New Redline article at USATODAY

Status
Not open for further replies.

Takkie

I Goc ya nose!
Jun 29, 2003
1,105
0
Florida
Visit site
what round do you think Radulov will be drafted in? it seems like with the right kind of coaching and attitude adjustment this guy can be a stud
 

Jag68Sid87

Sullivan gots to go!
Oct 1, 2003
35,575
1,249
Montreal, QC
Flames Draft Watcher said:
Doubt all you want but there will still be certain Euro's who are only on display for a tournament or two during the season.

As I said, Antropov is a classic example. Feel free to prove me wrong though.

I don't really quite get the Antropov comparison. Are you dissing the Leafs for making the selection, or praising them for thinking outside the box?

Personally, I think the jury is still out on him but, injuries aside, he has shown top-10 ability at the NHL level.
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Jag68Vlady27 said:
I don't really quite get the Antropov comparison. Are you dissing the Leafs for making the selection, or praising them for thinking outside the box?

Neither. He's an example of a player who was drafted mostly for his play in one tournament because it was hard to scout him that year.
 

leafaholix*

Guest
Flames Draft Watcher said:
Neither. He's an example of a player who was drafted mostly for his play in one tournament because it was hard to scout him that year.
The Maple Leafs drafted him because they had been watching him play for a while.

Not one tournament.
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Here's some quotes I could find... (Antropov was rated 17th in Europe by CSS)

"Nikolai Antropov, the huge Russian forward with goal scorer's hands. Not everyone has seen much of him, but 6-5 goal scorers don't grow on trees."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/shn/redline.htm

"This year was no different. There were only three centers in the draft that Detroit felt could take that role. It was hoped that teams picking before Detroit only knew about two of them. The far less publicized and little known player was Nikolai Antropov of Kazakhstan. At 6' 4'' and 200 lbs, the Wings felt Nikolai could be an impact player someday in the NHL. However, it was unclear how much other teams had seen him and what their opinions of him were. Detroit could only wait and hope. It turned out that they did not have to wait long. The 17th rated European was taken 10th overall by the Toronto Maple Leafs. A collective exhale was heard from Detroit's draft table as the Leafs made the selection. Their center was gone. "

http://www.hockeynut.com/wingdraft98.html

"Nik Antropov of the Toronto Maple Leafs falls into the former category. He went to the 1998 championships in Finland as an unheralded center for Kazakhstan.

"He outplayed many players in the tournament," Boyd said.

Toronto took notice. Six months later they drafted him in the first round. Now the 19-year-old is an important cog for the Maple Leafs in his rookie season.

"He raised a lot of eyebrows in that tournament," Boyd said. "He caught a few teams by surprise.""

http://www.bluejackets.com/news/beat/beat2/worldjc.php

"In recent memory, the only first-round choice who might not have been on everyone's radar screen is Toronto's Nik Antropov, who was selected 10th in 1998. Antropov was a bit difficult to find because he grew up and played in Kazakhstan, a small country that was part of the former Soviet Union. "

http://espn.go.com/magazine/hradek_20010620.html

FDW: Good article

"But, not nearly as delirious as the Maple Leaf brass must be. Or as relieved. When Hedberg recommended to then-GM Mike Smith that the Leafs use their first draft selection in 1998 to grab Antropov, pounding noises were heard from several tables on the floor of Buffalo's HSBC Arena. The Edmonton Oilers and Detroit Red Wings, in particular, could hardly believe that another team would commandeer their "secret" choice so early in the proceedings. But the Leafs were one of relatively few clubs that had extensively scouted the lanky forward in his obscure and remote native land of Kazakhstan. "

http://www.wowhockey.com/article785.html

FDW: That last quote pretty much clinches it. Only a couple teams scouted him in Kazakhstan therefore the vast majority of the NHL had one tournament's worth of viewing on him to make up their minds. And that's my point, there are players out there who unless you specifically send scouts to follow them that will only have one or two tournaments during the entire year to make an impressions. And as far as I understand it, it would somewhat rare for a team to send a scout to a remote place like Kazakhstan for any significant period of time.

I remember reading quotes from scouts on trying to scout certain guys. They would go to a tournament and then it would turn out the kid hadn't made the team or was injured.
 
Last edited:

leafaholix*

Guest
"But the Leafs were one of relatively few clubs that had extensively scouted the lanky forward in his obscure and remote native land of Kazakhstan."

Proves my point.
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Brock said:
But sometimes Redline seems to make up their mind based on only ONE game, not a handful.

SEEM? Sounds like a lot of conjecture on your part.

Are you suggesting that Radulov and the USHL guys in question have only been seen once by the Redline crew? Cause if you are that's just plain incorrect.
 

