Alan Adams: Young stars list

[Gert B Frobe]

I don't see how Ryan Malone is not on this list.

Because he's 25 and really not all that great.

 

[Epsilon]

Cmon,that's not the same thing at all and you know it.Kharlamov is basically a hockey legend and we all know he could do it against the best competition in the world,he did it against team Canada lot's of times.ovechkin is a 19 year old kid with nary a minute of playing time in the best league in the world and you take issue with him being ranked lower then a guy who has played two years in the n.h.l and was the co-winner of the Richard trophy playing for none other then those powerhouse Columbus blue jackets?

What were you saying then?It says right in the post...."how can he have Nash ahead of Kovalchuk and Ovechkin" Am i reading that wrong? do you mean something else? Yes,the list sucks.But that part was'nt wrong.

Actually,what do you mean when you said,"i did'nt say that" and you are bringing this up to me anyway.The post i was replying to was from some guy named afons?

One could take this argument further and ask how Crosby could be ranked ahead of Kovalchuk and Nash also. I don't think the difference between Crosby and Ovechkin is big enough that one should be ranked ahead of those two while the other one isn't.

For what it's worth, Kovalchuk and Nash should probably be #1 and #2.

 

[VanIslander]

Ovechkin = Crosby

anybody who says elsewise at this point, is a homer

we will know whose game translates better to the NHL, and who develops more, when they actually play an NHL season or two.

Until then, they are both obviously superstars in the making.

Endstop.

 

[espo*]

One could take this argument further and ask how Crosby could be ranked ahead of Kovalchuk and Nash also. I don't think the difference between Crosby and Ovechkin is big enough that one should be ranked ahead of those two while the other one isn't.

For what it's worth, Kovalchuk and Nash should probably be #1 and #2.

i agree,Crosby has yet to play an nhl game.Kovalchuk is an established star and Nash is a Rocket Richard winner.They've at least shown they can produce in the nhl.I'm sure Crosby will too but he has'nt yet.For me,to put a kid who has'nt played a game of nhl hockey yet and be listed ahead of those two guys he would have had to AT LEAST put up 200 plus points in junior and gone over to the worlds this year and kicked some serious ***.I don't see how anyone can put him above those guys yet.

 

[espo*]

Ovechkin = Crosby

anybody who says elsewise at this point, is a homer

we will know whose game translates better to the NHL, and who develops more, when they actually play an NHL season or two.

Until then, they are both obviously superstars in the making.

Endstop.

I think Ovechkins game and physical package is more mature and nhl ready myself also.The funny thing is that many hockey observers and mags seem to think it's just the opposite and i'm not sure why. I love Crosbys game,but he's 18 and i don't feel quite as nhl ready yet as AO.But i seem to be in the minority.I guess we'll find out soon enough this year.I hope i am wrong of course.

 

[SubNova]

I have not seen anything from Nash that would tell me he will be a great player. I watch him play and you don’t really notice him. On the other hand player like Kovy you know he is a start.

Plus I am one of those people that think Hash had a good year, but most of his goals were tap-ins.

 

[no name]

I thought I would get all sorts of negative posts about my opinion on Nash's selfishness and defense. I guess a lot of people agree.

 

[Evilo]

Ovechkin = Crosby

anybody who says elsewise at this point, is a homer

we will know whose game translates better to the NHL, and who develops more, when they actually play an NHL season or two.

Until then, they are both obviously superstars in the making.

Endstop.

100% agreed.

 

[Epsilon]

I thought I would get all sorts of negative posts about my opinion on Nash's selfishness and defense. I guess a lot of people agree.

I think this gets overstated way too much. One thing that I do find irritating though is that a lot of people who defend Nash on this stuff are the same types I saw bashing Kovalchuk 2 years ago for the exact same things (more goals than assists, bad defense, etc.).

 

[helicecopter]

Cmon,that's not the same thing at all and you know it. Kharlamov is basically a hockey legend and we all know he could do it against the best competition in the world,he did it against team Canada lot's of times.ovechkin is a 19 year old kid with nary a minute of playing time in the best league in the world

On the other hand Ovechkin is a guy who was the leading scorer for Russia at the senior Worldchampionships. So what?

..and you take issue with him being ranked lower then a guy who has played two years in the n.h.l and was the co-winner of the Richard trophy playing for none other then those powerhouse Columbus blue jackets? What were you saying then?It says right in the post...."how can he have Nash ahead of Kovalchuk and Ovechkin" Am i reading that wrong? do you mean something else? Yes,the list sucks.But that part was'nt wrong.

