C Alex Galchenyuk - Sarnia Sting, OHL (2012 draft)

[Rabid Ranger]

Matteau has spent the majority of his life in the US. How silly is it that which team Galchenyuk was drafted to in the OHL draft determines which national team he is eligible for? It's a silly rule that is only being enforced suddenly now.

Exactly. If Galchenyuk played for Erie or Saginaw it would be okay? Stupid beyond belief. Even more so in Matteau's case. I have to think USA Hockey pleads a more substantial case this spring and summer.

 

[Xokkeu]

Exactly. If Galchenyuk played for Erie or Saginaw it would be okay? Stupid beyond belief. Even more so in Matteau's case. I have to think USA Hockey pleads a more substantial case this spring and summer.

FWIW Matteau had an appeal denied.

 

[William H Bonney]

Exactly. If Galchenyuk played for Erie or Saginaw it would be okay? Stupid beyond belief. Even more so in Matteau's case. I have to think USA Hockey pleads a more substantial case this spring and summer.

I'm not sure but the fact that Galchenyuk is still on the IIHF's preliminary roster for Team USA but Matteau is not only clouds the issue. USAH was aware of the Matteau issue early enough to file an appeal which makes me think the issue with Matteau came up when the preliminary roster was submitted with him on it. You'd think anything with Galchenyuk would have come up too and thus if there were an issue he wouldn't still be on it either. But, that's also giving the IIHF way too much credit for due diligence.

I still wouldn't be surprised to find that the the IIHF is just exercising some technicality against Matteau because he apparently had a non-US city listed as his hometown on some registration or something.

 

[EagleBelfour]

The Habs are more likely to pick Murray then Galchenyuk

I'm curious as to how so.

 

[Future]

I'm curious as to how so.

Maybe because they dont want to risk a top 3 pick on a guy who missed his whole draft year? Idk sounds simple. I'm sure he'll be fine but there are many other players around gallys talent available at the 3 spot that actually played their draft seasons and would be good picks. I doubt he gets picked earlier than 5 even if he has a good combine. We'll see though.

 

[Pick Six]

I don't have a problem with Gally at #1, as I think it may have been a realistic possibility had he played the entire season. But it's hard to justify since he did not play almost the entire season. It's not like he lit it up once he came back for the last few games of the season and the playoffs.

That said, I would not be surprised if he goes as high as #2. He was that good before the injury.

Pretty well summed up my thoughts exactly. I could have seen him be #1 if he was healthy all season, but he's got too many questions now to be ranked that high, IMO.

Matteau has spent the majority of his life in the US. How silly is it that which team Galchenyuk was drafted to in the OHL draft determines which national team he is eligible for? It's a silly rule that is only being enforced suddenly now.

I don't know much about the Matteau situation. Isn't he deemed ineligible to play for the US at the U18s because he hasn't played two straight years in the US, yet? Why hasn't he played two straight years in the US if he's spent the majority of his life there?

If that's the case I think it's a good rule, and think Hockey Canada should adopt it (if they haven't already). Players shouldn't be allowed to play for a country if they haven't spent a small amount (2 years) of time in, even if they were born there. That country did nothing (or very little) to develop that player, I don't see how that country should reap the rewards of getting that player to play for them.

It sucks for players like Matteau and Galchenyuk, but I can definitely see why that rule (if it is the rule) was created.

 

[Crede777]

Maybe because they dont want to risk a top 3 pick on a guy who missed his whole draft year? Idk sounds simple. I'm sure he'll be fine but there are many other players around gallys talent available at the 3 spot that actually played their draft seasons and would be good picks. I doubt he gets picked earlier than 5 even if he has a good combine. We'll see though.

I think they would have Grigorenko at the top (or very near the top) of their list, wouldn't they?

Anyways, what are the odds that Galchenyuk returns to the OHL next season due to his having missed most of this season? In practice, he'd be entering the NHL next season with little more playing experience than he had a year ago.