Brock

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,196
3,628
The GTA
ohlprospects.blogspot.com
Flames Draft Watcher said:
SEEM? Sounds like a lot of conjecture on your part.

Are you suggesting that Radulov and the USHL guys in question have only been seen once by the Redline crew? Cause if you are that's just plain incorrect.

They certainly seem to have trouble holding it in their pants over one game.

I don't see why you can't let it rest. I don't like Redline. I never have. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I dont agree with the way that they seem to scout or rate prospects. They move guys up too quickly, they try to make statements (such as the Schremp thing) and they seem to contradict themselves a lot. I much prefer the ISS reports of the THN guide.

Redline has it's supporters and it has their detractors (such as me or Vlad the Impaler).

Just a question because you seem to fight for Redline to the bitter end. Do you work for them? Because it certainly seems so. Because I work for Hockeysfuture and I've fought for this site to the bitter end before (such as the Organizational Rankings). It just seems that you are always right there whenever someone has something negative to say about Redline, seems like you are defending them with an actual purpose, not just as a fan of their work.
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Brock said:
They certainly seem to have trouble holding it in their pants over one game.

I don't see why you can't let it rest. I don't like Redline. I never have. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I dont agree with the way that they seem to scout or rate prospects. They move guys up too quickly, they try to make statements (such as the Schremp thing) and they seem to contradict themselves a lot. I much prefer the ISS reports of the THN guide.

Redline has it's supporters and it has their detractors (such as me or Vlad the Impaler).

Just a question because you seem to fight for Redline to the bitter end. Do you work for them? Because it certainly seems so. Because I work for Hockeysfuture and I've fought for this site to the bitter end before (such as the Organizational Rankings). It just seems that you are always right there whenever someone has something negative to say about Redline, seems like you are defending them with an actual purpose, not just as a fan of their work.

No, I don't work for them and never have. I subscribe to their most comprehensive service and to me it's the best thing out there. I love the THN Draft Guide as well but it doesn't hold a candle to the information contained in Redline's draft guide. I'm sure if you bought Redline's draft guide you would agree (in depth profiles of over 100 prospects, gossip on the draft, mock drafts, etc.)

I just don't like seeing people criticize something for the wrong reasons. And if you think they have only seen one game of Radulov then that's a poor reason because it's not true.

I think you'd be shocked at how the NHL teams rate prospects then because guys do move up quickly or down quickly at points of the year. That's just how it works. The major tournaments (under-18's, world juniors) have a MASSIVE effect on rankings especially of European players. That's reality.

I really could care less if you like them or not. But if you're going to slag them on a public forum then the least you can do is to make sure your information is correct. The people who only read the USAToday articles really don't get the whole picture because there's pages and pages of tournament reports and player profiles that came along with that every month. I think you get a distorted idea of what things are like from just looking at the snippets they release for free. The meat and potatoes of each issue is not released for free as you could guess. It's not perfect. I've certainly disagreed with some rankings in the past and they have their own tendencies. But it's really unfair to judge their whole product based on the small part you read and I'm sure you realize that. I would find it hard to believe that any big draft fan (as most of us are) would be disappointed in Redline's Draft Guide if they can afford it.
 
Last edited:

Brock

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,196
3,628
The GTA
ohlprospects.blogspot.com
Flames Draft Watcher said:
I think you'd be shocked at how the NHL teams rate prospects then because guys do move up quickly or down quickly at points of the year. That's just how it works. The major tournaments (under-18's, world juniors) have a MASSIVE effect on rankings especially of European players. That's reality.

Bingo.

The Redline is simply like an NHL team's drafting guide.

Except for the fact that it's one team's drafting guide. Every team's rankings will be different.

The Redline Report is a very subjective view. They have their personal favourites and the guys they simply hate.

I realize that, that is how NHL teams operate. But the fact is I don't work for an NHL team, I'm the view of the outsider. And as the outsider, I want an objective view of things and a very objective opinion, the "consensus" if you will.

The Redline report is essentially like seing one NHL team's draft guide, where as other services are more of a consensus view on the top prospects for each draft year.
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Brock said:
Bingo.

The Redline is simply like an NHL team's drafting guide.

Except for the fact that it's one team's drafting guide. Every team's rankings will be different.

The Redline Report is a very subjective view. They have their personal favourites and the guys they simply hate.

I realize that, that is how NHL teams operate. But the fact is I don't work for an NHL team, I'm the view of the outsider. And as the outsider, I want an objective view of things and a very objective opinion, the "consensus" if you will.

The Redline report is essentially like seing one NHL team's draft guide, where as other services are more of a consensus view on the top prospects for each draft year.

