments instead. Drouin didn't get it done either, but at least he generated 3-4 decent scoring chances.

8. I think it's important to weigh in all factors. Skill alone, esp. if it's not elite, isn't enough to make it in the NHL.

9. Digging deep into euro leagues for golden nugget skill guys is exactly how we landed Pavel Bure, who was picked in the 6th round. This isn't typical, but it's not impossible. Why take a big gamble at 6th overall? Ehlers is ranked 13th and that's fair, imho.

[Smashian Kassian]

I don't get how you see Ehlers not having any real major issues in his game when there are a few that i've seen after watching him extensively. But if you're labelling Virtanen a one-trick pony at the same time, I can see a reason.

It's Drouin that I would get excited about on the Mooseheads. He drives the offense. Ehlers not so much. At least in that final series. Maybe Ehlers looked better in less important games?

He doesn't, what in his game is a weakness? High end passing, high end shooting, best skating ability in the draft, very high hockey IQ, gritty, goes to the dirty areas, he's tough, he has a two-way game.

Size is not a weakness in his game, its not his fault he's not 6'3 220, he just has to adapt his game to his size & he's done a remarkable job of doing so thus-far And the size is totally over blown as an issue anyways.

"Individual potential is like a glass of water. The size of your glass determines your capacity or the upper limits of what you can achieve in a particular area."

The growth potential of undersized players is always a concern. Most would peak at 180-185lbs, up to 10 years later. So you have to ask yourself if the players' other qualities make this lack of NHL size to be worth a draft selection.

In Ehlers' case, where he is below 170lbs and has a frame that doesn't advertise decent growth potential, you have to hope that his skill is elite for him being worth a 6th overall selection.

But is it?

From what I've watched extensively, it is not. He is at least a notch below Drouin in terms of skill and I'd like him to be above Drouin in terms of skill to make the size risk worth it. To be fair, i'd consider other sources than just my own eyes to value skill, and on that end I don't think there have been any reports that he's just as skilled or more skilled than his star teammate, nor any other comparables from the past like Kane, MacKinnon, etc. That, not his size, is what has him well outside top-5 rankings.

I can only conclude from what I've seen and can project using all info at hand is that Ehlers simply will need wide-open space to be an effective scorer. Since he hasn't shown any other significant attributes, like defense, or being able to sustain checking, at least from what i've seen from him, it means that he'll be a boom or bust one-dimensional scorer with good, but not elite peak ability. This will make him a floater and perimeter-type, esp. in playoff games where it's a lot harder to get to the net unless you have size. Basically, he's not a go-to guy. He'll need great linemates who can provide him the space he needs.

imho He needs to go to a team that will embrace that style and be patient with him while he gets as strong as he can possibly get. Since the Canucks already have their own similar project in Shinkaruk, I see redundancy here. I think Ehlers should go to the east, myself. Jeff Skinner has had some immediate success there.

Plenty of bull in this post here aswell ^^

Plenty of "Bull" in this post, Horvat.

I'm basing my post on watching the entire final series the Mooseheads were in and focusing on Ehlers.

Anyways I've very interested to know,

If thats the case, then what did you think of Ehlers performance in game 1?

[theminister]

Same goes for those guys that want size.. we have plenty of size. Especially when our team ain't suited for a LA Kings team.

Size & IQ is another thing. which Ritchie/Virtanen doesn't have.

I rather go with IQ and an improving player than seeing this one guy playing the same game for the next 10 years if he even makes it to the NHL Worse comes to worse, Virtanen = Jeremy Welsh & Nick Ritchie = Tom Wilson

So I'm all for Ehlers/Draistrl/MDC/Kapanen if any of them are available

Say what, now?

Those are brutal comparisons.

[TOMapleLaughs]

He doesn't, what in his game is a weakness? High end passing, high end shooting, best skating ability in the draft, very high hockey IQ, gritty, goes to the dirty areas, he's tough, he has a two-way game.

Size is not a weakness in his game, its not his fault he's not 6'3 220, he just has to adapt his game to his size & he's done a remarkable job of doing so thus-far And the size is totally over blown as an issue anyways.

Plenty of bull in this post here aswell ^^

Anyways I've very interested to know,

If thats the case, then what did you think of Ehlers performance in game 1?

This is my review again, in case you missed it:

Thanks. I've taken the time to watch the last series they were in to verify a few things.

First off, Drouin is noticably more talented than Ehlers. No question. He drives his teams' offense. When down by one late in the final games' final minute, it was Drouin directing the attack, managing to create several chances to score, while Ehlers managed no shots, one fall-down and a turnover. This critical time is a good indicator of play, esp. for a player with supposed star potential imho.

Second, Ehlers is a perimeter player. Even on the power play they had him on the point to avoid traffic. He needs open ice because he gets dumped easily in traffic. When he finds open ice he is successful.

Third, kinda said this already, but Ehlers is soft and one-dimensional. Easily brushed off on the boards and isn't a factor without the puck.

And lastly, he's a floater. Constantly waiting in open ice for the workers on the team to do their thing.

Overall, his style reminds me of Raymond, with a Filatov entitlement thrown in. But this was the last series in which they were eliminated. Maybe his star potential shows a bit more in less meaningful games against lighter competition.

Thanks again for allowing me to confirm my analysis.

This, again was based on one series against top peer competition. If he looks better against weaker competition, so be it.

Yes, his size is not his fault, but I believe NHL.com has him ranked at 13th irregardless of his size anyway. Not 6th. I think other prospects need to be considered, as they're all very skilled in their own right. And a lot don't have the size issue. For Ehlers to be worth the size risk and the risk of him playing a fairly one-dimensional style, I think his NHL ranking needed to be quite high.