 

[William H Bonney]

I don't know much about the Matteau situation. Isn't he deemed ineligible to play for the US at the U18s because he hasn't played two straight years in the US, yet? Why hasn't he played two straight years in the US if he's spent the majority of his life there?

If that's the case I think it's a good rule, and think Hockey Canada should adopt it (if they haven't already). Players shouldn't be allowed to play for a country if they haven't spent a small amount (2 years) of time in, even if they were born there. That country did nothing (or very little) to develop that player, I don't see how that country should reap the rewards of getting that player to play for them.

It sucks for players like Matteau and Galchenyuk, but I can definitely see why that rule (if it is the rule) was created.

No one knows why. The rumblings were because Matteau hadn't played 2 consecutive years, not seasons, in the US after the age of 10. But the IIHF statutes say nothing of the "after the age of 10" part. Matteau has spent 11 of his 18 years living and playing in the USA. He's played over 100 games in a USA jersey. Also, if Matteau is ineligible for that reason, a guy like Colin Wilson should have been ineligible as well but he wasn't.

The rumblings I've seen now are that the IIHF is exercising a technicality against Matteau for listing his hometown as being in Canada on registration paperwork. No idea if that's true but there's nothing in the IIHF rulebook to substantiate Matteau's supposed ineligibility.

 

[Xokkeu]

Pretty well summed up my thoughts exactly. I could have seen him be #1 if he was healthy all season, but he's got too many questions now to be ranked that high, IMO.



I don't know much about the Matteau situation. Isn't he deemed ineligible to play for the US at the U18s because he hasn't played two straight years in the US, yet? Why hasn't he played two straight years in the US if he's spent the majority of his life there?

If that's the case I think it's a good rule, and think Hockey Canada should adopt it (if they haven't already). Players shouldn't be allowed to play for a country if they haven't spent a small amount (2 years) of time in, even if they were born there. That country did nothing (or very little) to develop that player, I don't see how that country should reap the rewards of getting that player to play for them.

It sucks for players like Matteau and Galchenyuk, but I can definitely see why that rule (if it is the rule) was created.

They made up some rule where you have to play 2 years after ten years old. So since he spent years 0 to 11 in the US, then came back apparently at 16 to the US and played for one year and a half in the US, but that wasn't enough because he didn't change his driver's license. So he is ineligible for the US despite living for 13 of his 18 years in the US. Those five years in Canada are apparently more important to the IIHF than anything else.

 

[Lacaar]

Before Galchenyuk's injury, it was extremely close. During the week before the injury, I had a long discussion with Mark about this and we laid out what we were hoping to see in terms of improvements out of these guys, and talked about how very close they all were going into the season. So it's not like he came out of nowhere then we all of a sudden saw him a handful of times and said "Well, lets throw him #1" With the decline in play by Nail and Mikhail, as well as the 3 injuries Nail suffered this year it opened the door for Alex, IF he came back strong to potentially take that spot away. Which as you can see he did.

We explain the decision in the article. Both Grigorenko and Yakupov declined as we neared the end of the season. Galchenyuk came out and showed a great deal of talent, showed improvement, including the improvement in his upper body strength was very noticeable. We have seen more than enough of Galchenyuk to be confident in this decision.

Just as players can move up with good play, they can drop down with bad play, thats the way the rankings work. Players above Alex dropped off enough that he was able to jump over them. The gap was very small to begin with honestly. As mentioned I live in Sarnia, so I was in attendance at all home games minus about 5 in Alex/Nail's rookie season, plus saw them in a decent number of road games that year as well. I probably missed about 10 home games this year for Sarnia because I was traveling a little more for the draft, but again I saw them in quite a few road games as well. We have more than enough viewings on all of these guys to make an educated decision on who will be the most successful player in the NHL. I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with us, and I understand that.

It's possible we're going to be wrong. I don't believe so, or I wouldn't have supported this decision. But we'd rather be wrong and trusting what we've seen, than listening to the social perception of who should be #1, then be pissed off at ourselves if it ended up we were right in the first place, but didn't put the guy we really wanted at #1.