I agree with all of that and I certainly take their rankings with a grain of salt. But if you read their stuff you'd realize they do as well. They knew guys like Hudler/Vrana weren't going to go as high as they did and they told their readers as much. They had P.M. Bouchard ranked in the 20's in their final rankings but said in their draft guide that they knew he would go top 10. As scouts who are in the trenches with the other team's scouts they can sometimes get better gossip than the THN crew does. And take a guy like Schrempf (who you seem to have a problem with). They will gush about his skills and call him one of the top 3-5 skilled guys in the draft. They have him in the teens due to attitude concerns but they let you the reader make up your own mind on him because his scouting report is actually very flattering. When they have a guy ranked lower than most they will tell you and tell you why. When they have a guy ranked higher than most they will do the same.

The depth IMO is unrivaled by anything else I've read. The Redline Draft Guide to me is indispensible despite it's drawbacks. Buy it one year and judge for yourself because I highly doubt you'd have as many criticisms if you read the full product. As I said you get a distorted view because the only things you read are the top 10 and the column where they make bold statments. Those are two small parts of every issue and it's hard to take in context when you aren't reading the glowing scouting report on Schrempf's skills or things like that.
 
Last edited:

Brock

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,196
3,628
The GTA
ohlprospects.blogspot.com
Flames Draft Watcher said:
I agree with all of that and I certainly take their rankings with a grain of salt. But if you read their stuff you'd realize they do as well. They knew guys like Hudler/Vrana weren't going to go as high as they did and they told their readers as much. They had P.M. Bouchard ranked in the 20's in their final rankings but said in their draft guide that they knew he would go top 10. As scouts who are in the trenches with the other team's scouts they can sometimes get better gossip than the THN crew does. And take a guy like Schrempf (who you seem to have a problem with). They will gush about his skills and call him one of the top 3-5 skilled guys in the draft. They have him in the teens due to attitude concerns but they let you the reader make up your own mind on him because his scouting report is actually very flattering. When they have a guy ranked lower than most they will tell you and tell you why. When they have a guy ranked higher than most they will do the same.

The depth IMO is unrivaled by anything else I've read. The Redline Draft Guide to me is indispensible despite it's drawbacks. Buy it one year and judge for yourself because I highly doubt you'd have as many criticisms if you read the full product.

Well I do believe you that the depth they provide is outstanding. They do seem to bring up some very obsecure names, like I mentioned before. The thing with Redline, is that I think that it would be great to have if you got the other scouting reports as well. Because they offer up a bit of a different look, while the others take a more conservative approach.

But as a student, I don't really have the money to go with all of the different ones, and therefore have to choose. And I'd just rather have the one that is the "consensus" sort of approach.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Bluenote13 said:
I think it's for the same reason I like Bolland - he's the dynamic one in London, not Schremp. Dave mixes it up, for his size that says alot. Fast, deceptive, he's lethal on the PP & PK. I like Schremp, but i'd take Bolland over him at this point. Just an opinion.


"Dynamic?" Not exactly the way I would describe Bolland's game. Consistant and productive, but not exactly a guy that brings you out of your seat. On the other hand, that description fits Scremp to a tee.
 

leafaholix*

Guest
Don't know about you, but I'd rather have "consistent and productive" then a guy who'll bring you out of your seat occasionally.

Schremp is very flashy... but Bolland does the small things and has a great attitude.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Leafaholix said:
Don't know about you, but I'd rather have "consistent and productive" then a guy who'll bring you out of your seat occasionally.

Schremp is very flashy... but Bolland does the small things and has a great attitude.



This is where I get frustrated with how some perceive Schremp and his game. Who says he won't do the "small things"? As for his attitude, is it really that bad with London, or is that just the perception? Also, can't he in fact grow out of any immaturity? On the flip side, can you teach Bolland to do the things with the puck Schremp can?
 

leafaholix*

Guest
Very true.

But the maturing process may come after the draft. And Bolland may never learn to dangle the puck like Schremp, but making those circus shots doesn't get you any higher on a scouts list.

Or atleast not that much higher.
 

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,936
Halifax, NS
The 2nd time I seen Shremp he was much more aggresive on the forecheck and showed more grit. I can see the JR comparisons now allthough he is much more flashy then JR.
 

AE12

Registered User
Dec 6, 2003
40
0
MI
Visit site
Redline

AJ1982 said:
Usually it's just one or two games they look at to make their judgements, not even a full tournament. They also have biases that you wouldn't really expect of a independent scouting agency. Redline is like the tabloid of scouting agencies and is very subjective, rather than objective.

