Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 If you think that size doesn't matter you really don't know anything about hockey. Lol look at kane, st louis, zuccarello as examples of how you don't always need size in hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Who knows. They could be on the rise sooner than us if we plan on trading Kesler too. Maybe even edler starting to feel like a change of scenery would be good. Florida has a good young core, good GM and a green light to go for it. I see them like islanders, ready to take flight. That would a be a beauty way to get it done. Overpaying in stuff I don't mind getting rid of to get a future elite top centre haha. Sedin Sedin Jensen Reinhart Kesler Kassian Higgins Horvat Burrows Matthias Richardson Hansen Jesus that looks deep with pretty high end youth mixed in. Look at the mentors for them. Jensen with the twins. Kesler teaches Kass and Reino to leave it all out there night in and night out. Higgins and Burr are the Rupert brothers x100 haha. Then a beast of a 4th line. If there's a way to get it done I say do it I'll be danged if that 2knd line doesn't look extremely dangerous... Kassian looks like he can shoot, we know he can pass, Kesler can certainly pop a goal, Reinhart can score, dangle, control the puck and dish. No shortage of speed or size either? Interesting mix! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 then your agreeing with me that size is irrelevant, lets draft nylander because he has more skill than ritchie Both Ehlers and Nylander have more skill than Ritchie . Ritchie has more skill than Virtanen. The math speaks for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Whats Nylanders Offical Height and Weight can someone tell me thanks!! Just a wild guess, but I think with all the people posting here and watching the combine results someone will have posted them once we have anything official. Otherwise, keep looking at the old results that have been posted recently (and quoted and requoted). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSniper88 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Both Ehlers and Nylander have more skill than Ritchie . Ritchie has more skill than Virtanen. The math speaks for itself.Lol look at kane, st louis, zuccarello as examples of how you don't always need size in hockey.I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Remarkable what a combine can do isn't it? A day in a gym and another day in an interview and omg it's the next Forsberg I still need to see what Nylander does in the NA markets and at contract time before I am sold on him Contract? Rookie contracts are pretty much set standard, and then teams get RFA rights to leverage. Why would we be introducing contract into the conversation? It just sounds like smack talk. Or do you have some quote saying Nylander, with an NHL dad, is gunna bolt to the KHL...? The weird thought is: is doing well at the combine necessarily a good thing? Think of a guy with enough skill to put up huge points despite his (current) physical limitations, and then broadcast that forward once he has the skill and the physical training. Not all, some you have to determine if they are not at peak because of laziness or delayed growth spurt... It is an interesting thought though. maybe some kids dominate because they are (measurably) physically more advanced than their peers, an advantage they will lose going forward- there has to be an upper limit on some of these tests and the playing field will even out. Alas, I am not versed enough to answer this question though. In an ideal world, a top 5 draft pick should have; - elite skill - dominating performance against top competition on record - significant physical attributes that set you apart from other players. Could be speed, size or explosive athleticism. If fitness and strength are lacking, it would not be a surprise to see a guy drop several spots. Look at a picture of Horvat without a t shirt, then look at Shinkaruk. One's stock dropped at the draft despite items one and two! Lack of strength will limit your ability to explode out of scrums with the puck against bigger, better trained athletes.. The purpose of picking a player is to take on guaranteed attributes not take on risk. Sounds like Nylander's athletic attributes on display at the combine put some doubts to rest? Probably even set himself apart! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Edit: Long post. Put results of each test in spoilers. Note- number in brackets indicates rank out of ten. I only looked at the top ten in each category Key prospects and where they fit in different tests. Keep in mind I'm not a scout, and there may be names out there who are considered top prospects but that I didn't know about. Some names I was not familiar with but who seemed to stand out: Jayce Hawryluk, David Pastrnak, Brandon Hickey, Sonny Milano (he really killed it), Kaapo Kahkonen, Francis Perron, Shane Gersich, Brett Lernout Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output: Nylander (2) Bleakley (3) Kapanen (5) Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output: Nylander (1) - Really impressive that Nylander scored high in both peak and average power output Kapanen (2) Anaerobic: Fatigue Index: McKeown (7th) Aerobic Fitness: VO2 Max Didn't see any top prospects stand out (not that I am overly familiar with the prospects for this year). Kind of a useless test anyway since aerobic fitness isn't as relevant when you're play 45 second shifts Aerobic Fitness: Test Duration Reinhart (7th) Lemieux (10th) Anthropometry: Sum of 6 skin folds (my understanding- pinch test in six spots on the body): Fabbri (1) Ehlers (8) Body Fat %: Fabbri (1) Ehlers (8) Hand-eye coordination: (4) Nylander Leg power average: Ritchie (3) Perlini (5) Ekblad (6) Tuch (7) Leg power peak: Perlini (6) Ritchie (9) Right hand grip: Ekblad (7) Draisaitl (8) Left hand grip: Ekblad (6) Fleury (8) Bench press (# reps at 150 lbs): Tuch (5) Lemieux (10) Note-they are pretty technical when it comes to how the bench press is performed. Not necessarily the best indicator of strength Pull-Ups: (1) Ho-Sang Single Leg squat (right leg- from my understanding it was simply a grade out of 75 in terms of their form): Perlini (6) Nylander (10) Single Leg squat (left leg): McKeown (6) Agility and Balance (Left Hex): No notables in top 10 Agility and Balance (Right Hex): (1) Fleury (3) Kapanen (4) Reinhart (8) Audette (9) Lemieux Pro Agility (Left): Hickey (2) Nylander (3) Lemieux (4) Pro Agility (Right): Hickey (1) Nylander (2) Lemieux (8) Ehlers (10) Thoughts: Nylander certainly stood out, especially with legs and agility. Interesting that his legs were so strong but also showed good agility. Would have expected bigger guys to have higher outputs. Didn't notice some