Prospect Info: Leafs 2017 2nd (Via OTT) (#59 OA) - Eemeli Rasanen - 6'7" 209lbs RHD - Kingston (OHL)

[cupcrazyman]

You can't teach size & we have one of the best skating coaches in the league.

 

[Warden of the North]

Hoping for the next Parayko

It still burns me that the Leafs scouted Parayko HARD and didnt take him. Us and the Blues were the only teams that showed significant interest in him.

 

[7even]

Hoping for the next Parayko

It still burns me that the Leafs scouted Parayko HARD and didnt take him. Us and the Blues were the only teams that showed significant interest in him.

We did? Oof. I just found my new favourite least favourite piece of Leafs draft trivia.

 

[Kiwi]

Me neither - I watched the top prospects game. That clip is just more of the same. Nice try though.

Yeah I'm sure Rasanen's giving everything he's got so he can jam Liljegren (one of the best skating players in the 2017 draft) into the boards in a pre-season prospects drill

Wow
You would almost think a kid picked at #59 would need some work on his game and making any sort of judgment on anybody at the moment is completely pointless

 

[Keep Sorokin Me Babe]

We did? Oof. I just found my new favourite least favourite piece of Leafs draft trivia.

Yea that one's going to sting for a while. But the way I see it, if we had Parayko playing for us then we'd have Puljujarvi right now instead of Matthews. People forget we only finished 1 point behind Edmonton for last place that season

 

[Mikeyg]

I really hate the argument that "omg we suck because we didn't pick x player" Its like you guys don't understand that development is largely attributed to developmental programs and opportunity. There is no certainty that para becomes a real player here. It worked out for him in st louis... good for him... who cares? move on.

 

[7even]

I really hate the argument that "omg we suck because we didn't pick x player" Its like you guys don't understand that development is largely attributed to developmental programs and opportunity. There is no certainty that para becomes a real player here. It worked out for him in st louis... good for him... who cares? move on.

I don't know how you can say that with a straight face. All opportunity no talent gets you nothing. All talent no opportunity gets you nothing.

Besides, Parayko developed mostly at Fairbanks, not in St. Louis's system.

 

[Bullseye]

Yeah I'm sure Rasanen's giving everything he's got so he can jam Liljegren (one of the best skating players in the 2017 draft) into the boards in a pre-season prospects drill

Wow
You would almost think a kid picked at #59 would need some work on his game and making any sort of judgment on anybody at the moment is completely pointless

Ok so you're saying he's slow now though? Cause that's what I'm saying. Or have you been saving up "hot take" all night for a chance to use it?

The guy is big and slow with a nasty temper and a great shot. What about this is a hot take? Or do you retract? I would.

 

[notdoneyet]

I laugh at some of the so called experts on here who see a 30 second clip of s
Prospect and can come up with the description of a pylon.

For what it's worth chara isn't a speed demon. There are lots of guys who play in the NHL who don't have any speed

 

[Kiwi]

Ok so you're saying he's slow now though? Cause that's what I'm saying. Or have you been saving up "hot take" all night for a chance to use it?

The guy is big and slow with a nasty temper and a great shot. What about this is a hot take? Or do you retract? I would.

He's not slow his straight line speed is fine it's his edge work that needs work

This is just the same stuff that always gets thrown around
The guys got size and likes to use his body and everyone on here freaks out because he's not a smurf doesn't like to be touched

I'm getting told to retract something by a guy who just stated that the kid has a "nasty temper" with zero evidence but his own opinions and biases on his playing style
Now that's a "hot take"

Want to retract it?
I would if I was you

 

[Mikeyg]

I don't know how you can say that with a straight face. All opportunity no talent gets you nothing. All talent no opportunity gets you nothing.