Actually i agree that’s not the wrong part. I take issue with your reasoning only.
I am just saying the reason you gave is not a mathematical prove of that. It’s just something that makes an Ovechkin or Crosby pick riskier than a Kovalchuk or Nash one. Not necessarily a worse one, at least not for that reason alone.
I find funny how on this board a prospect that has proved things in the NHL is necessarily going to be a better player than another one who didn’t even have the opportunity to perform at the NHL level yet. As Epsilon suggested, then Crosby should be way lower lower than Ruutu and Bergeron for example. And that would be wrong imo.

 

[helicecopter]

Ovechkin = Crosby

anybody who says elsewise at this point, is a homer

100% agree.

Sorry, this is just crap.
When scouting staffs have to choose between two top prospects I don’t think they flip a coin to decide just because they both have yet to play their first NHL game… and scouting staffs are not supposed to be homers either.
With that logic everyone is equal until is proved who is better..
The fact at the moment in your opinions Ovechkin=Crosby doesn’t mean everyone who thinks otherwise has to be a homer. (there are homers, there are non-homers that will be proven wrong in their judgement and non-homers that will be right, some just because lucky, some others because they can see beyond you).

 

[helicecopter]

I have not seen anything from Nash that would tell me he will be a great player. I watch him play and you don’t really notice him.

Are you blind?

 

[espo*]

On the other hand Ovechkin is a guy who was the leading scorer for Russia at the senior Worldchampionships. So what?

Actually i agree that’s not the wrong part. I take issue with your reasoning only.
I am just saying the reason you gave is not a mathematical prove of that. It’s just something that makes an Ovechkin or Crosby pick riskier than a Kovalchuk or Nash one. Not necessarily a worse one, at least not for that reason alone.
I find funny how on this board a prospect that has proved things in the NHL is necessarily going to be a better player than another one who didn’t even have the opportunity to perform at the NHL level yet. As Epsilon suggested, then Crosby should be way lower lower than Ruutu and Bergeron for example. And that would be wrong imo.

he was the leading scorer on a team that was'nt Russia's best team possible they could send(very different,on a team with Fedorov,etc....he may not even have got great ice time) come to think of it,he was their top scorer in a tournament that was not the best caliber.Did he lead the Russians in scoring at the world cup in September?If you want to bring up the world's then Do you remember Nash's performance at the world's? He was a better player there then AO too so it just more backs up his higher posting.

As for your second part of the post,i'll just say again that i don't see how a guy that has'nt played an nhl shift yet should be ranked higher then a guy like Nash who scored 41 goals in the nhl yet,why would i rank AO higher? I've also already said Crosby should'nt be ranked above Nash either,he has'nt proven anything in the nhl yet.

 

[helicecopter]

he was the leading scorer on a team that was'nt Russia's best team possible they could send(very different,on a team with Fedorov,etc....he may not even have got great ice time) come to think of it,he was their top scorer in a tournament that was not the best caliber.Did he lead the Russians in scoring at the world cup in September?If you want to bring up the world's then Do you remember Nash's performance at the world's? He was a better player there then AO too so it just more backs up his higher posting.

I know, but that's not the point i am arguing.. it was just an example to say that's not true that a prospect who has yet to play in the NHL can't have proved anything, or theorically (not this case)even more than another one already there.

As for your second part of the post,i'll just say again that i don't see how a guy that has'nt played an nhl shift yet should be ranked higher then a guy like Nash who scored 41 goals in the nhl yet,why would i rank AO higher? I've also already said Crosby should'nt be ranked above Nash either,he has'nt proven anything in the nhl yet.

What i am arguing is the "hasn't played an NHL shift yet" argument, even if to a lesser extent when it's used in a comparison with a 41 goals scorer.

 

[Evilo]

Sorry, this is just crap.
When scouting staffs have to choose between two top prospects I don’t think they flip a coin to decide just because they both have yet to play their first NHL game… and scouting staffs are not supposed to be homers either.
With that logic everyone is equal until is proved who is better..
The fact at the moment in your opinions Ovechkin=Crosby doesn’t mean everyone who thinks otherwise has to be a homer. (there are homers, there are non-homers that will be proven wrong in their judgement and non-homers that will be right, some just because lucky, some others because they can see beyond you).

No that is not crap.
We've been hearing how great Ovechkin since he's 14. That was until Crosby made enough noise and headlines that the common North american opinion now thinks Crosby is the next Gretzky or Mario and as usual tries to nitpick about Ovechkin.
The fact is both are absolutely great prospects, and it's IMO absolutely both impossible AND ridiculous to try to nitpick on each player in order to declare one or the other a better prospect.
Both are great prospects, both may be different in their behavour, but to declare one selfish or anything is absolutely ridiculous.
Both are top notch prospects on the ice and off the ice. They both have shown a lot of maturity.

