shiznak Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Benning draft this kid please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NameFaker Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 6 hours ago, elvis15 said: Those are definitely not the players you try and draft with a top 10 pick, even if a few top 10 picks have ended up as that guy. Offence still has to be a part of that assessment, but you start to look at other stats as a bigger part. Hits, giveaway/takeaway ratio, blocks, etc. and then advanced stats, like possession, zone entries, with/without you metrics for linemates, etc. all can factor in to help explain those intangibles. Oh sure, everything's relative. We see that in trying to do simple comparisons even looking at points where a player might be on a much better team vs another with less but on a worse team. Tkachuk is probably a step behind the offensive talent and creativity of his linemates, but I wouldn't discount him much for that, just like I wouldn't discount Marner much for being so skinny. Drafting is a game of inches though, and little things might be amplified in the NHL. We do the best we can with what we have. To get more, you'd have to have someone tracking (and rating) each aspect for worth, and once you do that you start to get subjectivity leaking into the discussion. Look at hit statistics, and just how much they can vary from arena to arena, and consider how that would impact something like importance or intent of primary and secondary assists. This is why we look at something simply and trust the assumption (to a point, understanding it's flaws) that the goal is the most important event as you say, and each previous action generally had less and less importance. Otherwise it becomes far too complex an exercise, and each step is important to the outcome regardless of intent. And besides, if you want to talk about importance in that way and so specifically for each instance, shouldn't we assign more weight to a goal where someone skated through the whole team and deked the goalie out of his jock strap vs one where a rebound landed on a guy's stick right in front of an open net? Imagine trying to figure that out! Exactly, dude. I think it's a bit of a "wtf?" exercise. To clarify, I wasn't adamantly disagreeing with ya, just putting my two cents into the discussion. I do wonder what the future looks like, though. In a decade, what kind of statistics will we count as valuable? (Based on the assumption that stats represent the "future" trend) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 2 hours ago, HKSR said: There's a lot of Debbie Downers talking about Chychrun, but I remember the same conversations were had about Seth Jones as well. Cam Fowler got the same treatment. Should be careful of writing off a defenceman at such a young age when they have all the tools to be a star. My only concern at this stage is what Chychrun's work ethic and mental makeup is like. I'll admit, I haven't heard much about his work ethic or mental makeup, but if he's got that competitive edge and work ethic to improve, he'll become that full package defenceman one day... likely in his mid-20s (where most defencemen blossom). From what I've seen of him, he has all the tools to be a player like Pietrangelo. I'll take that chance if I'm picking 4th, 5th, or 6th in this draft. I didn't have the same concerns over Jones, apart from generally taking a D as high as 2nd or even 1st (particularly when MacKinnon and Barkov were my favourite players in the draft that year). He would have been my 3rd overall though. I don't remember my thoughts on Fowler before the draft. I think Chychrun has relied on size and physical ability a little too much to help him. That's not an issue in itself, but my concern is over his ability to advance beyond that against NHL'ers mentally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Dizzle Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 I think that's always the risk of drafting guys who are big and strong whether defencemen or forward. Sometimes they have the clear skill set to lessen the concern (Laine/Puljarvi/Ekblad) but sometimes it's less clear as to whether they produce in junior because they're skilled or big (Steve Bernier/Zach Kassian/Kyle Beach). My guess is we will draft in the four or five spot and walk away with one of Tkachuk or Dubois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHockeyNerds Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 6 hours ago, HKSR said: There's a lot of Debbie Downers talking about Chychrun, but I remember the same conversations were had about Seth Jones as well. Cam Fowler got the same treatment. Should be careful of writing off a defenceman at such a young age when they have all the tools to be a star. My only concern at this stage is what Chychrun's work ethic and mental makeup is like. I'll admit, I haven't heard much about his work ethic or mental makeup, but if he's got that competitive edge and work ethic to improve, he'll become that full package defenceman one day... likely in his mid-20s (where most defencemen blossom). From what I've seen of him, he has all the tools to be a player like Pietrangelo. I'll take that chance if I'm picking 4th, 5th, or 6th in this draft. by all reports he has a great work ethic, at least thats what his head coach said. the one thing that worries me is Chychruns on ice vision. Doesn't always make the best plays out there. Would not picking him at all, but alot of good options at 4-6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Chychrun has an outstanding package for a dman. He's good size, ( He will probably cap off at 6'3 225) he's got excellent speed, he's a physical player, plays very good in