Besides, Parayko developed mostly at Fairbanks, not in St. Louis's system.

you literally just proved my point. You are critically overvaluing talent and undervaluing the situation. It is such a mistake to think that NHL players are just collections of the most skilled/talented hockey players in the world. Lots of people have the talent to play in the NHL... most don't because A) they have some kind of deficiency B) not given a proper opportunity (or not put in a position to succeed) C) they don't continue developing. You are putting way way way to much emphasis on the mechanical skills required to be good. My cousin played with Lebda for many years between the nhl/ahl. Lebda could skate like the wind, was in excellent shape, got every opportunity but he simply didn't think the game properly and had glaring defensive issues. That literally had nothing to do with his talent/build, and a lot to do with other factors. I know for a FACT at notre dame for example, they never spent any time developing lebda's defensive game, all they cared about was wheeling him out there on the PP and practicing that. So don't come in here and tell me that the developmental path of players in their critical times doesn't matter, because you are unequivocally wrong in thinking that.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

Where does the really bad attitude come from?

 

[Kiwi]

You didn't watch his interview then? The one where they asked him if aggression and physicality was always something he had in his game and he said yes since he started playing at age 11. That was yesterday.

Nasty temper is way you describe an aggressive physical player - it's not an insult it's a description. I think you need to calm down because there's nothing here to get angry about - accept maybe you throwing hot take around indiscriminately.

Mod you wanna do something about this?

The guy plays with physicality and aggression that's his playing style
That is not having a "nasty temperament"

Komarov plays in exactly the same way
Nobody accuses him of having a "nasty temperament" that's the sort of "compliment" that gets thrown around with big guys like Rasanen

I agree I shouldn't have used the "hot take" comment
But there is a double standard around here especially when a 7 second clip in a pre-season scrimmage is getting comments about the kid being a pylon already

 

[7even]

you literally just proved my point. You are critically overvaluing talent and undervaluing the situation. It is such a mistake to think that NHL players are just collections of the most skilled/talented hockey players in the world. Lots of people have the talent to play in the NHL... most don't because A) they have some kind of deficiency B) not given a proper opportunity (or not put in a position to succeed) C) they don't continue developing. You are putting way way way to much emphasis on the mechanical skills required to be good. My cousin played with Lebda for many years between the nhl/ahl. Lebda could skate like the wind, was in excellent shape, got every opportunity but he simply didn't think the game properly and had glaring defensive issues. That literally had nothing to do with his talent/build, and a lot to do with other factors. I know for a FACT at notre dame for example, they never spent any time developing lebda's defensive game, all they cared about was wheeling him out there on the PP and practicing that. So don't come in here and tell me that the developmental path of players in their critical times doesn't matter, because you are unequivocally wrong in thinking that.

Whew lad, usually when I'm that high up on my pedestal I get a little woozy from the altitude!

Nowhere did I say the developmental paths of players is immaterial; development is multi-factorial. You absolutely cannot be a professional athlete without a) the genetic physical ability, b) the epigenetic ability to understand and critically process your particular game at a level beyond 99.99% of the population, and c) the unique privilege to grow that talent and dedicate your life to playing a game. I'll be the first here to state that there are currently several Albert Einsteins working as herders in the Serengeti.

The question is whether St. Louis's developmental program uniquely developed Colton Parayko. I would say no, given that he graduated his college program close to a finished product. So I do think that he would enjoy a comparable level of success in Toronto.

 

[Darcy Tucker]

6'7 massive... just learn to throw them bows

 

[Mikeyg]

Whew lad, usually when I'm that high up on my pedestal I get a little woozy from the altitude!

Nowhere did I say the developmental paths of players is immaterial; development is multi-factorial. You absolutely cannot be a professional athlete without a) the genetic physical ability, b) the epigenetic ability to understand and critically process your particular game at a level beyond 99.99% of the population, and c) the unique privilege to grow that talent and dedicate your life to playing a game. I'll be the first here to state that there are currently several Albert Einsteins working as herders in the Serengeti.

The question is whether St. Louis's developmental program uniquely developed Colton Parayko. I would say no, given that he graduated his college program close to a finished product. So I do think that he would enjoy a comparable level of success in Toronto.

Really? You've resulted to low cognitive puns now? Ironic considering you used the word epigenetic wrong.

Heres a tip: Don't use words like epigenetic when you don't understand what they mean. Epigenetics is a situation where your DNA gets chemical groups added or removed from it in order to silence/enhance certain genes. This right here "the epigenetic ability to understand and critically process your particular game at a level beyond 99.99% of the population" is not an example of correct use of the word.

