[News] With the #22 overall pick the Flames select LW/RW Emile Poirier

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

This is true. He partly made up for the reduced goal-scoring with assists, but assists are cheap.

Not as big a drop as Angelo Esposito in his draft year, but definitely heading in the wrong direction. Even standing still would be a bit of a yellow flag.

Whatever happened with that Esposito kid anyways ?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Out of curiosity, how does his speed compare with that of MacKinnon? How is Emile's edgework and agility? He seems to have insane acceleration and top speed, but I wonder how it compares to MacKinnon who people think has top 5 speed and agility?

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by cowtown75

Whatever happened with that Esposito kid anyways ?

Playing hockey in Italy. I think he was cut from the Finnish league.

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Out of curiosity, how does his speed compare with that of MacKinnon? How is Emile's edgework and agility? He seems to have insane acceleration and top speed, but I wonder how it compares to MacKinnon who people think has top 5 speed and agility?

I also would like to know this- good question

[stignasty]

Originally Posted by 868904

...therefore, their opinion isn't much better than you or I.

"One of the best skaters in the draft" - Bob McKenzie
Yet...

[868904]

Originally Posted by stignasty

"One of the best skaters in the draft" - Bob McKenzie
Yet...

I respect Mckenzie but I have zero respect for McGuire and Ferraro. I was more referring to those two.

Speaking of that though, how in the hell did so many of the public scouts knock Poirier for his skating because it was awkward? As long as he's fast and effective who cares how it looks. Watching those highlights it certainly doesn't seem like skating is a problem, in fact it's his strength as Mckenzie pointed out.

[corporatejay]

How do you quantify "compete level".

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

How do you quantify "compete level".

Guys who give a ####

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by 868904

I respect Mckenzie but I have zero respect for McGuire and Ferraro. I was more referring to those two.

Speaking of that though, how in the hell did so many of the public scouts knock Poirier for his skating because it was awkward?

Have you seen Moneyball (or read the book)? Most of MLB passed over Chad Bradford because he was a submarine pitcher. He was deadly against right-handed batters, but he had a funny-looking style, and baseball GMs did not fear losing as much as they feared being laughed at.

In the movie, Jonah Hill's character says, 'Baseball thinking is mediaeval.' That's no longer true, but in hockey, some of the same attitudes still linger on. Probably the last place they'll die is in the media, because after all, media guys don't have to win games. Some of the guys reporting on the draft are almost as far behind the times as Don Cherry.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by cowtown75

Guys who give a ####

That's how you define it. But then, how do you tell whether a player is a 3 or a 4? Or a 5, a rubber chicken, or an egg-salad sandwich? It's more subjective than figure skating.

What that 'stat' really measures is not whether the player gives a ####, but whether the guy doing the rating gives a #### about how much of a #### the player gives.

I would say more, but I don't want to wear out my # key.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

How do you quantify "compete level".

Better yet, try to get a definition of "hockey IQ". It's a whole bunch of subjective crap arbitrarily out into statistics. Think figure skating scores

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Better yet, try to get a definition of "hockey IQ". It's a whole bunch of subjective crap arbitrarily out into statistics. Think figure skating scores

Distinction: There is 'hockey IQ', and there is 'Ice Q', which is TSN's term.

'Hockey IQ' is kind of the opposite of errors in baseball. With a good video database like PUCKS, you should (in theory) be able to see what percentage of the time a puck-carrier fails to make an available play, and what percentage a defending player gives up a scoring chance by making a bad move. You could get a reasonably valid statistic out of that. I don't think anybody has ever actually done it, but it could be done in principle.

'Ice Q', on the other hand, is a dessert product from Dairy Queen that never made it out of test marketing.

[Mister Yamoto]

I've never heard of Emile Poirier. I already like him way more than Jay Bouwmeester.

*That's the last time I am gonna mention J-Bow. Just had to get one last one in.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by 868904

Yup that's my point, the tsn guys watch about as much junior hockey as the average fan, ie, the world juniors and the odd game on sports net, or a game or two that rolls through Vancouver, Calgary, or Edmonton. They don't have the time to watch these kids like real scouts do for a living, therefore, their opinion isn't much better than you or I. They are paid to be knowledgable in the NHL and that's a big enough area to cover. They are not experts on junior hockey. Just like how Michel Goulet doesn't have Tod Button's knowledge of junior players.

