Craig's List 2014 Prospects

[Caged Great]

don't take my preference for Ehlers over Ritchie/Perlini as "I only want little people"

If I thought that Ritchie or Perlini were comparable offensively to any of the other guys I'd be all on that bandwagon because we need size.

However, it's not comparable and that is what I have major concerns about. Neither Perlini or Ritchie are in the same class of skill as any of the other 6 forwards (Draisaitl, Bennett, Reinhart, Dal Colle, Ehlers or Nylander)

To me it seems reckless to take someone that's a worse player than someone that's a better player just because one has 2-3 inches in height over the other. You would have to hope like hell that Ritchie or Perlini takes several steps forward in their game, and I don't think they have that in them.

It'd be one thing if we were picking 8th overall or 10th, but when we're likely to pick 5th, it would be a huge mistake taking either of those two.

[SuperMatt18]

Anybody know what Ehlers stats are in games where Drouin was not playing?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

don't take my preference for Ehlers over Ritchie/Perlini as "I only want little people"

If I thought that Ritchie or Perlini were comparable offensively to any of the other guys I'd be all on that bandwagon because we need size.

However, it's not comparable and that is what I have major concerns about. Neither Perlini or Ritchie are in the same class of skill as any of the other 6 forwards (Draisaitl, Bennett, Reinhart, Dal Colle, Ehlers or Nylander)

To me it seems reckless to take someone that's a worse player than someone that's a better player just because one has 2-3 inches in height over the other. You would have to hope like hell that Ritchie or Perlini takes several steps forward in their game, and I don't think they have that in them.

It'd be one thing if we were picking 8th overall or 10th, but when we're likely to pick 5th, it would be a huge mistake taking either of those two.

Sounds like you would've taken Robert Nilsson in 2003 over guys like Getzlaf and Perry because he was the most skilled and Getlzaf and Perry must've been overrated due to size.

You are guilty of underrating the skill of the big guys and assuming they are placed too high because of their size. You keep assuming they are worse players where there is no evidence they are. You seem to place an emphasis on skill and skill alone without factoring in other things.

There is a reason big skilled players are valuable and that is because it is inherently easier for them to protect the puck, to drive the net, to win board battles when you're bigger and stronger. I don't see you acknowledging this fact at all. Guys like Getzlaf, Perry, Benn, Thornton, etc are as good as they are partially because of their size and strength. They wouldn't be as good if they were 5'11.

I mean you talk as if you are an expert on these guys making absurd absolute statements like "Perlini and Ritchie are not good enough offensively to the degree where they will be impact players" and "pick 5th it would be a huge mistake taking either of those two" and yet you acknowledge you don't even look for scouting reports on them. You can't talk in absolutes about things you are self-admittedly ignorant about. You can't ignore the role size plays in the NHL either.

[the_only_turek_fan]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=711003

At this stage in the season there seems to be four legitimate contenders in the mix for top honors: Forwards Samuel Bennett of the Kingston Frontenacs of the Ontario Hockey League, Leon Draisaitl of the Prince Albert Raiders of the Western Hockey League and Sam Reinhart of the Kootenay Ice of the WHL, and defenseman Aaron Ekblad of the Barrie Colts of the OHL.


There's also a chance forward Michael Dal Colle of the Oshawa Generals of the OHL also might sneak into the mix at some point prior to the announcement of the No. 1 selection June 27 at Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia.

It appears Dal Colle is high on a few lists. If some think he has a shot to go at #1, then grabbing him at #5 or #6 would be a good pick for the Flames,

[the_only_turek_fan]

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2014-nhl-d...pect-rankings/

Looking at these rankings, it appears that Draisaitl is the guy that may slide.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Watching him, he has more offensive talent than when Sven was his age, and more than either Poirier or Granlund. He's more likely to hit his potential because of his higher offensive skill. Poirier and Granlund have both taken huge strides in the last 14 months raising their profiles to be in the same conversation as Baertschi, but Ehlers would already be in that conversation before he's even drafted, and if he continues to progress, he could be a dangerous first line forward. He has the same speed as Poirier give or take a bit, but the same shot/passing ability that Sven has, which could be a lethal combo.
But what makes Poirier such a good pick at the moment is that he is a physical player and his game is translatable to the NHL. Baertschi's game is taking a bit longer - as is Gaudreau's and so on. However, nobody is doubting that Ehlers can't be a very good 1st line player, but you speak like it is almost a 'sure thing'.