all 3 zones, future top 2 dman for sure, but probably somewhat of a Edler or Jovanovski type, in the sense that he is capable of playing a top 2 position, but sometimes he will turn it over, but none the less, Chycrun does and will probably be a better offensive player then Bogosian. But right now, at 4-5 I rather draft someone else other then Chycrun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 4 hours ago, elvis15 said: I didn't have the same concerns over Jones, apart from generally taking a D as high as 2nd or even 1st (particularly when MacKinnon and Barkov were my favourite players in the draft that year). He would have been my 3rd overall though. I don't remember my thoughts on Fowler before the draft. I think Chychrun has relied on size and physical ability a little too much to help him. That's not an issue in itself, but my concern is over his ability to advance beyond that against NHL'ers mentally. Excellent point. One difficulty in projecting success from performance in early Junior years (draft -1, draft year) is that some guys do well because they mature early or because that are big strong guys playing against boys. As other guys mature physically and catch up in terms of size and strength, they also tend catch up in performance. So I am worried about Chychrun. It is particularly a concern given that his numbers did not improve much between his draft-1 year and his draft year. 2 hours ago, J-Dizzle said: I think that's always the risk of drafting guys who are big and strong whether defencemen or forward. Sometimes they have the clear skill set to lessen the concern (Laine/Puljarvi/Ekblad) but sometimes it's less clear as to whether they produce in junior because they're skilled or big (Steve Bernier/Zach Kassian/Kyle Beach). My guess is we will draft in the four or five spot and walk away with one of Tkachuk or Dubois. That is what I hope and expect as well. Chychrun is just too big a risk at that spot for the reasons noted above, in addition to the concern that it is always harder to project Ds. Chychrun could end up as a top of the depth chart guy, but he could just as easily end up as a career third pairing guy. In some some ways guys Juolevi, Sergachev, Bean and even Dante Fabbro have more attractive trajectories. And I think Fabbro has been better in the U-18s so far. But you don't want any of those guys at #4 or #5 where it looks like there are blue-chip potential top-6 forwards available. I want the Canucks to take the BPA with their first pick, and the BPA at 1-6 won't be a D-man in my view. I would like to see the Canucks make a trade for a mid-range first round pick where some good Ds will be available, although I admit that is long shot. But even with their high second round pick there are some interesting D prospects who might be available like Logan Stanley and Kale Clague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaSwede Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 5 hours ago, JamesB said: Excellent point. One difficulty in projecting success from performance in early Junior years (draft -1, draft year) is that some guys do well because they mature early or because that are big strong guys playing against boys. As other guys mature physically and catch up in terms of size and strength, they also tend catch up in performance. So I am worried about Chychrun. It is particularly a concern given that his numbers did not improve much between his draft-1 year and his draft year. That is what I hope and expect as well. Chychrun is just too big a risk at that spot for the reasons noted above, in addition to the concern that it is always harder to project Ds. Chychrun could end up as a top of the depth chart guy, but he could just as easily end up as a career third pairing guy. In some some ways guys Juolevi, Sergachev, Bean and even Dante Fabbro have more attractive trajectories. And I think Fabbro has been better in the U-18s so far. But you don't want any of those guys at #4 or #5 where it looks like there are blue-chip potential top-6 forwards available. I want the Canucks to take the BPA with their first pick, and the BPA at 1-6 won't be a D-man in my view. I would like to see the Canucks make a trade for a mid-range first round pick where some good Ds will be available, although I admit that is long shot. But even with their high second round pick there are some interesting D prospects who might be available like Logan Stanley and Kale Clague. That's what I am expecting to happen, there will be a quality defender that the Canucks like at #33. Someone will drop from the first round as well. I've always found there to be quality prospects available just at the beginning of the second round, it's pretty much a late first. If the Canucks are picking at #6 and the top 3, Tkachuck and Dubois are gone, I can see them going for Chychrun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonny_Bohonos_14 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 TSN Hockey @TSNHockey 13h13 hours ago LIKE FATHER, LIKE SON? @CraigJButton profiles @GoLondonKnights F Matthew Tkachuk http://fw.to/uxhwp0k #TSNHockey TSN @TSN_Sports 19h19 hours ago Craig Button begins his countdown to the draft with a closer look at Alex Nylander. VIDEO@ http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/video/nhl-draft-countdown-alexander-nylander~851881 … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Tkachuk with a hattrick and an assist last night against Erie to bring his point total up to 26 points in 11 games. He is second in points and second in goals (13) in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 1 minute ago, Toews said: Tkachuk with a hattrick and an assist last night against Erie to bring his point total up to 26 