Kane vs. Turris

[IronMarshal]

If Philly has the number one pick, I believe their choice will bebetween Turris and Kane. GM Paul Homgren in a recent interview spoke rather glowingly of both prospects, saying that Kane had some Crosby like qualities (not calling him another Crosby though) and that Turris was a complete player who would score alot and be responsible defensively. I gathered from his Turris comments that Turris is a more complete and better defensive player than Kane, but Kane more physically (Turris with very skinny legs and frail looking) mature and higher skilled offensively. He dismissed Cherepanov as being great on any given night and missing on others, and Espo as an underachiever. Vorachek, JVR and Alzner never came up.
My question is, what are the differences between Turris and Kane?
Turris is a smallish 6 footer but Kane is what 5'9? Is there an advantage there?
Which player is better in shootouts? This is very important as the Flyers lose shootouts all of the time.
Which player has the higher offensive upside?
Is Turris substantially better than Kane defensively?
Which player is more aggresive?
Which one has more hockey sense?
Which has better leadership skills?
All input is appreciated, what are your thoughts, and have you seen both players (you needn't have seen them to have an opinion that can be formulated through hearsay and reading).

Click to read more...

 

[Blind Gardien]

I don't know anything about Turris other than what I read on these boards. So I won't even try to answer all those good questions, leaving that to others more qualified.

What I will say... if after comparing the players it still looks pretty close in most areas or overall... well... Kane did accomplish his feats in the OHL and on the WJC stage, which ought to give one an extra ounce of confidence in his ability. Turris still has to step up to that level of competition, and even believing strongly that he will (as basically everybody does), it's still an element of risk (however slight) that Kane has already gone past.

 

[Ratfinklives]

Which player is better in shootouts? This is very important as the Flyers lose shootouts all of the time.

Yes they do lose them all the time. But if you use shootout ability at ALL as a barometer of who you are taking with the first or second overall pick in a draft that would be a huge mistake. Bad players can be good at shootouts just as good ones can be bad at them.

 

[Timeless Winter]

If I'm Holmgren I take Kane and not even think twice about it.

 

[GSK*]

If I'm Holmgren I take Kane and not even think twice about it.

Thats right !

I can't say better.

 

[topched88]

You gotta think kane, allthough turris is lighting it up, kane had some stupid stats that were rediculous, somthing like 141 points in 57 games

 

[VanW27]

Dont count out Voracek, the guy has been on fire since the WJCs and has continued that into the playoffs (10pts in 3games) on a not so good Moosehead team. Plus IMO hes a pro-style player in that he plays a game that will translate very easily to the NHL.

Id say Kane is the front runner though.

 

[Karamazov]

Dont count out Voracek, the guy has been on fire since the WJCs and has continued that into the playoffs (10pts in 3games) on a not so good Moosehead team. Plus IMO hes a pro-style player in that he plays a game that will translate very easily to the NHL.

Id say Kane is the front runner though.

I agree with you here, Kane is still in the lead I think and if Voracek keeps playing like the opposotion stole something from him, he could easily take the 2nd spot.

 

[haelwho]

Kane has proven himself at a higher level than Turris.

BUT

Turris could be better at the same level as Kane.

Kane is the safer pick, but either could end up the better of the two.

 

[leafmon]

Kane has proven himself at a higher level than Turris.

BUT

Turris could be better at the same level as Kane.

Kane is the safer pick, but either could end up the better of the two.

Agreed and you know what it all adds up to.......A bad year to have the first pick

 

[IronMarshal]

Yes they do lose them all the time. But if you use shootout ability at ALL as a barometer of who you are taking with the first or second overall pick in a draft that would be a huge mistake. Bad players can be good at shootouts just as good ones can be bad at them.