Aside from that, again you underrate the amount of people capable of skating fast under the right conditions. Conditions are much more important than natural ability in a game like hockey. The genetic makeup of necessities for a hockey player would be A) Higher proportion of fast twitch muscle fibers B)Baseline cognitive capacity to think at a fast level, C) good coordination,

Everything else, ie hockey sense, vision, training, preferences, playstyle, skills are all cognitive abilities. Cognitive abilities must meet the capacity (as outlined in B), but all these other things are learned behaviors and actions. Therefore, the influence/context is much more important. There are lots of people who harbor the physical ability to be professional athletes, but those who make it are born as a result of cognitive development, rather than simply a warehouse of fast twitch fibers.

What does that mean? Simply put, the developmental path is paramount. You cannot predict how players would develop under different circumstances.

 

[7even]

Really? You've resulted to low cognitive puns now? Ironic considering you used the word epigenetic wrong.

Heres a tip: Don't use words like epigenetic when you don't understand what they mean. Epigenetics is a situation where your DNA gets chemical groups added or removed from it in order to silence/enhance certain genes. This right here "the epigenetic ability to understand and critically process your particular game at a level beyond 99.99% of the population" is not an example of correct use of the word.

My degree is in biology. Epigeneticism is just what you say, a mechanism in which your environment influences the phenotypic expression of your genome, and is implicated in the development of personality and intelligence. It's one of the fascinating avenues that enables you and I to be almost identical and yet, clearly, so very different.

Aside from that, again you underrate the amount of people capable of skating fast under the right conditions. Conditions are much more important than natural ability in a game like hockey. The genetic makeup of necessities for a hockey player would be A) Higher proportion of fast twitch muscle fibers B)Baseline cognitive capacity to think at a fast level, C) good coordination,

Everything else, ie hockey sense, vision, training, preferences, playstyle, skills are all cognitive abilities. Cognitive abilities must meet the capacity (as outlined in B), but all these other things are learned behaviors and actions. Therefore, the influence/context is much more important. There are lots of people who harbor the physical ability to be professional athletes, but those who make it are born as a result of cognitive development, rather than simply a warehouse of fast twitch fibers.

What does that mean? Simply put, the developmental path is paramount. You cannot predict how players would develop under different circumstances.

You're missing the forest for the trees here, unless you believe that the University of Alaska at Fairbanks takes specific training and deployment orders from the St. Louis Blues.

What's with all the condescension and pretentiousness dude? Jesus.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

You can't teach size & we have one of the best skating coaches in the league.

It's not about size it's about strength and you can teach strength.

 

[Warden of the North]

We did? Oof. I just found my new favourite least favourite piece wof Leafs draft trivia.

Yes. Theres a report out there that it was only Leafs and Blues scouts really paying serious attention to him. Unfortunately we did not have a pick anywhere close to him

 

[deletethis]

Did I just hear that he didn't start playing hockey until he was 11? This and a rapidly growing frame suggests a large opportunity to improve.

 

[Joey Hoser]

everyone on here freaks out because he's not a midget who doesn't like to be touched

What kind of delusional non-sensical narrative is this? Who the **** thinks this?

You're so desperate to call someone stupid on the internet that you don't even make sense. Look at what you just wrote.

 

[ULF_55]

Yeah I'm sure Rasanen's giving everything he's got so he can jam Liljegren (one of the best skating players in the 2017 draft) into the boards in a pre-season prospects drill

Wow
You would almost think a kid picked at #59 would need some work on his game and making any sort of judgment on anybody at the moment is completely pointless

Was listening to the Fan960 about the Flames prospects camp.

They've told their players not to try and make statements by hitting or being overly aggressive.

Specifically, it is a learning experience not a tryout.

They actually talked about being Sieloffed.

 

[Walshy7]

Was listening to the Fan960 about the Flames prospects camp.

They've told their players not to try and make statements by hitting or being overly aggressive.

Specifically, it is a learning experience not a tryout.

They actually talked about being Sieloffed.

shanny said exactly this a couple of days ago too. As i said i think in that particular clip there was a point where Rasanen had the chance to bury Liljegren but obviously didnt and shouldnt have, but to start calling him a pylon and "got walked" is just silly. Had he hit him it would of been a narrative of Liljegren has gotta "keep his head up".