The worst thing you can do as a scout is not go with your gut instinct, becasue if it turns out you woulda been right, it really gets you. It's happened to me a few times when I first started, and it was an important lesson learned.

Sweet. I expect to see Galchenyuk playing for his NHL team next year.

How big of an impact do you expect him to make for his NHL team?
25goals, 25 assists?

Oh.. If he's the #1 prospect. He damn well better make his NHL team.

 

[Mike Mike Caron]

Matteau wanted to play for USA, USA wanted Matteau to play for them, he just wasn't eligible. He's gonna play in the Q next season so he won't be eligible for U-20 either.

 

[Marc the Habs Fan]

I think they would have Grigorenko at the top (or very near the top) of their list, wouldn't they?

Not sure why mostly everyone aside from Habs fans believe this. Just because Grigorenko plays in Quebec doesn't mean he's automatically at the top of the Habs list. And Roy being the HC here isn't exactly a lock either.

It's similar to the 2007 draft when there was ''no way'' the Habs would pass on another Quebec Rempart, who just happened to be from Montreal, in Angelo Esposito.

 

[MrWilson*]

Sweet. I expect to see Galchenyuk playing for his NHL team next year.

How big of an impact do you expect him to make for his NHL team?
25goals, 25 assists?

Oh.. If he's the #1 prospect. He damn well better make his NHL team.

Galchenyuk is over-rated, IMHO. He wasn't an elite skater to begin with and, IMO, injured his knee because of it. Defensively, his skills are average and he isn't the most physical player. Doesn't have 3 step acceleration to speak of either. Great shot and vision for sure, but he did play an entire season with the #1 ranked player--and saw a ton of PP minutes.

So he misses his entire draft season. Tough break but it doesn't make him a hero. There is no real data on this guy after the end of last season. What's he like without Yakupov? What happens if say, a guy like Halmo, hits him with his head down? Lot of concussed top 20 players this year. It remains to be seen how that will affect them down the road. What's he look like next to the rest of his peers if he plays an entire season? Again, NO DATA. People think this kid could go #1? I seriously doubt that.

Missed entire draft year season + knee injury + NO DATA outside of that skating with Yakupov translates into a #1 pick??? Uh.....no

 

[Future]

Galchenyuk is over-rated, IMHO. He wasn't an elite skater to begin with and, IMO, injured his knee because of it. Defensively, his skills are average and he isn't the most physical player. Doesn't have 3 step acceleration to speak of either. Great shot and vision for sure, but he did play an entire season with the #1 ranked player--and saw a ton of PP minutes.

So he misses his entire draft season. Tough break but it doesn't make him a hero. There is no real data on this guy after the end of last season. What's he like without Yakupov? What happens if say, a guy like Halmo, hits him with his head down? Lot of concussed top 20 players this year. It remains to be seen how that will affect them down the road. What's he look like next to the rest of his peers if he plays an entire season? Again, NO DATA. People think this kid could go #1? I seriously doubt that.

Missed entire draft year season + knee injury + NO DATA outside of that skating with Yakupov translates into a #1 pick??? Uh.....no

Lol I found this one funny.

 

[Crede777]

Not sure why mostly everyone aside from Habs fans believe this. Just because Grigorenko plays in Quebec doesn't mean he's automatically at the top of the Habs list. And Roy being the HC here isn't exactly a lock either.

It's similar to the 2007 draft when there was ''no way'' the Habs would pass on another Quebec Rempart, who just happened to be from Montreal, in Angelo Esposito.

It isn't a fair comparison because Esposito was supposed to be good, but not as good as Grigorenko is supposed to be.

A more apt comparison would be Brule, but Brule played in the WHL and didn't play for Roy.

The point is, the Canadiens almost certainly have a channel of information that other teams scouts don't have. It's hard to believe that Roy doesn't tell Timmins more than he tells everyone else.

