I’m all for second chances, but this was a total dirtbag thing to do. In this day and age, with all that’s happened with this sort of thing a seventeen year old should know better. I hope he isn’t drafted by any team as this “owning up” seems to be well timed to occur pre-draft.
I have an 18 year old who has nowhere near the drive and effort in most things like an NHL prospect has (he has large talent in other areas but he's going to have to work hard for longer to get somewhere with it). He's also done plenty wrong (and so did his brother and so did I at that age). And there's no way he'd even think of doing this.
Not that there are actual examples of this, but...
Stabbing someone actually has more defences and/or excuses (defence, in a fight, drunken brawl, accident when acting tough). And holding up a store is often spur of the moment stuff.
This required him to decide to record someone without their knowledge (someone who presumably trusted him), and then, later, deliberately decide to share it. To me it's more low-down.
I think the major difference is also that there are actual consequences that occur with the other acts. Most people who are okay giving a second chance to reformed criminals do so after they served their time and showed they have changed. It doesn't start with "Well he admitted to it yesterday, so let's get him a jersey and a multi-million dollar contract today" it's closer to "He made a mistake, but if he serves his time, it's better for society that we give him the chance of one day being a productive member of society (often with a scarlet letter in the form of a criminal record) instead of locking him up for ever."
In this case, the guy got off lucky that he just had to pay a fine (oh and the chief of police also works for the same team...). And now we're talking about a privilege that 99.9999999% of the world will never have in the form of being drafted by a professional sports league.
I think I can safely guarantee that if another prospect was charged with a stabbing during a liquor store robbery last week, not a single poster would be saying what he did wasn't that bad, stabbings happen all the time and the teams should still draft him. There would be major red flags. We would all agree about how heinous the action was, question his character, and certainly would not be defending the stabbing it or downplaying it like we saw here.
But according to our friend here, there isn't even a need for a second chance. What he did was completely normal in hockey culture and therefore we can't judge him at all.
The Following User Says Thank You to Oling_Roachinen For This Useful Post:
Link to a couple FC Hockey articles on this draft, including two great articles on players to target for the second and third round. Sorry if this is off topic in the “fight another poster” thread.
I am just hoping for some smart choices in the second and third rounds, no more Boltmanns please.
The Following User Says Thank You to Tkachukwagon For This Useful Post:
Summarizing
- The draft lacks a strong #1 overall selection, whoever goes 2 and 3 are likely weaker than normal years too. For the record, if I had #1 I would be drafting William Eklund, but that would also be a weaker #1 than most years.
- From 4 to say 17 I actually think there's a lot of upside and quality players to pick
- From 17-35 I think it's weaker
- From then on...who knows.
How did you arrive at this breakdown? Who are your top 3? I assume two of them are Power and Eklund?
This is a weird take... literally everything I've seen on this draft has basically Power at #1, then eight guys: Matthew Beniers, Dylan Guenther, Simon Edvinsson, Kent Johnson, Luke Hughes, William Eklund, Mason MacTavish and Brandt Clarke. Of those eight, Beniers and Hughes and maybe Guenther are likely to go in the top 5-6 with MacTavish and Johnson more likely to wind up out of the top 5, but there's not a whole lot to choose between them and different scouting staffs like different guys.
The next tier includes a bunch of guys like Sillinger, Raty, Rosen, Coronato and Lysell who could go anywhere from 10-25.
Then there are the two goalies in Cossa and Wallstedt who are pretty close to evenly rated, if you're one of the first two teams who needs to draft a goalie. Both would be somewhere in the mix with the "eight guys after Power" in terms of talent but drafting a goalie is a bit of a different thing, so they get their own category.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
I'm never going to pretend that I'm a scout or expert but I do spend a lot of time reading about the draft and watching video and games when I can.
My view of the draft is
- It is primarily weak because it lacks a true #1. The fact that Power is the unanimous #1 pick underscores this. He will be a very good NHLer but more along the lines of a Chris Philips or Erik Johnson. He's not going to change a franchise.
- Following Power there is a clump of really good players that each have some obvious flaws (sometimes only one) that create some risk or lower probability of their ceilings being reached. But what I like is there is a lot of skill and strong hockey sense. The flaws, in many cases, are addressable in my view.