 

[espo*]

I know, but that's not the point i am arguing.. it was just an example to say that's not true that a prospect who has yet to play in the NHL can't have proved anything, or theorically (not this case)even more than another one already there.

What i am arguing is the "hasn't played an NHL shift yet" argument, even if to a lesser extent when it's used in a comparison with a 41 goals scorer.

i agree it can't be disregarded,i guess that's why a kid like Crosby is ahead of some of those guys who have proven it in the nhl.I just don't think it's wise to put a guy that has'nt played even a game yet ahead of a player who scored 41 goals in the nhl last year at the age of what? 19? 20? For me,Ovechkin would have had to thoroughly dominate the World championships or at the very least..............outplay the guy people are saying he should be ranked higher then(Nash) and he did'nt.............Nash was probably the 2nd or 3rd best player in that tournament and clearly outclassed AO .He's ranked higher for a good reason,he's earned the higher ranking.Next years list may be different but even though i do take AO's rsl season and world performance into account............Nash comes out on top at this point,and deservedly so.

 

[dru]

I thought I would get all sorts of negative posts about my opinion on Nash's selfishness and defense. I guess a lot of people agree.

I disagree. How is Nash selfish again? Because he scores a lot of goals right in front of the crease? Because he scored more PP goals than anyone in the league? What team in the NHL wouldn't kill for a power forward like that?

I have not seen anything from Nash that would tell me he will be a great player.

You're talking nonsense. Just stop.

 

[slimer]

I take it Jackman and Backman don't qualify as young?

 

[Dr. Charles]

Ovechkin = Crosby

anybody who says elsewise at this point, is a homer

we will know whose game translates better to the NHL, and who develops more, when they actually play an NHL season or two.

Until then, they are both obviously superstars in the making.

Endstop.

Ovechkin was so impressive in that final last winter...

 

[Spooky371*]

This list is published in the only Swedish NHL-magazine Pro Hockey:

1 Crosby
2 Nash
3 Ovechkin
4 Kovalchuk
5 Gaborik
6 Spezza
7 Frolov
8 Bergeron
9 Malkin
10 Ruutu
11 Parise
12 Carter
13 Getzlaf
14 Vanek
15 Kessel
16 Perry
17 Richards
18 Olesz
19 Koivu
20 O´Sullivan
21 Kostistyn
22 Shremp
23 Grigorenko
24 Radulov
25 Staal


Don´t know how well known or respected he is but I think this list is pretty pro Canadian/ pro North American: How can he have Nash before Ovechkin and Kovalchuk? Since Crosby is first it must be pretty much potential based. And where is Zherdev and Semin? They should be top 10, and Bergeron ahead of Malkin

Comments?

Wow, Kostitsyn over Staal and Semin ? I hope he talk about MARC STAAL cuz Kost are good, but Staal way better...

 

[Belgican]

Where is Liles ?

 

[no name]

I disagree. How is Nash selfish again? Because he scores a lot of goals right in front of the crease? Because he scored more PP goals than anyone in the league? What team in the NHL wouldn't kill for a power forward like that?




You're talking nonsense. Just stop.

Just because he is big doesnt mean he is a power forward. He is more of a sniper. You have to admit that when the puck goes to him he is going to shoot no matter how many guys are on him.

 

[dru]

Just because he is big doesnt mean he is a power forward. He is more of a sniper. You have to admit that when the puck goes to him he is going to shoot no matter how many guys are on him.

Actually, I've watched just about every NHL game Nash has ever played and he is a power forward. He scores at least 70% of his goals from right outside the crease by banging bodies and controlling rebounds right in front of the net, thus the low assists. I don't think he's more apt to shoot from anywhere on the ice, although he does have an accurate shot.

 

[no name]

Actually, I've watched just about every NHL game Nash has ever played and he is a power forward. He scores at least 70% of his goals from right outside the crease by banging bodies and controlling rebounds right in front of the net, thus the low assists. I don't think he's more apt to shoot from anywhere on the ice, although he does have an accurate shot.

I have only read a few scouting reports and watched him about 10 times for my opinion but I will accept yours considering you watch every game. If you dont mind I will take it with a grain of salt. I myself have a way of finding no fault in my favorite players

 

[helicecopter]

The fact is both are absolutely great prospects.

Both are great prospects, both may be different in their behavour, but to declare one selfish or anything is absolutely ridiculous.
Both are top notch prospects on the ice and off the ice. They both have shown a lot of maturity.

I totally agree on this.

But what is crap is to say Crosby and Ovechkin HAVE to be considered equal just because both excelled in juniors and both have yet to play an NHL game.