I was disagreeing with your point about scouts not sharing information with McKenzie. A guy like McKenzie talks with and hears a lot from various scouts and hockey people. and my bet is that he would be able to form a consensus opinion on a junior league player based on a larger opinion pool than most GMs in the league. As for guys like McGuire and Ferraro, I don't think these guys talk about guys they never watched. If they do they always refer to what scouts think. And ya, the biggest difference between the TSN guys and the average fan is that those guys have access to people who have scouted the junior leagues extensively.

[FAN]

I've had some time to think about this pick and as much as I wanted the team to draft Shinkaruk (local boy who volunteered to help with the flood cleanup!), there's a lot to like about Poirier. It seems to me that there are different opinions on what Poirier's offensive upside would be. Those who doesn't think he isn't going to amount to much of a scorer has him in the 2nd round. Those who like his offensive upside see him as a sleeper who is rocketing up the charts.

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

That's how you define it. But then, how do you tell whether a player is a 3 or a 4? Or a 5, a rubber chicken, or an egg-salad sandwich? It's more subjective than figure skating.

What that 'stat' really measures is not whether the player gives a ####, but whether the guy doing the rating gives a #### about how much of a #### the player gives.

I would say more, but I don't want to wear out my # key.

Lol. You cannot define compete level via stats. If I asked you who had a higher compete level- Steve Begin or Tangs, what would you say ? In my books, compete level means giving it every thing you got, every shift and you leave it all on the ice. You can't place a player on a 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th because of just compete level- depends what your coach thinks of you that game and if you deserve the extra mins because you deserve it- talent also factors in of course. Compete level cannot be quantified by a stat. It means that the player gives you it all at all times no matter what. He is a gamer, is competitive more than the average Joe and is a total team player as he gives all of himself all the time. He is a Competitor.

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Distinction: There is 'hockey IQ', and there is 'Ice Q', which is TSN's term.

'Hockey IQ' is kind of the opposite of errors in baseball. With a good video database like PUCKS, you should (in theory) be able to see what percentage of the time a puck-carrier fails to make an available play, and what percentage a defending player gives up a scoring chance by making a bad move. You could get a reasonably valid statistic out of that. I don't think anybody has ever actually done it, but it could be done in principle.

'Ice Q', on the other hand, is a dessert product from Dairy Queen that never made it out of test marketing.

Let's put it this way- Hockey IQ= Tanguay. A guy who has the instincts to make plays, good ones based on pure instinct that cannot be taught.

Compete Level- Something that Tangs lacks. He says he has it, but he dissapears a lot. Again, a guy like Begin brings it every shift- he is not the most gifted offensive guy but you know is is gonna give you 110% every time you throw him on the ice.

[FAN]

Compete level is certainly subjective. There are some guys that simply competes hard every single shift no matter what the score and circumstances are and you can't miss it and there are guys that need to be motivated to compete hard (e.g. contract year). Then there are guys who lose their competitiveness.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't know how you would gauge compete level statistically, but perhaps seeing how much the player stops skating and just coasts, doesn't race for pucks as often, gets too easily knocked off the puck or refuses to 'battle' for it. I would assume that there is a lot of subjectivity involved with figuring out compete level, but some of it should be easy to see as well if a scout is really looking at a prospect all the time. How they attach a number to that - I don't know.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

There are many ways to gauge compete level. Some of which are more subjective than others.

For exmple:
How often does a player continue to move his feet when he's pinned against the boards?
Does he fight through checks?
How fast does he skate to the bench on a shift change?
Does he dig in his skates to hold his ground in front of the crease? With or without cross checks?
Does he dig at pucks after the other goalie makes the save?
When the puck goes into the corner, does he try to win the race and take the hit, or lose the race and hit the other guy?
If he gets stripped of the puck, does he usually stop hard, turn around and chase it down, or does he wheel around, or does he go for a shift change?
How often do you see him at max speed?
If he can hit max speed in 5 strides (for example) how often do you see him actually do that?

Most of these can be broken down into "Always/Sometimes/Never", or something close to that. It's not much more subjective than pretty much any of the other things scouts look at.