The thing is, both players sound worthy of the number 1 pick. It also sounds like Homer is trying to decide between the two. Since the shootout has become such an important part of the game, and it really has as it can mean 10 points or more in the standings, then yes, when it comes down to two players and a top shootout player is a need, you had better take that player.
As I said, personally I like Turris more, but I am not convinced that I am right with that. If Kane is appreciably better than Turris at the shootout, I may have to change my mind as I value the players very closely. Frankly, I don't know which one is better at shootouts, and I am guessing that they are probably close at that as well and it probably isn't an issue. But it could be. Hence the question.

 

[IronMarshal]

Dont count out Voracek, the guy has been on fire since the WJCs and has continued that into the playoffs (10pts in 3games) on a not so good Moosehead team. Plus IMO hes a pro-style player in that he plays a game that will translate very easily to the NHL.

Id say Kane is the front runner though.

You can't teach size as they say, and that is a definite plus for Voracek and JVR, But I remember that great '79 draft when Perry Turnbull had all of that size and skill and Brian Propp had unbelievable numbers and skill but no size. I think Turnbull went number 2 overall and Propper was like 16th (after the Rangers took Doug Sulliman ). Which one was the better pro?

 

[slade]

skill players are getting the nod nowadays- scouts and managers alike realized their mistakes.


im not sold on turris just yet...lets see how he fares at wisco.

 

[scoutman1]

skill players are getting the nod nowadays- scouts and managers alike realized their mistakes.


im not sold on turris just yet...lets see how he fares at wisco.

I agree with you here...as skilled as Turris is, it is still a BIG jump from Jr A to even CHL or NCAA, Turris IMO has to get stronger for sure to IMO, I wouldn't pick him top 3 for the simple fact that you can't be sure with a Jr A player what you are really getting.

 

[slade]

has any junior A player gone top 5?

(excuse my lack of draft knowledge)

 

[Epic]

Another issue to consider is how long before each of those players can be a player for the Flyers? Philly needs help now and I'm starting to think because there's no true number 1 pick that the pick itself might be more valuable then the player.

I believe Philly will trade the pick but if they don't I expect them to take Kane or Cherapanov first. Although they may like Turris a lot, he is several years away from being in the NHL where Kane and Cherapanov could actually play a few games for them next year.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Closest To Being Nhl Ready Will Not Be A Factor.

 

[Quiet Robert]

has any junior A player gone top 5?

(excuse my lack of draft knowledge)

I want to say no, but someone with better knowledge of draft history could probably correct me. The highest guy I could think of is Dainius Zubrus who played Junior A and went 15th. Other than him though, I don't really remember many first rounders who were Junior A players.

I'd say it's only recently that it's become more common for high end Canadian kids to go the US college route. Of course there have been examples from the past (Paul Kariya, Rob Blake, Adrian Aucoin etc...) but in general top level Canadian kids have gone the CHL route.

I don't know about the US equivalent though. I know they have USHL (which I think is like Major Junior) and the U-18 Development Program, which is a little different. I guess you could draw parallels with kids getting drafted out of high school? They don't play against the best competition but have good talent and have committed to a US university and will develop there, same sort of the thing with top Junior A kids.

 

[IronMarshal]

Another issue to consider is how long before each of those players can be a player for the Flyers? Philly needs help now and I'm starting to think because there's no true number 1 pick that the pick itself might be more valuable then the player.

I believe Philly will trade the pick but if they don't I expect them to take Kane or Cherapanov first. Although they may like Turris a lot, he is several years away from being in the NHL where Kane and Cherapanov could actually play a few games for them next year.

There has been talk by Tim Panaccio of the Phila Inquirer taht the Flyers may trade the pick for that reason. I doubt it though. Timmy P. is often wrong on this stuff and I don't think he is a Holmgen fave. Clarke hated him, and Homer and Clarkie are major buds.
The Flyers have made a serious youth movement and are going in a different direction than in the past. Just looking at their recent drafts will tell you that. Ed Snider has said as much. He also said the organization was too inbred, leading to stale thinking. I think they will take the player with most upside but not at the expense of great risk. That is why I think they keep the pick and go with either Turris or Kane.

 

[slade]

i would love an offensive resurgence with kane in philly...