iceman64 Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) II just read Jared Chan's article on 3 Defensemen available at 40th but he also had "mentions" and Alex Vlasic, out of the USDP who seems to be a fairly decent player who is a real man child at 17 yrs old, 6'6 200 lbs who has skills.. only 4 goals last season but 23 assists. Some have him listed around 37-38 but if Benning can grab him by trading up a few spots? Or wait it out and see if he's available? Oh for what it's worth bob mckenzie has him @ 23rd. Another big dman with some skills would be great to pair up with hughes or? in a cpl of years This is a big if depending on if Benning wants another D but why not get stocked up on D with the way injuries happen here? Who knows though right? Might be a really good prospect forward who he can't pass up. Anyway, thoughts? Edited May 9, 2019 by iceman64 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Yes, I thought Vlasic played pretty well at the U18. Mind you, he played for the stacked US team. But double-mind you, Vlasic made that team and didn't look out of place. I believe he can play both sides as well. I am hoping that Grewe or Beecher are around at #40. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post dm_ranger Posted May 9, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted May 9, 2019 I won't claim to have any insight into prospects and their projections. I do however, have an immediate hesitation when 'man-child' is used. Kids that are bigger, stronger, faster, than their 15-17 year old rivals don't stay bigger, faster, stronger at the NHL level. I think you need to look at skills, IQ, and work rate of the "Man-child" prospects harder than you do with other prospects. This doesn't mean don't take them, but be aware that their physical advantage might dry up in the NHL and I want to know they have other options. Jake and Gadjovic are possible examples of this. 1 1 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlastPast Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Antti Tuomisto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted May 9, 2019 Author Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) 57 minutes ago, dm_ranger said: I won't claim to have any insight into prospects and their projections. I do however, have an immediate hesitation when 'man-child' is used. Kids that are bigger, stronger, faster, than their 15-17 year old rivals don't stay bigger, faster, stronger at the NHL level. I think you need to look at skills, IQ, and work rate of the "Man-child" prospects harder than you do with other prospects. This doesn't mean don't take them, but be aware that their physical advantage might dry up in the NHL and I want to know they have other options. Jake and Gadjovic are possible examples of this. Yes but which one of them is 6'6? And obviously he has skills and iq... Edited May 9, 2019 by iceman64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dm_ranger Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 If he has skills, good IQ and is mobile enough then it sounds great. As I said I don't claim to know any of these prospects. I just don't want someone whose success to this point is that he was 6'6 playing against 5'9 players. If he checks the other boxes great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 1 hour ago, dm_ranger said: Kids that are bigger, stronger, faster, than their 15-17 year old rivals don't stay bigger, faster, stronger at the NHL level. I think you need to look at skills, IQ, and work rate of the "Man-child" prospects harder than you do with other prospects. Great comment! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted May 9, 2019 Author Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, dm_ranger said: If he has skills, good IQ and is mobile enough then it sounds great. As I said I don't claim to know any of these prospects. I just don't want someone whose success to this point is that he was 6'6 playing against 5'9 players. If he checks the other boxes great. Yeah i get that part but i don't think it's the case here size wise. IQ though? Yeah he has that and play making ability it seems with 23 assists but i get what your saying. I guess your best off reading his bio and from more than one source,what's said about him for yourself.. Edited May 9, 2019 by iceman64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 this site has us picking Byram at 10th lol and Afanasyev with the 40th. https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2019/ 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Trebreh said: this site has us picking Byram at 10th lol and Afanasyev with the 40th. https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2019/ Byram being around at 10 would be even more lucky (and also unlikely) than Hughes dropping to 6! Edited May 10, 2019 by 'NucK™ 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 39 minutes ago, Trebreh said: this site has us picking Byram at 10th lol and Afanasyev with the 40th. https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2019/ Afanasyev would be an interesting pick. Russian (if that matters to you), but has played in the US for a few years. 6'4" 200+lbs LW. Might be the perfect complementary piece to Boeser and Petterssons line 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 46 minutes ago, Trebreh said: this site has us picking Byram at 10th lol and Afanasyev with the 40th. https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2019/ Byram dropping to 10 is about as likely as Lebron James asking for a trade to Vancouver and only Vancouver. But hey, if it happens praise the sun. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseBlue Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 I just noticed there is another Connor Mc.. in the draft .. i hope he uses 97 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyoung Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Vlasic would be sick Korczak, kokkonen, Poulin, légare, grewe would be other great options. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Trade up get Nolan foote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where's Wellwood Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 1 hour ago, JesseBlue said: I just noticed there is another Connor Mc.. in the draft .. i hope he uses 97 Connor McMichael https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/424496/connor-mcmichael The London Knights make good players. Does he fall till our second? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKnight Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Lassi Thomson is my 2nd round guy. Also, really like Grewe and Puistola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 7 hours ago, Trebreh said: this site has us picking Byram at 10th lol and Afanasyev with the 40th. https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2019/ That is not a ''site'' per se? It is a site where people can log on, create a profile, and create their own mock draft. That was the draft opinion of a username Bill Plazcek; a quick Google has him as a blogger or writer (?) for a Chicago based / Blackhawk based web site called the rink.com ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Puistola is pretty darn intriguing. Broberg at 10 and Puistola at 40 would be awesome! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyClarke Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 18 hours ago, dm_ranger said: I won't claim to have any insight into prospects and their projections. I do however, have an immediate hesitation when 'man-child' is used. Kids that are bigger, stronger, faster, than their 15-17 year old rivals don't stay bigger, faster, stronger at the NHL level. I think you need to look at skills, IQ, and work rate of the "Man-child" prospects harder than you do with other prospects. This doesn't mean don't take them, but be aware that their physical advantage might dry up in the NHL and I want to know they have other options. Jake and Gadjovic are possible examples of this. Very True! I recall Jeff Greenlaw was a can't miss prospect. Kid was huge in Juniors. Sadly, he did nothing in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now