Confirmed with Link: 1st Overall - Aaron Ekblad (signed 9/3/14)

[Laus723]

what does it matter if they aren't highly touted? they're still rookies.

point is, your blanket statement of "even the best rookies always end up being massively negative" is wrong.

Best generally implies that they were highly touted. One of the guys you listed was 26 I believe. As was stated, only 3 picked in the top 15 over the last 37 years went positive. Kinda points largely to teams needing their help were pretty poor teams.

You're off in your player rankings.

 

[16Skippy]

I'd rank them NOW as follows:

Ekblad
Murray
Jones
Fowler
Reinhart
Nurse
Larsson
Gudbranson

I've never been an enormous Jones fan though, too soft for my liking.

If you're talking about how much they were hyped coming into their drafts, well that's an entirely different list which would probably look like:

Jones
Larsson
Ekblad
Murray
Reinhart
Nurse
Fowler
Gudbranson

Ekblad would have been ranked second behind Jones. He's more defensive than Jones and more of a shooter than a QB on the PP. He's also more physical but I wouldn't consider him a physical dman Gudbranson or Nurse though.

Thanks

 

[flapanthersfan]

Best generally implies that they were highly touted. One of the guys you listed was 26 I believe. As was stated, only 3 picked in the top 15 over the last 37 years went positive. Kinda points largely to teams needing their help were pretty poor teams.

"even the best" was his quote, doesn't exclude players that were not highly touted.

and yes, most guys coming out of their draft years are generally put on bad teams, but that doesn't automatically sentence them to a -20 rating like the other poster was implying. that's silly.

You're off in your player rankings.

maybe, but the one that i'm not off on is Gudbranson being last of the bunch. and i get the feeling that's the one you're singling out.

and if it is, go post it in the polls section and see who ends up in last place. i dare you.

 

[Laus723]

"even the best" was his quote, doesn't exclude players that were not highly touted.

and yes, most guys coming out of their draft years are generally put on bad teams, but that doesn't automatically sentence them to a -20 rating like the other poster was implying. that's silly.

maybe, but the one that i'm not off on is Gudbranson being last of the bunch. and i get the feeling that's the one you're singling out.

and if it is, go post it in the polls section and see who ends up in last place. i dare you.

We can argue semantics if you'd like, and while it doesn't sentence them, I know why he was talking about. You put up a 26 year old.

No, not all...so relax.

 

[Dread Clawz]

Question for the prospect buffs: How does Ekblad compare/rank compared to other recent hyped defense prospects? Namely Jones, Nurse, Ryan Murray, Griffin Reinhart, Larsson, Guds, and Fowler.

In terms of potential? I'd rank them:

Jones
Ekblad
Reinhart
Trouba
Lindholm
Murray
Fowler
Nurse
Larsson
Guds

Like flapanthersfan said, Ekblad plays a harder game than Jones, and I like that. But you can't ignore what Jones can do on the offensive side of the puck.

 

[Rattrick]

"even the best" was his quote, doesn't exclude players that were not highly touted.

and yes, most guys coming out of their draft years are generally put on bad teams, but that doesn't automatically sentence them to a -20 rating like the other poster was implying. that's silly.

You've yet to give me a player who came in at 18 as a top pick and had a positive ranking. The other poster (thanks btw) gave Bogosian back in 2008 as the most recent example. You can't give me one cause they don't exist. For every one Bogosian, there are 3 Jones, Bouwmeester, Larsson players.

And no, I wasn't saying he'd be a minus 20, just saying history proves he's more likely to be a -15-20 than a +10.

We had the worst defense in the league last year and you think an 18 years old is gonna come in and not fall on his face to start? I want what you're having.

 

[Crossbar]

You've yet to give me a player who came in at 18 as a top pick and had a positive ranking. The other poster (thanks btw) gave Bogosian back in 2008 as the most recent example. You can't give me one cause they don't exist. For every one Bogosian, there are 3 Jones, Bouwmeester, Larsson players.

And no, I wasn't saying he'd be a minus 20, just saying history proves he's more likely to be a -15-20 than a +10.

We had the worst defense in the league last year and you think an 18 years old is gonna come in and not fall on his face to start? I want what you're having.

Not to mention our terrific track record of developing young d-men. Maybe Gallant, his staff and Willie Mitchell change that trend, maybe they don't. I'll always side with guys like Mike Santos who say kids shouldn't be rushed to the NHL right away. Someone brought up Lindholm, he played on AHL ice before he ever stepped on NHL ice. Then there is the fact he plays for the Ducks, not the same as playing for the powerhouse Panthers.

 

[iam76]

is Ekblad another player the league's fans will downplay the maximum potential like they did with Barkov last year? Basically acting as if hes already at his peak due to his mature body. I feel sometimes we get players and they drop in rating or ability due to this franchises past. Its like in college basketball when a stud player commits to a school like uconn then drops ten ranking spots behind some guy who committed to duke,unc, or kentucky who was rated worse all year... Since Tallon has come on board we have drafted some studs. Now its up to the team to develop them on the job or in the minors.

 

[iam76]

Not to mention our terrific track record of developing young d-men. Maybe Gallant, his staff and Willie Mitchell change that trend, maybe they don't. I'll always side with guys like Mike Santos who say kids shouldn't be rushed to the NHL right away. Someone brought up Lindholm, he played on AHL ice before he ever stepped on NHL ice. Then there is the fact he plays for the Ducks, not the same as playing for the powerhouse Panthers.

i hope weegar gets this approach.

To me i see his game as our version of duncan keith....

keith needed some ahl time to hone his game...

weegar can go down and get a bit more gritty and help the rampage.

