Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx
To be fair Nylander played on a much worse team and led his team in scoring by 14 points (also 6 goals and 6 assists in 6 playoff games). Brown didn't even lead his team in points (no goals, 6 assists in 5 playoff games).
I do think Nylander's offensive production is disappointing for what he is, though.
|
It is always difficult to gauge how one prospect benefited from playing with certain other prospects, and who was driving offence without watching at least a large portion of the games.
Logan Brown was 2nd on his team in points - and coincidentally, was 14 points back from the leader. However, he played 7 games less. The gap would have been much smaller. Also, the next highest player was Sergachev - a Defencemen.
What Nylander did in the post season was definitely more impressive - 2PPG. That isn't good - that's really good.
Windsor scored more goals than Mississauga as well, so Nylander's contribution was a larger percentage of the team's offence.
This is where we need posters who watched the teams play to chime in with what they thought. Who stirred the drink on those lines. Who they found to be more effective.
All I remember is scouts talking about how disappointing Brown came out of the gates, and then how 'awesome' he has been in the 2nd half putting in complete games. The opposite was true of Nylander, who faded in the 2nd half - but how much did injury factor in? One thing that I keep remembering is scouts talking about how they went to view Nylander, but came away thinking McLeod was driving the line.
Who makes the better prospect? What numbers were better given the team/lines they played on? Who drove their respective lines? It is always difficult talking about stats.
To put it this way - and yes, it is coming from YEARS ago, but I feel the point still stands - where do you think Jarome ranked on his team his draft year? 1st? 2nd? 3rd? He was 7th.
Darcy Tucker, Hnat Domenichelli, Shane Doan, Aaron Keller, Tyson Nash and Ivan Vologjaninov all finished ahead of Jarome in points. Ryan Huska - the current head coach of the Stockton Heat - finished with 4 less points in 6 less games played.
Without doing the math, I am going to guess that Jarome had a less of a percentage of both goals and points from his team than either Nylander or Brown. One would think that Iginla was somewhat of a passenger in his draft year based on stats, as he wasn't even the highest producing 17 year old on the team (Brown and Nylander both are) - Shane Doan had 23 more points than Iginla that year.
Point is, stats just helps put things in perspective when talking about 17 year old kids. You always want to see them produce, but how they are producing is often more important. Is the way a certain kid is producing 'NHL translatable'? Even scouts get this wrong (Vancouver, for instance, traded Shinkaruk away because they felt his skill-set was not translatable to the NHL).
I think Nylander's shot is very much translatable - but I also thought that Granlund's shot was as well. Is Nylander quick enough? Does he go to the dirty areas enough? Does he start shying away when other teams zero-in on him physically? Does he have a high compete level? Is he playing a 200ft game, or is he standing by the blue-line like Pavel Brendl used to do on the Hitmen? I would say probably none of those are completely true, and some (if not most, and maybe all) are are only half true at best.
Same can be said for Brown. Was he productive simply because he was huge? Does he have the drive to work hard at getting better for the next step, much less the NHL? Why did he have a slow start, and has it been rectified or was the 2nd half a 'flash in the pan'?
I can't answer any of those questions - but one thing I learned to do was that these are more important questions than how a prospect ranked on his team. Usually the best prospect ranks as the top point producer on the team, but that doesn't always apply, and often how they are doing it just isn't translatable at all to the NHL and they often don't have the IQ to adapt.
I also wouldn't think Nylander's production is disappointing for what he is - most junior players hit career highs in junior that they never match in the NHL, but that isn't always the case. It really is all about translating a prospect's game, and trying to figure out if that prospect has room to grow in different areas - physically, speed, skill-set, shot, competitive drive, etc. That is why prospects bust at times - these things are difficult to gauge at times.
From the Flames' perspective, we don't really know who they will take. For all we know, they crossed out Brown's name from the possible candidates due to some reason or other. Nylander may very well be in their top 6 because, although he isn't big or truculent, is a very skilled player and the Flames feel he translates very well to the NHL.
Flames will not take a risk at 6. They will take who they feel is the best prospect now, but mostly who they feel will be the best player tomorrow. My inkling is that Brown checks-off the most boxes for the Flames without subtracting offensive production. He is also a higher rated organizational prospect (center over wingers - and even as a winger, you would think he would end up taking face-offs on his strong side).
At this point, I wouldn't bet money that I knew who for sure the Flames were targeting out of the next 10 (after the first 5) players. I also wouldn't necessarily bet money that I know exactly who they would have crossed off either, as these prospects are so different in so many ways yet are all grouped so tightly.