["Bull" Horvat]

Say what, now?

Those are brutal comparisons.

I don`t believe neither of those two (Ritchie & Virtanen) has the hockey sense and IQ as their game seems darn one dimensional (i don`t like using that term but Virtanens' an one trick pony.

what i meant was: many people think drafting with size is #1 priority.. i want a blend of both IQ + skill. that's the reason why Reinhart & Bennett are up there in the rankings. They're not "dynamic" like McDavid /Eichel in any way.

those comparisons are the worse case scenarios. welsh is known for his great skating with that size and shot. of course. i admit i messed up on the Welsh comparison. Lupul/Kreider ... heard attitude/consistency is an issue

[TOMapleLaughs]

I don`t believe neither of those two (Ritchie & Virtanen) has the hockey sense and IQ as their game seems darn one dimensional (i don`t like using that term but Virtanens' an one trick pony.

what i meant was: many people think drafting with size is #1 priority.. i want a blend of both IQ + skill. that's the reason why Reinhart & Bennett are up there in the rankings. They're not "dynamic" like McDavid /Eichel in any way.

those comparisons are the worse case scenarios. welsh is known for his great skating with that size and shot. of course. i admit i messed up on the Welsh comparison. Lupul/Kreider ... heard attitude/consistency is an issue

I want McDavid/Eichel too.

Next year.

[Smashian Kassian]

This is my review again, in case you missed it:

This, again was based on one series against top peer competition. If he looks better against weaker competition, so be it.

Yes, his size is not his fault, but I believe NHL.com has him ranked at 13th irregardless of his size anyway. Not 6th. I think other prospects need to be considered, as they're all very skilled in their own right. And a lot don't have the size issue. For Ehlers to be worth the size risk and the risk of him playing a fairly one-dimensional style, I think his NHL ranking needed to be quite high.

You didn't answer my question.

I would like to hear your thoughts on how Ehlers played in game 1 since you claim to have "extensively watched".

Rankings are opinion, I have Virtanen at 11 myself & Perlini in the 20s, some have them alot higher. I don't really put rankings from one source head & shoulders above the others, especially sources like ISS & CSS. Although Bob McKenzie's rankings I will admit I put more stock into than others.

I guess the disconnect here is I don't see the "size issue" because he's game is so superiorly developed in other areas that, combined with his character (basically we know he is going to work his hardest to bulk up) its not really much of a concern for me.

There are definitely other prospects to consider, but there's no need to chop Ehlers down to build them up. Virtanen looks like he could be a very good goal scorer, Ritchie having a complete offensive game with PWF attributes, Fleury with two-way, top pairing potential with an offensive flare, exc.

Anyways back to my question, I would like to hear your informed opinion on how Ehlers performed in just game 1.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

This is my review again, in case you missed it:

This, again was based on one series against top peer competition. If he looks better against weaker competition, so be it.

Yes, his size is not his fault, but I believe NHL.com has him ranked at 13th irregardless of his size anyway. Not 6th. I think other prospects need to be considered, as they're all very skilled in their own right. And a lot don't have the size issue. For Ehlers to be worth the size risk and the risk of him playing a fairly one-dimensional style, I think his NHL ranking needed to be quite high.

Why does it matter? Doesn't the NHL decide what picks go where anyways.

[Absent Canuck]

I believe that comparison originates with me.

Granted, Ehlers has a better shot and not quite the playmaking of Hemsky but I find the style reminiscent.

It was never intended to be a direct projection but was simply my own personal view from watching the games played. That doesn't make it a negative assessment, as a Hemsky type producer would be a good addition, but a caution against top players drafted from one league not having the same effect at the NHL level that they did in junior.

If you compare the junior careers of Hemsky and Ehlers, then they are similar but I would argue Ehlers is faster and grittier.

The pro career of Hemsky is one of being made out of glass and tuning out for stretches at a time. Ehlers is not like that. He goes into the dirty areas and takes hits .

Trying to compare someone in juniors to a pro is very hard to do. There is a tendency to put for the comparable to a player who did not live up to his potential (Hemsky) and someone who did (Girioux, Druoin, macKinnon) depending how we personally feel

[theminister]

If you compare the junior careers of Hemsky and Ehlers, then they are similar but I would argue Ehlers is faster and grittier.

The pro career of Hemsky is one of being made out of glass and tuning out for stretches at a time. Ehlers is not like that. He goes into the dirty areas and takes hits .

Trying to compare someone in juniors to a pro is very hard to do. There is a tendency to put for the comparable to a player who did not live up to his potential (Hemsky) and someone who did (Girioux, Druoin, macKinnon) depending how we personally feel

If you decide to check, it's because I was comparing playing in the Q to playing in the Q.

I'm not using my feelings. I'm using my eyes and memory.

["Bull" Horvat]

I want McDavid/Eichel too.

Next year.

i wish we could just swap our 1st round pick with another team's 1st round pick just for giggles

see who wins the lottery next year when everyone gets the chance to do so

[theminister]

I don`t believe neither of those two (Ritchie & Virtanen) has the hockey sense and IQ as their game seems darn one dimensional (i don`t like using that term but Virtanens' an one trick pony.

what i meant was: many people think drafting with size is #1 priority.. i want a blend of both IQ + skill. that's the reason why Reinhart & Bennett are up there in the rankings. They're not "dynamic" like McDavid /Eichel in any way.

those comparisons are the worse case scenarios. welsh is known for his great skating with that size and shot. of course. i admit i messed up on the Welsh comparison. Lupul/Kreider ... heard attitude/consistency is an issue

Of course they both have hockey sense.

Are they generationally exceptional in that regard? No. But they're both natural hockey players.