- I think that skill extends into the latest teens, where there is another shelf, where you get into players that have either way larger and harder to overcome flaws, combinations of flaws that make them unlikely to success - or limited upside.
For example there are a number of smallish players who are also not great skaters. Being both small and not a great skater is tough to overcome just looking at historic outcomes. There's a bunch of that stuff littered through the draft.
Summarizing
- The draft lacks a strong #1 overall selection, whoever goes 2 and 3 are likely weaker than normal years too. For the record, if I had #1 I would be drafting William Eklund, but that would also be a weaker #1 than most years.
- From 4 to say 17 I actually think there's a lot of upside and quality players to pick
- From 17-35 I think it's weaker
- From then on...who knows.
I heard a podcast the other day where someone commented that it's going to be interested watching the OHL next year, and some other leagues that didn't play much or at all, because there are going to be players that emerge out of nowhere that are going to look like great steals or ones that didn't go at all. We could see a bumper crop of overagers drafted next year. Right now - we just don't know who those players are.
As a guy who has studied the draft very closely for 3 decades, I agree-the lack of true, top-end blue-chippers is the main reason this draft is looked at harshly. There is still some depth through the third round (the level of talent compared to other years may be lower, but we'll see), and there's still plenty of reasons to be excited, maybe more than usual due to the many question marks-some of which will be answered this weekend. The Covid, and OHL factors are interesting as well-there could be some players selected in the 2nd/3rd rounds that are virtual unknowns, except to the team that drafts them.
How did you arrive at this breakdown? Who are your top 3? I assume two of them are Power and Eklund?
This is a weird take... literally everything I've seen on this draft has basically Power at #1, then eight guys: Matthew Beniers, Dylan Guenther, Simon Edvinsson, Kent Johnson, Luke Hughes, William Eklund, Mason MacTavish and Brandt Clarke. Of those eight, Beniers and Hughes and maybe Guenther are likely to go in the top 5-6 with MacTavish and Johnson more likely to wind up out of the top 5, but there's not a whole lot to choose between them and different scouting staffs like different guys.
The next tier includes a bunch of guys like Sillinger, Raty, Rosen, Coronato and Lysell who could go anywhere from 10-25.
Then there are the two goalies in Cossa and Wallstedt who are pretty close to evenly rated, if you're one of the first two teams who needs to draft a goalie. Both would be somewhere in the mix with the "eight guys after Power" in terms of talent but drafting a goalie is a bit of a different thing, so they get their own category.
I think the "tiers" will be different from person to person, team to team, scout to scout, and I don't see a lot of consensus when it comes to the opinions of the pundits.
I think the "tiers" will be different from person to person, team to team, scout to scout, and I don't see a lot of consensus when it comes to the opinions of the pundits.
I think there's a ton of consensus on both who the #1 is, and who the next eight skaters are going to be. Far more than is usual for a top 10. The only credible ranking I'm aware of that doesn't have those 9 guys in the top 9 is McKeen's, and they have 8 of them. Some rankings have one of the goalies in the top 10, but like I say, figuring out who's going to pick a goalie is more of a question of analyzing the team than the player.
If there are other major outlets' rankings I'm unaware of though, let me know. I don't count Button who is basically a joke at this point.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
I think there's a ton of consensus on both who the #1 is, and who the next eight skaters are going to be. Far more than is usual for a top 10. The only credible ranking I'm aware of that doesn't have those 9 guys in the top 9 is McKeen's, and they have 8 of them. Some rankings have one of the goalies in the top 10, but like I say, figuring out who's going to pick a goalie is more of a question of analyzing the team than the player.
If there are other major outlets' rankings I'm unaware of though, let me know. I don't count Button who is basically a joke at this point.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you for the most part, but McTavish has been top-8 in a lot of mocks recently, and there's been sightings of Guenther, Johnson, and Edvinsson outside the top-9. I believe in a top-9 of Power, Beniers, Eklund, Edvinsson, Hughes, Guenther, Wallstedt, Johnson,and Clarke. Then I think there's another tier with McTavish, Lucius, Sillinger, and Lysell-then I see a pretty wide open plateau that lasts until later in the first. That's just my opinion.
