Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
Crazy offensive skill, but almost nothing else that will make him an NHLer. It can be taught, but he is far more likely to bust than to make the NHL. I have him in this group of players, but he's lower down for me, around 10.
|
I don't like this take.
What you're implying is that Poirier is just some guy who shows up in the offensive zone, creates a few chances, and then does absolutely nothing in the other two zones.
It isn't that simple.
Yes, he clearly does struggle without the puck. Could be plenty of reasons for that. Maybe he's never been asked to focus on the defensive side. Maybe the systems his team plays magnify his issues. Maybe he's never had his "Method" or "Brodie" type partner to cover for him at that end, which again magnifies his issues. Or maybe he's just bad. But let's set all of that aside for now, because we know that:
1) He admits he's not at all good at that end, and needs to get better
2) He will probably spend time in the AHL working on that end, in an organization that can really show him video of his miscues and afford him minor league icetime to make mistakes to learn from
I'd rather focus on attributes that could make him an NHLer that aren't as simplistic as "offensive skill".
- Elite at controlled zone exits - low turnover rate with elite exit rate
- High-end skating ability
Why?
1) Because if you can get the puck out of the zone, you defend less.
2) If you can skate, you can recover from poor positioning and still close gaps
Ultimately, I believe the idea of a "boom or bust" prospect is so overstated. Most prospects bust. Even role players at the NHL level though, have some high-end attribute that got their foot in the door. If for Poirier that's his offense, that still gives him a higher chance at getting a chance in the NHL than, say, Boltmann who will need to absolutely PERFECT his game to take it to the next level.
I've seen some people compare Poirier to Kylington, and I can see why.
What I will say is this - Kylington's defensive game has come
miles from where it was when he was drafted. If he has had any issues in the NHL, it's arguably been at the offensive end where he doesn't generate as much as we need him to and ends up being a net-zero type player when we need more. Of course he's not
perfect defensively, but he's more than passable at this point and those other attributes can swing a game. If Kylington can start scoring more, he's a potent top six defenseman, still with a high enough ceiling to be more. Why can't Poirier follow a Kylington type development curve at the defensive end?
So yeah, I'm voting Poirier, but I do also like the potential of guys like Zavgorodny and Parsons