Redline is very subjective and actually prints alot of untruthes about players. They don't get the facts about a player and they attack players personnally, which is beyond belief. It is a disgrace that Redline is allowed to print this bias crap in USA Today.
 

AE12

Registered User
Dec 6, 2003
40
0
MI
Visit site
Brock said:
They certainly seem to have trouble holding it in their pants over one game.

I don't see why you can't let it rest. I don't like Redline. I never have. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I dont agree with the way that they seem to scout or rate prospects. They move guys up too quickly, they try to make statements (such as the Schremp thing) and they seem to contradict themselves a lot. I much prefer the ISS reports of the THN guide.

Redline has it's supporters and it has their detractors (such as me or Vlad the Impaler).

Just a question because you seem to fight for Redline to the bitter end. Do you work for them? Because it certainly seems so. Because I work for Hockeysfuture and I've fought for this site to the bitter end before (such as the Organizational Rankings). It just seems that you are always right there whenever someone has something negative to say about Redline, seems like you are defending them with an actual purpose, not just as a fan of their work.

The ISS is very good and is something that anyone could afford. I subscribe to it and I am happy with the objective info given on each player.
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
Flames Draft Watcher said:
I agree with all of that and I certainly take their rankings with a grain of salt. But if you read their stuff you'd realize they do as well. They knew guys like Hudler/Vrana weren't going to go as high as they did and they told their readers as much. They had P.M. Bouchard ranked in the 20's in their final rankings but said in their draft guide that they knew he would go top 10. As scouts who are in the trenches with the other team's scouts they can sometimes get better gossip than the THN crew does. And take a guy like Schrempf (who you seem to have a problem with). They will gush about his skills and call him one of the top 3-5 skilled guys in the draft. They have him in the teens due to attitude concerns but they let you the reader make up your own mind on him because his scouting report is actually very flattering. When they have a guy ranked lower than most they will tell you and tell you why. When they have a guy ranked higher than most they will do the same.

The depth IMO is unrivaled by anything else I've read. The Redline Draft Guide to me is indispensible despite it's drawbacks. Buy it one year and judge for yourself because I highly doubt you'd have as many criticisms if you read the full product. As I said you get a distorted view because the only things you read are the top 10 and the column where they make bold statments. Those are two small parts of every issue and it's hard to take in context when you aren't reading the glowing scouting report on Schrempf's skills or things like that.

Well said FDW. I couldn't agree more, and admittedly, I've only had the draft guide once. I won't be without it again.

The thing most people fail to realize - as you put it so well above - is RLR is actually a glimpse into an individual scouting report, rather than a watered down consensus of many scouts, topped off with a few rhetorical quotes some scouts were actually willing to go on record about.

I'd take the RLR any day ahead of something like THN, which tells you little more than you'd read on these boards.
 

Stock Rocks

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
3,946
0
Billerica, Mass.
Visit site
Flames Draft Watcher said:
I really could care less if you like them or not. But if you're going to slag them on a public forum then the least you can do is to make sure your information is correct. The people who only read the USAToday articles really don't get the whole picture because there's pages and pages of tournament reports and player profiles that came along with that every month. I think you get a distorted idea of what things are like from just looking at the snippets they release for free. The meat and potatoes of each issue is not released for free as you could guess. It's not perfect. I've certainly disagreed with some rankings in the past and they have their own tendencies. But it's really unfair to judge their whole product based on the small part you read and I'm sure you realize that. I would find it hard to believe that any big draft fan (as most of us are) would be disappointed in Redline's Draft Guide if they can afford it.


Right on, FDW. Beautifully said.

I've had each draft guide since '01, and the product is great. I find the ones who rip RLR the most are the ones who don't have access to it. Jealous? If the shoe fits...
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Leafaholix said:
Very true.

But the maturing process may come after the draft. And Bolland may never learn to dangle the puck like Schremp, but making those circus shots doesn't get you any higher on a scouts list.

Or atleast not that much higher.



I don't agree. I think Schremp's showing at the OHL All-Star game did ratchet his standing up a few notches in some scouts' eyes.
 

eh

Registered User
PensFan68 said:
What about Lauri Korpikoski? Anyone see him play? I like what they have to say about him.
I actually had to check the lineups of the TPS junior A game I saw some weeks back to find out I've actually seen him play. That pretty much says it all. Ok, playing against competition two years older does of course some impact, but Jarmo Jokila who's the same age and four inches shorter was the best player of his team in the same game. :dunno: There were a few scouts (including the 'Hawks "European Scouting Coordinator" (according to their website) Sakari Pietilä) in the game as well, it would be interesting to hear what they would've had to say...

If they (TPS) do play any playoff games against the Helsinki based teams, I plan to go and take a closer look at Korpikoski.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->