The Following User Says Thank You to Sandman For This Useful Post:
How did you arrive at this breakdown? Who are your top 3? I assume two of them are Power and Eklund?
My top 3 would be Eklund, Hughes and Beniers in that order, with Power at #4. I think Hughes has immense upside and if hadn't been injured could have perhaps contended for #1. I get that's counter to all the outlets that have Power but what I see with him is a big, mobile dman - but who isn't that skilled offensively and isn't that physical. I will be surprised if he ends up being the top player from this draft, or even amongst the top 2 or 3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
This is a weird take... literally everything I've seen on this draft has basically Power at #1, then eight guys: Matthew Beniers, Dylan Guenther, Simon Edvinsson, Kent Johnson, Luke Hughes, William Eklund, Mason MacTavish and Brandt Clarke. Of those eight, Beniers and Hughes and maybe Guenther are likely to go in the top 5-6 with MacTavish and Johnson more likely to wind up out of the top 5, but there's not a whole lot to choose between them and different scouting staffs like different guys.
Yes I agree that's the top tier. I didn't outline it that way, as I wasn't summarizing the various tiers I see, was just summarizing the parts of the draft I like and don't. But I agree that seems to be the consensus top 9. And they could really go in any order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
The next tier includes a bunch of guys like Sillinger, Raty, Rosen, Coronato and Lysell who could go anywhere from 10-25.
For the me next tier (that takes you to 17 which is where I see a dip) are: Sillinger, Lucius, Svechkov, Lysell, Coronato, Othman and the two goalies. I have Raty outside that - he just didn't produce and I see him now going in the late part of the first. I think there's talent to be found after 17, but I think a lot of those players have some pretty big flaws to overcome in their games or physical attributes.
And it's generally a weak draft from a skating point of view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Then there are the two goalies in Cossa and Wallstedt who are pretty close to evenly rated, if you're one of the first two teams who needs to draft a goalie. Both would be somewhere in the mix with the "eight guys after Power" in terms of talent but drafting a goalie is a bit of a different thing, so they get their own category.
Yup but I was including them in my shelf at 17.
Last edited by Jiri Hrdina; 07-20-2021 at 12:00 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
I think there's a ton of consensus on both who the #1 is, and who the next eight skaters are going to be. Far more than is usual for a top 10. The only credible ranking I'm aware of that doesn't have those 9 guys in the top 9 is McKeen's, and they have 8 of them. Some rankings have one of the goalies in the top 10, but like I say, figuring out who's going to pick a goalie is more of a question of analyzing the team than the player.
If there are other major outlets' rankings I'm unaware of though, let me know. I don't count Button who is basically a joke at this point.
I don't now why you think Button is a joke. I enjoy reading different views and seeing different lists to form my own view. Pronman gets similarly crapped on but if you listen to these guys talk at length - you'll find they are very humble about what they know and don't know. The idea of lists paints a false picture sometimes of how they view these guys - which is much tighter clumps where there isn't much difference between the guy at 21 and the guy at 27. I enjoy both of them and find reading and listening to their views provides different perspectives, instead of just reading the same lists in slightly different orders from most other mocks.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Mailloux renounces himself from the 2021 draft and asks that no team drafts him in the hopes that he can use the upcoming season to prove his maturity and character for the 2022 draft.
I don't now why you think Button is a joke. I enjoy reading different views and seeing different lists to form my own view. Pronman gets similarly crapped on but if you listen to these guys talk at length - you'll find they are very humble about what they know and don't know. The idea of lists paints a false picture sometimes of how they view these guys - which is much tighter clumps where there isn't much difference between the guy at 21 and the guy at 27. I enjoy both of them and find reading and listening to their views provides different perspectives, instead of just reading the same lists in slightly different orders from most other mocks.
I get angry every time I see or hear Button but it has nothing to do with his knowledge of prospects and everything to do with how far he set this franchise back with his stupidity.
Mailloux renounces himself from the 2021 draft and asks that no team drafts him in the hopes that he can use the upcoming season to prove his maturity and character for the 2022 draft.