 

[Pick Six]

No one knows why. The rumblings were because Matteau hadn't played 2 consecutive years, not seasons, in the US after the age of 10. But the IIHF statutes say nothing of the "after the age of 10" part. Matteau has spent 11 of his 18 years living and playing in the USA. He's played over 100 games in a USA jersey. Also, if Matteau is ineligible for that reason, a guy like Colin Wilson should have been ineligible as well but he wasn't.

The rumblings I've seen now are that the IIHF is exercising a technicality against Matteau for listing his hometown as being in Canada on registration paperwork. No idea if that's true but there's nothing in the IIHF rulebook to substantiate Matteau's supposed ineligibility.

That's all very interesting. I look forward to hearing the real reason. It really is unfortunate for Matteau, as even if he went to Shattuck instead of Notre Dame, he'd be eligible.

They made up some rule where you have to play 2 years after ten years old. So since he spent years 0 to 11 in the US, then came back apparently at 16 to the US and played for one year and a half in the US, but that wasn't enough because he didn't change his driver's license. So he is ineligible for the US despite living for 13 of his 18 years in the US. Those five years in Canada are apparently more important to the IIHF than anything else.

As I said before, that's really unfortunate for Matteau. That being said, I can completely understand the IIHF's ruling on this (if it's official). Having to play two years in the US after the age of 10 isn't much of a requirement, to be honest. As for those five years, ask anyone who watches Minor Midget, those years are integral as far as development goes.

If he only spent two years in the US (from 10 to 18), did the US really develop him as a player? Hockey is all about developing the game across the world, and it's important to reward countries for doing just that, IMO.

Not sure why mostly everyone aside from Habs fans believe this. Just because Grigorenko plays in Quebec doesn't mean he's automatically at the top of the Habs list. And Roy being the HC here isn't exactly a lock either.

It's similar to the 2007 draft when there was ''no way'' the Habs would pass on another Quebec Rempart, who just happened to be from Montreal, in Angelo Esposito.

I don't think anyone really thinks it's automatic (nothing in this draft is).

Wouldn't you say, though, that it's more likely for Grigorenko to be coveted by MTL, if Roy's the coach? Of course it's not a slam dunk, but I would think that everything else being equal, Roy would lean to Mikhail.

I think too many Habs fans around here (not directed at you, just an observation on this forum), have jumped to some conclusions about the Habs 'not liking' Grigorenko. I personally think if they were to get Roy as the Coach (even if not), Grigorenko could be a perfect fit as their future 1C. They just need to get a good compete level out of him.

 

[Xokkeu]

That's all very interesting. I look forward to hearing the real reason. It really is unfortunate for Matteau, as even if he went to Shattuck instead of Notre Dame, he'd be eligible.



As I said before, that's really unfortunate for Matteau. That being said, I can completely understand the IIHF's ruling on this (if it's official). Having to play two years in the US after the age of 10 isn't much of a requirement, to be honest. As for those five years, ask anyone who watches Minor Midget, those years are integral as far as development goes.

If he only spent two years in the US (from 10 to 18), did the US really develop him as a player? Hockey is all about developing the game across the world, and it's important to reward countries for doing just that, IMO.

One doesn't just start playing hockey at 10 years old. If Galchenyuk wasn't a Russian citizen, he could be denied the chance to play to ever play international hockey just because he was drafted by the wrong OHL team. That sort of technicality is purely asinine. If he played in the KHL his entire life and only was born here by chance, then I'd say fine, no big deal. But when you have a binational league it's silly that by sheer chance of draft it determines you national eligibility.

It's even worse that the IIHF is making up the rules as they go along and just enforcing them suddenly with no warning and no precedent.

 

[Zine]

One doesn't just start playing hockey at 10 years old. If Galchenyuk wasn't a Russian citizen, he could be denied the chance to play to ever play international hockey just because he was drafted by the wrong OHL team. That sort of technicality is purely asinine. If he played in the KHL his entire life and only was born here by chance, then I'd say fine, no big deal. But when you have a binational league it's silly that by sheer chance of draft it determines you national eligibility.

