How is Blake Wheeler doing?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chimaera

same ol' Caps
Feb 4, 2004
30,888
1,713
La Plata, Maryland
PhoPhan said:
Wheeler has more talent than Rupp. If his playmaking abilities and/or finishing abilities don't translate to the NHL, he will still be nothing less than a Chris Gratton due to his size and skating ability.


I'm not sure if I agree.



Chris Gratton, while hyped up for a long time has put up some ok numbers in his career.

Gratton put up 60 points twice, and 38-44 points 6 times in his career.


That's not amazing, but that's a decent showing in 10 years of time.


I've never seen Wheeler, but if he reaches 30 points a year 2 times, he's way ahead of the curve.
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,463
Ottawa
Legionnaire said:
The USHL is the American version of the CHL. Wheeler was too young to attend college last year, but he will be going to UMinn next year.

Thanks!
 

PhoPhan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
14,724
100
Vlad The Impaler said:
How do you know all that? Have you seen him play? What's his upside and what does he excel at?
No, I have not seen him play first hand, but I have heard/read numerous first hand accounts, all of which seem promising. He doesn't really excel in any specific area, but by the same token, has no glaring weaknesses. Big players with respectable speed are not all that common. This is where the comparison to Gratton came from. Chris is a player who is not really exemplary in any category, but has no real holes in his game, either. He continues to play in the NHL and draw interest from teams (traded for Briere, and with Vaananen for Morris and Ballard more recently) almost solely because, as a good skater with even better size, he always has potential. I don't agree with it necessarily, but it's true.

As far as upside, Wheeler has the tools to be a 1st line player. He has size, and can get bigger (at least as far as weight). He has very good wheels (no pun intended) for a lanky kid. He has good hands, but as said before, has trouble skating and handling at the same time (something that can be taught, I'm sure). He is equally adept as a finisher and as a playmaker. He hasn't shied away from contact, but he hasn't been Scott Stevens. I honestly cannot think of an adequate comparison for his upside. The best I can come up with is a poor man's Mats Sundin, but I'm afraid that's not accurate and has its drawbacks.
 

dafranchz

Registered User
Kavliary2000 said:
from what Ive read
If his upside is so high..but is concidered a long term project
why not give him an 8C or 8D rating......he currently has a 6.5C..ouch especially for a guy picked 5th overall
In ranking Blake, there was and is a lot to be proved. Granted to tore up the H.S. league, he hadn't seen an increased level of play until this year with Green Bay.

Not only is he a high risk, high reward type of draftee but, he is a huge high risk in relation of how he might continue to develop and progress.

I don't feel a 8d or 8E would truly dipict where he is at currently. The 6.5c ranking isn't his final ranking. It is starting point and the number should and will fluctuate as he progresses.
 

Legionnaire

Help On The Way
Jul 10, 2002
44,254
3,965
LA-LA Land
Jeff Dahlia said:
The transition from HS to the USHL is a significant one.

Definitely. His choice to play there instead of staying in High School is also a postive sign. It shows that he has a commitment to improve, and is dedicated to hockey....He was an all-state TE as well and he could have chosen that route, but he didn't.
 

chaachie12

Registered User
Mar 13, 2002
723
0
Minneapolis, MN
Visit site
you can't compare his USHL stats to that of other high picks. Blake's #1 asset is his size, no one else on that list could say that. I think if in his sophmore year at Minnesota he is still under a 20 pt/year producer I think it will be time to have this conversation...I think he will need to score 20+ goals a year (after his freshman year) at UMN to warrant that pick...but only time will tell. :dunno:
 

dafranchz

Registered User
chaachie12 said:
you can't compare his USHL stats to that of other high picks. Blake's #1 asset is his size, no one else on that list could say that. I think if in his sophmore year at Minnesota he is still under a 20 pt/year producer I think it will be time to have this conversation...I think he will need to score 20+ goals a year (after his freshman year) at UMN to warrant that pick...but only time will tell. :dunno:
Exactly! That is why I am really reluctant to blow him out of porportion at this point.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
chaachie12 said:
you can't compare his USHL stats to that of other high picks. Blake's #1 asset is his size, no one else on that list could say that. I think if in his sophmore year at Minnesota he is still under a 20 pt/year producer I think it will be time to have this conversation...I think he will need to score 20+ goals a year (after his freshman year) at UMN to warrant that pick...but only time will tell. :dunno:

Which list are you talking about?