Yep, and if they were 6-0 or 6-1, they'd be ranked 25th or so. If they were in the same tier of offensive skill as Ehlers, they'd be in the top 3 if not 1st overall. Perlini isn't as bad in his offensive game, and I would take him before Ritchie, but there's 7 forwards I would take ahead of either (Reinhart, Bennett, Draisaitl, Ehlers, Nylander, Dal Colle, and Virtanen)
Nobody is saying that Ritchie, Virtanen, Perlini, etc., are at the same skill level as Ehlers. What people are saying is that you are undervaluing the size and skill combo - and when talking about the bigger players, you seem to almost evaluate them as plugs. You can't say that "If they were 6'0" or 6'1", they would be ranked 25th" or whatever. It would be exactly like me counter-arguing "If Ehlers was 5'2", he probably wouldn't even get drafted!" There is absolutely no sense in that argument.

If Lindros was only 5'11", he most definitely wouldn't have been drafted first over-all by Quebec either, and Quebec wouldn't have received much of a package at all when they finally traded him. It is a nonsensical argument, and it can just keep going around in a circle.

Believe it or not, the amount of scouting reports I've read is minimal. Just what I've read on here. I don't take other people's opinions and create arguments based off them. I watch something and make judgements off what I see, and state them. Doesn't mean I'm right or wrong. Just another voice out there. After I make my opinion I look to see if others are seeing what I am, or if they are seeing something different. If they are seeing something different, I try to find out why.

Maybe you need to watch the big wingers a bit more then. Why do most of the scouting services rank these big players so high, and state that they have loads of skill?


The only argument I've see in favour of Ritchie is that he's 6-3 230 and has good stats. Nothing based on how he accumulates those stats. Just numbers. The thing is that stats are irrelevant. When you're talking about 1st rounders, you expect them to be top junior players and their stats to be awesome. Otherwise they wouldn't be first round guys. So if you disregard that and look at the individual skills and compare them. When that is done, Ritchie does not come out on top often (other than he's big and can push people around, which that advantage will evaporate at the NHL level)

Ritchie's shot is outstanding - he can beat goalies from the hashmarks, he has very soft hands, he has very impressive agility for a guy his size, and he can make great plays. His range of scoring is pretty large - not just a 'crash and bang' goalmouth scramble player. Pure skill vs guys like Ehlers, Nylander, Kapanen, etc., - Ritchie will lose every time. Look at the entire picture - size, skill, projections, etc. - and Ritchie is coming up (thus far) ahead of those in most scouting services. Why? Also, what makes you think it will evaporate at the NHL level? Most scouts believe Ritchie will actually be growing more, and putting more size onto his frame. If his development goes well, he will continue pushing people around at the NHL level. Why do you think this is going to evaporate?

The reason why Ehlers is in the same group as the bigger guys is because he's small. If he was 6-2, he'd be up there with Reinhart, and if he keeps it up, he might get there anyway. Similarly, the reason why the bigger guys are as high as they are is because they are big. Drafting for size alone is not a good strategy and those forward's offensive game is not in the same tier as the slightly smaller guys. The whole package has to be considered.

Again, he is not 6'2". He also has a slight frame. Making that argument that if he was that size is the same as me trying to argue if he was smaller, he wouldn't get drafted at all. Gaudreau was considered as the 2nd most skilled forward in the entire draft. Petan last year was considered in the top 4 skill-wise by many. Why do they get drafted lower? There is significantly more risk that they will not be able to have the same level of dominance in the NHL at that size - they are less 'translatable'. Sometimes they pan out, but there are many forwards who are unable to translate their super-skills because of their smaller packages.

It is also funny that you wrote down: "The whole package has to be considered." This is exactly what people are considering. Having 6'2"+ forwards with a high-level of skill can very well be much more valuable than super-skilled sub-6'0" players - especially if an organization already has a few of them. Adding more can just turn a team into one that is easy to play against - ala Edmonton.