It's even worse that the IIHF is making up the rules as they go along and just enforcing them suddenly with no warning and no precedent.

But would it be different if Galchenyuk played for an American OHL team?

As far as I know, the CHL isn't considered a 'national competition' of the US; nor is the CHL sanctioned by USA Hockey.


Here's the IIHF statute:

When a player has multiple citizenships where the relevant citizenships are for countries of member national associations and he has never represented any country in any IIHF championship or an Olympic competition or in qualifications to these competitions, then in order to play for the country of his choice he must
a) prove that he has participated for at least two consecutive years in the national competitions of and resident in the country that he wishes to represent during which period he has neither transferred to another country nor played ice hockey within any other country and
b) if the country of his choice is one to which the player has transferred then he must have had an IIHF international transfer card approved and dated by the IIHF at least two years prior to his proposed participation.

 

[Xokkeu]

But would it be different if Galchenyuk played for an American OHL team?

As far as I know, the CHL isn't considered a 'national competition' of the US; nor is the CHL sanctioned by USA Hockey.


Here's the IIHF statute:

Who knows, the IIHF hasn't explained any of this. But if the CHL doesn't count as a national competition of the US then that would make the ruling less absurd in my view. That'd at least make a bit more sense.

 

[Zine]

One doesn't just start playing hockey at 10 years old. If Galchenyuk wasn't a Russian citizen, he could be denied the chance to play to ever play international hockey just because he was drafted by the wrong OHL team. That sort of technicality is purely asinine. .

In that case Galchenyuk would be able to represent USA. The ruling in question only applies to players with multiple citizenships.

In terms of promoting the sport..I like the ruling. If a player chooses to represent a country over another, it ensures that the chosen country must have a minimal hand in developing the player during his crucial developmental years.

 

[ChillyPalmer]

I'm curious as to how so.

Timmins doesn't scout for need, he scouts for the BPA. They didn't need Price when they drafted him, so if Timmins thinks Murray is the best, he'll pick him, and by most scouting ranks, Murray is ranked ahead of Gally. I honestly think the Habs will take Grigo, but if Murray is there at 3, they'll take him before Gally.

 

[Frattin23]

Based on what exactly?

Its hard for people to fathom how a player, who wasnt ranked first before his injury, can now be ranked first overall after basically missing the whole year. That is baffling. I suppose you had Galchenyuk ranked over Yakupov all along?

thisthisthisthisthis. Galchenyuk should be available at 5th. To say that he will go first, or even second, is a stretch.

 

[CN_paladin]

Timmins doesn't scout for need, he scouts for the BPA. They didn't need Price when they drafted him, so if Timmins thinks Murray is the best, he'll pick him, and by most scouting ranks, Murray is ranked ahead of Gally. I honestly think the Habs will take Grigo, but if Murray is there at 3, they'll take him before Gally.

Murray is ranked higher because he is a safer bet to be a future NHL calibre defenseman whereas Galchenyuk dropped due to an knee injury.

 

[Frattin23]

I hate it when people say Galchenyuk was neck and neck with Yakupov for #1 overall before he got injured. This is incorrect. While Galchenyuk was always an elite prospect, Yakupov has been the consensus #1 overall selection for more than 2 years now! It is more than logical to assume that Yak and Murray will go 1,2, no matter on what the team selecting them is. After that, it gets more tricky. Less and less people are flattered by Grigorenko. Might be possible for him to have a similar drop out of the top 5 a la Couturier last year.

Galchenyuk will go anywhere from 3-5 though, most likely depending on Mtl's assessment of him.

 

[RyanHPscout]

I'm just referring to the article where it stated that Yakupov was a product of Galchenyuk and his prodution went down without him. By a hack I mean the "journalism".