Some of the players mentioned in this thread ARE big kids. David Backes is a big guy who scores a lot (and everything I have heard about him points to a better prospect than Wheeler, and you get all that late in the second round). He's 6 foot 3 and I think 210 pounds.

Tomas Vanek is also a fairly big player with very thick build, not to mention a scoring machine.
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Vlad The Impaler said:
Which list are you talking about?

Some of the players mentioned in this thread ARE big kids. David Backes is a big guy who scores a lot (and everything I have heard about him points to a better prospect than Wheeler, and you get all that late in the second round). He's 6 foot 3 and I think 210 pounds.

Tomas Vanek is also a fairly big player with very thick build, not to mention a scoring machine.

Sometimes its instructive to look at the first year in a league rather than the precise calendar year of birth. Tukonen and Wheeler are similar ages but are at very different levels of development.

Wheeler's first year is pretty similar statistically to Vanek's and Backes' except that he's leading the team in scoring. He also has nobody to play with while Vanek and Backes both played on loaded teams. I dont know why you think Green Bay are a good team because that isnt the case atm. I think its also a relatively young roster.. they've had something like 10 players leave the team in an attempt to shake things up.

2004 was a very poor draft year, much like 2002. Instead of playing it "safe" like they did then with guys like Koreis and Eager, they have gone for a home run pick. He might not be a 6'8 beanpole as in your example but he's pretty big at 6'4 already and he'll probably grow another inch (that's three inches taller than both Vanek and Backes listed heights of 6'2). If you read the Wheeler thread in the Coyotes forum, there are a few first hand reports and there's one in the NCAA forum too. Most seem to agree on Eric Daze upside.
 

Epsilon

#basta
Oct 26, 2002
48,464
369
South Cackalacky
Gwyddbwyll said:
Sometimes its instructive to look at the first year in a league rather than the precise calendar year of birth. Tukonen and Wheeler are similar ages but are at very different levels of development.

Wheeler's first year is pretty similar statistically to Vanek's and Backes' except that he's leading the team in scoring. He also has nobody to play with while Vanek and Backes both played on loaded teams. I dont know why you think Green Bay are a good team because that isnt the case atm. I think its also a relatively young roster.. they've had something like 10 players leave the team in an attempt to shake things up.

2004 was a very poor draft year, much like 2002. Instead of playing it "safe" like they did then with guys like Koreis and Eager, they have gone for a home run pick. He might not be a 6'8 beanpole as in your example but he's pretty big at 6'4 already and he'll probably grow another inch. If you read the Wheeler thread in the Coyotes forum, there are a few first hand reports and there's one in the NCAA forum too. Most seem to agree on Eric Daze upside.

Which is fine, but Eric Daze certainly isn't what I look for at 5th overall. Especially not with players like Olesz and Meszaros still on the board.
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Epsilon said:
Which is fine, but Eric Daze certainly isn't what I look for at 5th overall. Especially not with players like Olesz and Meszaros still on the board.

Hindsight is golden. I didnt see you posting that Meszaros should be taken 5th overall at the time.

They are yet to fulfil their top potential and the vast majority of prospects fail to do so. I'll be pretty happy with a big 30 goal scorer out of a terrible draft year. Certainly the Coyotes need one much more than another talented puck mover as they already have Tanabe, Morris, Mara and Ballard.

If you look back on 1998.. so many teams now wish they took a risk on Gagne, Gomez or Regehr instead of the hyped guys like Fata (7th) or Malhotra (8th). Personally I was calling for Tukonen or Olesz at the time but I admire their guts not to take the easy option and to go for a guy they obviously believe in.
 

Epsilon

#basta
Oct 26, 2002
48,464
369
South Cackalacky
Gwyddbwyll said:
Hindsight is golden. I didnt see you posting that Meszaros should be taken 5th overall at the time.

I had Meszaros as my #2 d-man going into the draft behind Barker. Unlike most of this board I was most definitely not on the Thelen bandwagon.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,633
37,428
Kavliary2000 said:
from what Ive read
If his upside is so high..but is concidered a long term project
why not give him an 8C or 8D rating......he currently has a 6.5C..ouch especially for a guy picked 5th overall

He's not a #5 overall pick that's why. He's hardly a #35 overall pick.
 

