Quote:
Originally Posted by bax
Niklas Hjalmarsson only had 8 points in 65 games in Sweden before coming to North America and he turned out okay. Also, Matt Greene's best offensive season in college was 17 points in 40 games which came in his second year in the league. His point totals from his 3 years in college went 4, 17, 9. No doubt Sieloff has some work ahead of him, but I still think he's a player. Playing on a bad team isn't helping his offensive stats at all.
|
Hjalmarsson was a boy playing against men, completely different scenario. The fact that he played 65 games in a mens league is what you should be looking at.
As for Greene, NCAA hockey is a much better league then the OHL. NCAA is a league dominated by 22-24 year olds, none of these guys would be eligible for junior. That is what makes Gaurdreau's point production so impressive as he did it as an 18-19 year old. Not to mention Gillies doing what he did as a 19 year old.
I am not saying you are wrong as I haven't looked at the data, and I agree that you shouldn't write off Sieloff because he doesn't put up points, but I do think there is some serious merit to the thesis being brought up that D who put up points have a high correlation to D that make the NHL.
I think that the points that are being put up in junior shows that this guy is:
A) getting a lot of ice time (thus in good condition, can play in all ends of the ice)
B) the guy has hockey sense and can make a break out pass
C) the guy is more physically gifted than his peer group
I would think that the correlation of points-effective defensman is actually pretty high. I would like to see the stats though before I agree or disagree with the point being brought up.