points in 11 games. He is second in points and second in goals (13) in the playoffs. What happened the last London Knight to do super well in the playoffs? It escapes me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 5 hours ago, DeltaSwede said: If the Canucks are picking at #6 and the top 3, Tkachuck and Dubois are gone, I can see them going for Chychrun. *Juolevi IMO. I'm also still not sold on Dubois. Nice tool box and all but... Late riser? Check. Weaker league? Check. Big body (possibly case of man dominating boys)? Check. Scares the @#$% out of me. Now clearly, I don't have Benning's scouting intel or the benefit of an in person interview that could certainly sway those feelings but with the information I do have, I'd be taking Tkachuck and possibly even Nylander ahead of Dubois IMO. And I'd take Juolevi before either of those guys and it's be a tough call for me between Juolevi/Tkachuck though I'm slightly leaning Tkachuck at 4. If Tkachuck goes at 4 and we're 5 or 6, I take Juolevi all day, every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numb3r 16 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 5 minutes ago, J.R. said: *Juolevi IMO. I'm also still not sold on Dubois. Nice tool box and all but... Late riser? Check. Weaker league? Check. Big body (possibly case of man dominating boys)? Check. Scares the @#$% out of me. Now clearly, I don't have Benning's scouting intel or the benefit of an in person interview that could certainly sway those feelings but with the information I do have, I'd be taking Tkachuck and possibly even Nylander ahead of Dubois IMO. And I'd take Juolevi before either of those guys and it's be a tough call for me between Juolevi/Tkachuck though I'm slightly leaning Tkachuck at 4. If Tkachuck goes at 4 and we're 5 or 6, I take Juolevi all day, every day. What if tkachuk did not play with marner and Dvorak, would he still be rated as high? Something to think about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 2 minutes ago, numb3r 16 said: What if tkachuk did not play with marner and Dvorak, would he still be rated as high? Something to think about I've thought about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Ran the simulator... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 11 hours ago, JamesB said: Excellent point. One difficulty in projecting success from performance in early Junior years (draft -1, draft year) is that some guys do well because they mature early or because that are big strong guys playing against boys. As other guys mature physically and catch up in terms of size and strength, they also tend catch up in performance. So I am worried about Chychrun. It is particularly a concern given that his numbers did not improve much between his draft-1 year and his draft year. ... This was much of the talk around Ekblad in his draft year as well, but I didn't see those concerns as much since his game was still built on smart decisions and ability vs just overpowering players. 24 minutes ago, J.R. said: *Juolevi IMO. I'm also still not sold on Dubois. Nice tool box and all but... Late riser? Check. Weaker league? Check. Big body (possibly case of man dominating boys)? Check. Scares the @#$% out of me. Now clearly, I don't have Benning's scouting intel or the benefit of an in person interview that could certainly sway those feelings but with the information I do have, I'd be taking Tkachuck and possibly even Nylander ahead of Dubois IMO. And I'd take Juolevi before either of those guys and it's be a tough call for me between Juolevi/Tkachuck though I'm slightly leaning Tkachuck at 4. If Tkachuck goes at 4 and we're 5 or 6, I take Juolevi all day, every day. I still have a soft spot for Sergachev, but Juolevi would do. Tkachuck I'd understand though as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Just now, elvis15 said: This was much of the talk around Ekblad in his draft year as well, but I didn't see those concerns as much since his game was still built on smart decisions and ability vs just overpowering players. I still have a soft spot for Sergachev, but Juolevi would do. Tkachuck I'd understand though as well. I wish we somehow had another ~#10 pick to take him! Could EASILY be the best D in the draft but.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 56 minutes ago, numb3r 16 said: What if tkachuk did not play with marner and Dvorak, would he still be rated as high? Something to think about He was excellent at the world Juniors, much better than marner was. Maybe Marner is as good as he is because he plays with Tkachuk........I never see anyone consider that perspective Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 4 minutes ago, stawns said: He was excellent at the world Juniors, much better than marner was. Maybe Marner is as good as he is because he plays with Tkachuk........I never see anyone consider that perspective I do i would take him at 4 no problemo. I think he is the type of kid Benning looks for, decent size, grit x10 can score as well as play hard in the greasy areas as well as coming from a great development team in London. The Knights are a friggin factory for great young players that can be fast tracked into the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 6 minutes ago, ice orca said: I do i would take him at 4 no problemo. I think he is the type of kid Benning looks for, decent size, grit x10 can score as well as play hard in the greasy areas as well as coming from a great development team in London. The Knights are a friggin factory for great young players that can be fast tracked into the NHL. agreed that's the element that's puts him above the rest of the fwds, imo. Juolevi as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.