Joe d

Registered User
Aug 15, 2004
94
0
go kim johnsson said:
He's not a #5 overall pick that's why. He's hardly a #35 overall pick.


Please explain why you don't think he is a #5 or #35 pick......
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
go kim johnsson said:
He's not a #5 overall pick that's why. He's hardly a #35 overall pick.

Interesting perspective considering you argued Eager should be valued as a 1st rounder since thats where he was picked (but only since he became a Flyer that is!).
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,014
11,020
Murica
Epsilon said:
Which is fine, but Eric Daze certainly isn't what I look for at 5th overall. Especially not with players like Olesz and Meszaros still on the board.

I think the point is no one really knows if Wheeler is going to be worthy of the 5th overall pick yet. IMO, he has at least two more years or development before that will be known or not. Comparing him to "x" player is pointless at this time.
 

Legionnaire

Help On The Way
Jul 10, 2002
44,254
3,965
LA-LA Land
Rabid Ranger said:
I think the point is no one really knows if Wheeler is going to be worthy of the 5th overall pick yet. IMO, he has at least two more years or development before that will be known or not. Comparing him to "x" player is pointless at this time.

Yeah, give me a call in ten years and we can discuss it. Right, now he's a big, gangly kid who's still trying to grow into his body.
 

AgentNaslund*

Guest
Phoenix killed emselfs good wasting their high pick on him. I would have taken Montoya.
 

King'sPawn

Enjoy the chaos
Jul 1, 2003
21,809
20,599
I honestly think Phoenix should have traded away the #5 pick to move up a few spots.

As to his development, I wouldn't worry. He's got a few years before we can even consider labeling him a bust. Last season Brian Boyle, the Kings 2004 1st round pick, was getting 4th line ice time at Boston College. A lot of fans were worried.

This year, he's getting 2nd line ice time, not to mention 1st unit PP time. He's making strides. Wheeler will make strides, too. He certainly has several years to do such :)
 

MN_Gopher

Registered User
May 2, 2002
3,628
21
Mpls
Visit site
Backes 21 p in 30 games.
Vanek 33 p in 35 games.
Irmen 53 in 61 games.
Potluny 57 in 60 games.
Wheeler has 24 in 30 games.
Of this list Wheeler is the only one to lead his team in points his first year in the USHL. He leads his team now, who knows were he will end up. Is 3 points ahead of second place. So he is on par with the others. I like the comparison, judge him after his sophmore year in the NCAA. Irmen had 24 points his freash year, he has 26 this year in bout half the games. And looks a whole lot better and IMO is the best all around player on the gophers. HS to USHL to NCAA is two big steps. He is listed 6 '4 185. If he fills out to 215 he will be a force.
Like a said i awhile ago he has all the tools. Just needs to be able to carry the puck deke a guy and shoot his shot. Can do all individually but not all together. He gets caught in that i can put a move on this guy and go around him. Well sorry you are a pole out there. Doing the puck slide through the guys skates is hard if it comes from eight feet to the right then eight feet to the left. He has to learn when to just lower his shoulder and drive vs. go finesse. He gets pucks poked away because he cannot bring it across his body fast enough. Now he could skate up the ice with his stick in one hand sheilding a guy and the guy with his reach would have no chance to poke it away. I think and hope the USHL will get him physical ready to play his freshmen year at MN. In that season Lucia will correct his gaps and put him in a plave where he can sucseed. Then his sophmore year he will the player that he is going to be for the future.
His junior year he could be playing with. Kessel(please please choose MN) Mueller, Goligoski and Anderson. One heck of a PP.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
Jacobv2 said:
The numbers you posted of Vanek are from when he was 15.

The numbers on Backes are from when he is 17, I think. Also, Backes is not a top 10 pick but a low second rounder (62nd overall).

This is what I don't get. Wheeler was obviously drafted very early. I guess I expected better numbers or super special upside from a 5th overall reach like that. I'd still like to see him play, just to look at the tools, intangibles and potential. But I am underwhelmed statistically.

His outlook on paper is that of your average 2nd rounder. But that's on paper. On the ice, maybe it's another story :dunno:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->