None of us said Yakupov's production went down without Galchenyuk.

The quote was: "Nail has dropped off in his intensity and production."

From The start of the season to the WJC Yakupov had 2.08 PT/GP

From Post WJC thru the playoffs Yakupov had 0.95 PT/GP

This is a major drop off in production.

The other quote later on was "Nail seemed to benefit from playing with Alex, more than Alex did from playing with Nail."

This may have been where you got confused. This is in reference to their play in the playoffs. This goes well beyond the goals and assists column. Nail really had this huge spark in him whenever he was on the ice with Alex, one that he seemed to be missing for a little while. The big change in his on ice manerisms really appeared to show how much playing with Alex was a positive. Regardless of whether or not they ran into a hot goaltender in Jake Paterson.

Sweet. I expect to see Galchenyuk playing for his NHL team next year.

How big of an impact do you expect him to make for his NHL team?
25goals, 25 assists?

Oh.. If he's the #1 prospect. He damn well better make his NHL team.

Depends on what team Alex goes to. I would suspect he'd put up more assists than goals, but is capable of both.

We don't project these guys based on who does the best as a rookie. We base it on who will be the best player at the NHL level if Alex takes an extra year or two to reach his full potential then so be it.

Missed entire draft year season + knee injury + NO DATA outside of that skating with Yakupov translates into a #1 pick??? Uh.....no

For what it's worth, Galchenyuk beat Yakupov in the finals at the NHL Research and Development camp skills competition for fastest skater. Not saying Galchenyuk is a better skater because turning, agility, and acceleration has more value than who's the fastest going in a straight line, but I do think it shows that Galchenyuk is better than most give him credit for overall skating wise.

This isn't a mock draft, this is a rating. He could very well go 6th for all we know. The rating is based on who we feel would be the best player. If I'm doing a mock draft, and Edmonton is picking #1, I would expect them to take whoever they have at the top. The safe guess would be to say Yakupov is at the top of their list, becasue he's at the top of most lists.

I hate it when people say Galchenyuk was neck and neck with Yakupov for #1 overall before he got injured. This is incorrect.

It's not incorrect, because everyone has different opinions.
We feel Galchenyuk is the best prospect.
It was neck and neck because I was at those discussions, and remember them well, so I know it was neck and neck lol. Atleast on our side of things.

Some have/had Grigorenko #1.
Do I agree with it?
Absolutely not.
Does that make them wrong?
Absolutely not.

Those that have/had him #1 have their own reasoning. The only thing that will prove them right/wrong is how Grigorenko performs after he is drafted and how he develops as a prospect. Same goes for all of these guys.

We had Stuart Percy as a Top 20 prospect for the 2011 NHL Entry Draft. I was excited to hear Stuart go top 25, because we knew he was vastly underrated. But that doesn't make us right, how he performs over the next few years will determine if we were right about Stuart, and despite his injury I believe we will be.

Yak and Murray will go 1,2, no matter on what the team selecting them is. After that, it gets more tricky. Less and less people are flattered by Grigorenko. Might be possible for him to have a similar drop out of the top 5 a la Couturier last year.

Galchenyuk will go anywhere from 3-5 though, most likely depending on Mtl's assessment of him.

Everything you say in that quote I think is very possible to happen. I personally think Columbus will go after someone other than Murray, but that's my own assumption. As I said earlier, this isn't a mock draft predicting Edmonton to take Galchenyuk #1, this is a projection that 4-5 years from now, that Galchenyuk will be the best player out of the 2012 NHL Entry Draft.

I have no issues clarifying our reasoning, I don't intend on repeating myself, but I will clarify anything that's not already clarified if it's presented in a mature fashion. What I won't do is get in an argument over who should/shouldn't be ranked where. This is our ranking, we put a lot of thought and work into it, and closer to the draft we'll throw together a mock draft, because rankings and mock drafts are two completely different things. Where other people/organizations/magazines/etc. have players ranked is their own choice and they do this based on their own opinions.