Umm, yes, big players do get traded all the time. Big Centers rarely do, but we already are fairly set up the middle with Monahan (6-2) Jankowski (6-3) Knight (6-2). It is something that can be addressed through trades. It's not a huge impossible obstacle to overcome. Additionally, you can address it through free agency as well.
Yes, big players do get traded all the time - but not many big+skilled players do. Again, how expensive do you think it would be to acquire Benn, Perry, Iginla, etc., when they were in their prime?

Responses in bold above.

I think you are just underrating the skill that the big men at the top end of this draft have. Nobody is going to argue that there isn't a place (especially in today's NHL) for smaller super-skilled guys. However, Calgary already has some of these types - both on the team and in the prospect pool. What they are missing is big guys with skill. You are critically undervaluing how important size + skill is, and how difficult it is to draft and develop.

The most successful teams in the NHL today - the recent past winners and the most notable contenders - all have a fairly big top 6 on average - not big plugs surrounding skilled guys, but skilled big guys sometimes surrounding smaller and more skilled guys. That is the point we are trying to make.

I wouldn't be against drafting Ehlers. I just don't see it as any mistake at all to bypass him for someone who has less skill (but still skilled!!) and who has much bigger size.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2014-nhl-d...pect-rankings/

Looking at these rankings, it appears that Draisaitl is the guy that may slide.

All it takes is for one team to love him. He can easily go top 4. Some rumours that EDM does like him. Big, skilled centres rarely slide in my experience of watching many drafts.

Total crapshoot trying to predict it right now. We'll have better info as the draft approaches and we have the draft order and the end of season rankings. There is very little separation in the top few. It is going to come down to personal preference, organizational philosophy and organizational need.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Anybody know what Ehlers stats are in games where Drouin was not playing?

18 games, 11 goals + 14 assists = 25 points ... 1.38 PPG in those games, while he has 1.65 PPG on the whole season.

[dammage79]

I find you can really get a better sense of the players (from a fan perspective) after the combine. Heck. Im trying to dig up lots of info on other players (europe mainly) and there's hardly anything right now.

Same with youtube stuff. Very few videos of players outside of say the top ten (?).

I'd say last year and the year before there was plenty of media available for us fans to chew on and suss out our own fairly educated opinions. This year, meh. Sign of a weak draft maybe?

Given how volitile the rankings are after 5-6, I wouldn't be surprised if teams in this draft went "off the board" more than a few times in the first round this year. Plenty of players to move up and down the rankings ladder I think.

EDIT: With Ehlers, Am I the only one who thinks his success is firmly planted on Drouins hip or has he carved out his own rise? I see Devos post and think "not too shabby" but thats after he played with Drouin for a good chunk of time.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by devo22

18 games, 11 goals + 14 assists = 25 points ... 1.38 PPG in those games, while he has 1.65 PPG on the whole season.

I think MacKinnon's and Drouin's PPG stayed relatively the same when they weren't playing together last year, so that's a reasonably significant difference, but not brutal.

[Caged Great]

I think it would be easier to show how I do my evaluations because it has nothing to do with tangibles like stats or height and weight.

I have scouted over 2000 prospects in the last 15 years, most at the ages 17-19 (some of the Euros were harder to scout in previous years as they had no video). I have tracked what assets players have in terms of their overall package.

Things like size are one of the things on the list but there are about 30 things on my list. Now when you track that many players, certain patterns start emerging that if player A has this feature, he stands a better chance at developing. Similarly, if a player A has this negative feature he has a better chance at not developing.

Guys like Gustav Nyquist, Fredrik Andersen, Ondrej Palat, Mattias Janmark Nylen, Patrick Hornqvist, and Mark Jankowski all had many positive "flags" that while their skills at the time might not have been evident or overwhelming, they had a ton of things going for them, that it doesn't surprise me that they are having success now. Nyquist had the most positive "flags" of any player in the mid/late rounds of any player I've seen, and he's doing alright this year (3rd in the NHL in goals per game).

Similarly, with Ritchie, he has 5 flags in the negative category. That's one of the most for a 1st round pick, and the highest for a top 10 player that I've tracked. That's why I'm so very against him specifically. Perlini has 3 flags so I'm not as concerned with him, but usually if a player has 3 + flags on the negative side it's hard for them to reach their potential. It's not impossible, just significantly more difficult. The last Flames pick to have 5+ negative flags by the way was Greg Nemisz.