 

[flapanthersfan]

You've yet to give me a player who came in at 18 as a top pick and had a positive ranking. The other poster (thanks btw) gave Bogosian back in 2008 as the most recent example. You can't give me one cause they don't exist. For every one Bogosian, there are 3 Jones, Bouwmeester, Larsson players.

"a player coming in at 18 as a top pick" is not what you said in your original post. as has been mentioned before, the teams those players are put on are usually terrible.

ours shouldn't be nearly as bad.


And no, I wasn't saying he'd be a minus 20, just saying history proves he's more likely to be a -15-20 than a +10.

We had the worst defense in the league last year and you think an 18 years old is gonna come in and not fall on his face to start? I want what you're having.


If you think last years roster is even remotely comparable to this one, i'd like to know what YOU'RE having.

If you put Ekblad in front of Tim Thomas and Jacob Markstrom, I'd agree with you. But that's not what we're doing.

Like I said before, I'm not saying he's going to come in here and be a +20. But to automatically sentence him to a -20 because of 4-5 past instances you have off the top of your head is stupid.

 

[Sparkman112]

You've yet to give me a player who came in at 18 as a top pick and had a positive ranking. The other poster (thanks btw) gave Bogosian back in 2008 as the most recent example. You can't give me one cause they don't exist. For every one Bogosian, there are 3 Jones, Bouwmeester, Larsson players.

And no, I wasn't saying he'd be a minus 20, just saying history proves he's more likely to be a -15-20 than a +10.

We had the worst defense in the league last year and you think an 18 years old is gonna come in and not fall on his face to start? I want what you're having.

You're welcome.

How about we argue after we see his numbers and just celebrate our new stud on the blue line

 

[IM Clutcm]

You're welcome.

How about we argue after we see his numbers and just celebrate our new stud on the blue line

 

[BeezKnees]

There's a mini feature article about Ekblad on Nhl.com right now, including a press conference vid after Development camp..it's worth a look.

He seems so poised/mature but most of all, humble. Knows where he wants to be, and willing to do the work to get there. I'm loving this kid, he'll be a stud.

 

[BureCT22]

I was so shocked and upset when the Panthers drafted Gudbranson. 1: because I didn't hear anything positive about the guy before the draft and 2: because I fell in love with Fowler and thought he was the best Dman in that draft.

Gudbranson: 169 GP 5 G 16 A 21 PTS 239 PIM
Cam Fowler: 265 GP 22 G 94 A 116 PTS 56 PIM

 

[iam76]

otherwise this happens over and over

 

[Rattrick]

I was so shocked and upset when the Panthers drafted Gudbranson. 1: because I didn't hear anything positive about the guy before the draft and 2: because I fell in love with Fowler and thought he was the best Dman in that draft.

Gudbranson: 169 GP 5 G 16 A 21 PTS 239 PIM
Cam Fowler: 265 GP 22 G 94 A 116 PTS 56 PIM

I agree Gudbranson was a very "meh" pick, but to be fair Fowler is a career -42 playing on a pretty stacked Ducks team.

 

[FlaPanthers11]

I was so shocked and upset when the Panthers drafted Gudbranson. 1: because I didn't hear anything positive about the guy before the draft and 2: because I fell in love with Fowler and thought he was the best Dman in that draft.

Gudbranson: 169 GP 5 G 16 A 21 PTS 239 PIM
Cam Fowler: 265 GP 22 G 94 A 116 PTS 56 PIM

Comparing mostly offensive numbers for an offensive D man and defensive D man isn't really a sound argument.

 

[Laus723]

I was so shocked and upset when the Panthers drafted Gudbranson. 1: because I didn't hear anything positive about the guy before the draft and 2: because I fell in love with Fowler and thought he was the best Dman in that draft.

Gudbranson: 169 GP 5 G 16 A 21 PTS 239 PIM
Cam Fowler: 265 GP 22 G 94 A 116 PTS 56 PIM

If you didn't hear anything positive, you weren't paying any attention. They're also different types of defensemen.

 

[flapanthersfan]

I agree Gudbranson was a very "meh" pick, but to be fair Fowler is a career -42 playing on a pretty stacked Ducks team.

He was a +15 this year.

Yes, he was bad defensively his rookie year, and not great his sophmore year. But made huge strides this year, something Guds has yet to do.

There's a reason he was on the US Olympic team over even a proven star defender like Keith Yandle.

Tallon ****ed that one up royally.

 

[gudzilla]

proven star defender?

proven star offenseman u mean?

 

[flapanthersfan]

proven star defender?

proven star offenseman u mean?

Last I checked, Yandle was a defensman.

Not great defensively, but incredible offensively. Better than Fowler.

But Fowler made it because of his two-way play. Which was my point originally, since a poster was trying to claim he sucks defensively.

Fowler sucked his first two years, not last year. He played a very good two-way game.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

Fowler is a significantly better player at this point in time. Gudbranson has A LOT of developing to do before that is a reasonable conversation.

 

[LUUUUUIS]

HIDE YO CATS!

 

[ucanthanzalthetruth]

I wanted them to pick Skinner so badly that draft.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

Fowler is a significantly better player at this point in time. Gudbranson has A LOT of developing to do before that is a reasonable conversation.

Fowler has been in a significantly better organization and played on a significantly better team as well. Gudbranson had to come in here and be "the guy". Not just "the guy", but like all of our prospects have been viewed over the years, he is seen as someone who has to be the savior of this franchise.
I believe if you reverse the teams they were selected by, and on top of that the spot where they were selected, we would have seen much different results.