 

[Mikeyg]

My degree is in biology. Epigeneticism is just what you say, a mechanism in which your environment influences the phenotypic expression of your genome, and is implicated in the development of personality and intelligence. It's one of the fascinating avenues that enables you and I to be almost identical and yet, clearly, so very different.



You're missing the forest for the trees here, unless you believe that the University of Alaska at Fairbanks takes specific training and deployment orders from the St. Louis Blues.

What's with all the condescension and pretentiousness dude? Jesus.

Considering I have a masters in science and am a senior med student, I feel that I am more than qualified to tell you that you still used it wrong. Your definition is okay, (its lacking the mechanisms of action which I outlined) but you are incorrectly interpretting your own argument. Epigenetic changes are 100% based on environment. You are sayong that hockey players are blessed with incredible epigenetics, but that argument is fundamentally flawed. If you have the baseline genetic requirements outlined earlier, by definition, the act of placing yourself within an environment that is more conduvice towards faciltating the necessary epigenetic changes benefical to pro athletes is more important than the mere physical gofts.

i'm just really confused with what your argument is here. You just restated what I said about the epigenetic influences on cognitive functioning, but then didnt connect the dots with the parakyo argument. Simply put, from the minute he was drafted, had he been moved to a dofferent epigenetic environment there is no way of predicting how he would have turned out. Clearly he wasn't at his best leading up to the draft or he would have been a top 5 pick. The post draft environment is what mattered for him, and we will never know how it would have wprked out for him elsewhere.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

Really? You've resulted to low cognitive puns now? Ironic considering you used the word epigenetic wrong.

Heres a tip: Don't use words like epigenetic when you don't understand what they mean. Epigenetics is a situation where your DNA gets chemical groups added or removed from it in order to silence/enhance certain genes. This right here "the epigenetic ability to understand and critically process your particular game at a level beyond 99.99% of the population" is not an example of correct use of the word.

Aside from that, again you underrate the amount of people capable of skating fast under the right conditions. Conditions are much more important than natural ability in a game like hockey. The genetic makeup of necessities for a hockey player would be A) Higher proportion of fast twitch muscle fibers B)Baseline cognitive capacity to think at a fast level, C) good coordination,

Everything else, ie hockey sense, vision, training, preferences, playstyle, skills are all cognitive abilities. Cognitive abilities must meet the capacity (as outlined in B), but all these other things are learned behaviors and actions. Therefore, the influence/context is much more important. There are lots of people who harbor the physical ability to be professional athletes, but those who make it are born as a result of cognitive development, rather than simply a warehouse of fast twitch fibers.

What does that mean? Simply put, the developmental path is paramount. You cannot predict how players would develop under different circumstances.

My degree is in biology. Epigeneticism is just what you say, a mechanism in which your environment influences the phenotypic expression of your genome, and is implicated in the development of personality and intelligence. It's one of the fascinating avenues that enables you and I to be almost identical and yet, clearly, so very different.



You're missing the forest for the trees here, unless you believe that the University of Alaska at Fairbanks takes specific training and deployment orders from the St. Louis Blues.

What's with all the condescension and pretentiousness dude? Jesus.

Considering I have a masters in science and am a senior med student, I feel that I am more than qualified to tell you that you still used it wrong. Your definition is okay, (its lacking the mechanisms of action which I outlined) but you are incorrectly interpretting your own argument. Epigenetic changes are 100% based on environment. You are sayong that hockey players are blessed with incredible epigenetics, but that argument is fundamentally flawed. If you have the baseline genetic requirements outlined earlier, by definition, the act of placing yourself within an environment that is more conduvice towards faciltating the necessary epigenetic changes benefical to pro athletes is more important than the mere physical gofts.

i'm just really confused with what your argument is here. You just restated what I said about the epigenetic influences on cognitive functioning, but then didnt connect the dots with the parakyo argument. Simply put, from the minute he was drafted, had he been moved to a dofferent epigenetic environment there is no way of predicting how he would have turned out. Clearly he wasn't at his best leading up to the draft or he would have been a top 5 pick. The post draft environment is what mattered for him, and we will never know how it would have wprked out for him elsewhere.

Holy off-topic and absolute pissing match. Maybe find a bathroom and compare, rather than do it in a thread about an 18 yo kid we just drafted.

Is this **** serious?