names for some of the strength tests. I imagine some college prospects would dominate, as their programs seem to emphasize fitness moreso than the CHL since they play fewer games. Thanx for posting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaMash Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 What I think a lot of you are forgetting to realize is that being small does not necessarily mean the player will be bad, and being big does not necessarily mean the player will be great at the NHL level. It might be more difficult for players 5'10" and under, but then there are also guys like Hugh Jessiman who are huge and highly thought of prospects, but end up going nowhere. The size thing isn't as much of a big deal as people make it out to be. Every player develops differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerAids Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 ^^ No kidding, plus nylander and Ehlers are 5 11" I wouldn't even call them small, they are average sized in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 What I think a lot of you are forgetting to realize is that being small does not necessarily mean the player will be bad, and being big does not necessarily mean the player will be great at the NHL level. It might be more difficult for players 5'10" and under, but then there are also guys like Hugh Jessiman who are huge and highly thought of prospects, but end up going nowhere. The size thing isn't as much of a big deal as people make it out to be. Every player develops differently. Its really about predictability. If a guy is bigger, faster and stronger he's going to have advantage after advantage even against better skilled smaller guys. A place and a role anyway. But if one guy is bigger, and can use his size to lean on you it is a factor. But if the smaller player is the faster more explosive player, and has endurance the size will likely be easily off set. That size can keep you in the league. Look at Byfuglien. And he even brings great skill, puts up some numbers. But he's also out of puff, and is not really capable of competing at his hardest to help take a team to another level when competition is tightest. He's put up those numbers on some pretty ordinary teams. You can quote me from a few weeks ago, went on record as saying if Ritchie had great endurance and VO2 ratings at the combines we should all be getting behind him as our selection. But its Kapanen and Nylander who appear to have demonstrated the elite athleticism that might distinguish them over size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Both Ehlers and Nylander have more skill than Ritchie . Ritchie has more skill than Virtanen. The math speaks for itself. You care far too much about point totals. Why are there scouts? Why doesn't the GM just look at the math like you? Seems simple enough. People continually citing small players like Kane, St.Louis, etc. are missing the point. For every one of those guys you mention there are ten stand out junior players that failed. Unless a guy has unbelievable skill (a way to figure this out is if the scouts unanimously have him in the top 2) it is a bad strategy to draft very small players (I am not saying Ehlers or Nylander are very small players). Look at Ottawa with Karlsson. People will say what a steal, which it was, because a gamble with the odds stacked against them paid off. If Ottawa implemented that strategy with every pick every year they would have the worst draft record in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Both Ehlers and Nylander have more skill than Ritchie . Ritchie has more skill than Virtanen. The math speaks for itself. Absent-minded Canuck I am surprised you think Carl Soderberg and Mikkell Boedker are both better than Daniel Sedin. That is a very controversial position, but I guess you are right because the math backs you up right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 I am very impressed with how professional Nylander was at the combine. Not just the tests and how hard he works to maintain it but his mental focus. I am convinced he will not be there when we pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaMash Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Its really about predictability. If a guy is bigger, faster and stronger he's going to have advantage after advantage even against better skilled smaller guys. A place and a role anyway. But if one guy is bigger, and can use his size to lean on you it is a factor. But if the smaller player is the faster more explosive player, and has endurance the size will likely be easily off set. That size can keep you in the league. Look at Byfuglien. And he even brings great skill, puts up some numbers. But he's also out of puff, and is not really capable of competing at his hardest to help take a team to another level when competition is tightest. He's put up those numbers on some pretty ordinary teams. You can quote me from a few weeks ago, went on record as saying if Ritchie had great endurance and VO2 ratings at the combines we should all be getting behind him as our selection. But its Kapanen and Nylander who appear to have demonstrated the elite athleticism that might distinguish them over size. I'm not saying it doesn't make a difference, I'm just saying that people are putting way too much weight into it when trying to discredit Nylander/Ehlers and Kapanen earlier when he was in the discussion. They're not that small of players. I agree though, about the size being helpful in the case of guy like Big Buff, but he seems to be a pretty rare breed of being chunky and somewhat athletic haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Lol. If only any of this was relevant. Here's another post. Kane has a Conn Smythe, Carter doesn't. Kane >> Carter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horvat Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Nylander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzaburger Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Sam “No Pull-Ups” Bennett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Attention everyone! Kane lost!HeLost.So so long, Nylander and Ehlers, not that you were ever a comparable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horvat Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Attention everyone! Kane lost! He Lost. So so long, Nylander and Ehlers, not that you were ever a comparable. If you have ever watched nylander play you would see that he doesn't even play like kane so shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 If you have ever watched nylander play you would see that he doesn't even play like kane so shut up. One of the softest players in the league -Marion Gaborik -has 12 goals right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.