Takkie
I Goc ya nose!
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
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.
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?
The Maple Leafs drafted him because they had been watching him play for a while.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.
Brock said:But sometimes Redline seems to make up their mind based on only ONE game, not a handful.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thats is why you work for them?AE12 said: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.
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.
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 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. 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...PensFan68 said:What about Lauri Korpikoski? Anyone see him play? I like what they have to say about him.