Ehlers has 5 + flags with one semi negative (size)
Ritchie has 2+ flags (size physicality) with 5 negs

If a player is average or close to it in a category, then I don't flag it either way. There has to be some deviation there. For size as an example, 5-11 - 6-1 are what I consider average. Players below 5-11, get a neg, players above get a +.

The reason why I don't use scouting reports is because we are not looking at the players for the same things. My system is vastly more targeted at how a player does something instead of the results of the actions. My evaluations tend to be a lot more accurate than the "Average" team's drafting results.

PS, in 03 Nilsson was near the bottom of my list, my preference at the time of our pick was #1 Zach Parise, #2 Mike Richards, #3 Jeff Carter. I wasn't overly disappointed though because Dion was #1 on my D list.

One of the things that I do rely on scouting reports for is attitude/leadership, because that's kind of hard to peg from video highlights

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

All it takes is for one team to love him. He can easily go top 4. Some rumours that EDM does like him. Big, skilled centres rarely slide in my experience of watching many drafts.

Total crapshoot trying to predict it right now. We'll have better info as the draft approaches and we have the draft order and the end of season rankings. There is very little separation in the top few. It is going to come down to personal preference, organizational philosophy and organizational need.

Couturier in Philly slid and wasn't Grigerenko, supposed to go higher as well?

The fact that Jim Matheson said the Oilers like him means that the Oilers take him or Ekblad if they are available IMO.

[nik-]

Courturier slid because of offensive concerns, and Grigerenko because of questions regarding his competitiveness.

I don't really think Draisaitl slides.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

Similarly, with Ritchie, he has 5 flags in the negative category. That's one of the most for a 1st round pick, and the highest for a top 10 player that I've tracked. That's why I'm so very against him specifically.

5 negative flags on Ritchie? Consistency, conditioning and what? Those are the only ones I've heard and it's not clear if conditioning is really a huge issue And most 18 year olds struggle with some consistency issues.

[Caged Great]

Also, If any of Draisaitl/Bennett/Reinhart are on the board when we pick, we should go that route.

[nik-]

my order of preference of those three is Reinhart then Bennett, but very close, then Draisaitl.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

5 negative flags on Ritchie? Consistency, conditioning and what? Those are the only ones I've heard and it's not clear if conditioning is really a huge issue And most 18 year olds struggle with some consistency issues.

I don't track conditioning or consistency as those variables both tend to be correctable and are inconsistent in their impact.

My flags for him are Passing, Release, Stickhandling, Creativity, and Hockey IQ.

That's why I'm dubious about his offensive upside.

[RyZ]

Originally Posted by devo22

18 games, 11 goals + 14 assists = 25 points ... 1.38 PPG in those games, while he has 1.65 PPG on the whole season.

If Virtanen played with Drouin he would have scored 60 this year.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Couturier in Philly slid and wasn't Grigerenko, supposed to go higher as well?

The fact that Jim Matheson said the Oilers like him means that the Oilers take him or Ekblad if they are available IMO.

Grigorenko had the Russian factor.

Couturier had some skating concerns and didn't really improve his point totals from his 16 year old year to 17 year old year. And did he really slide that far though? Strome, Zibanejad and Scheifele went ahead of him and all are skilled centres as well, several with good size too. That year all the big centres went top 8 even though many were projecting that guys like Zibanejad or Scheifele might go around the Flames pick (I was desperately hoping one would fall). Frankly Couturier's year reinforces my point rather than argues against it. It went:

1. C - RNH
2. LW - Landeskog
3. C/LW - Huberdeau
4. D - Adam Larsson
5. C - Strome
6. C - Zibanejad
7. C - Scheifele
8. C - Couturier

6 out of the top 8 were centres. The next 9 picks were all D and W. So yeah that year is actually a fantastic year for my argument. It clearly shows that the big, skilled centres do not usually fall.

[greentree]

I am coming around to Virtanen. Based only on highlights packages...wow...the guy offers things we badly need (although seems to me an elite dman prospect is needed even more).