Player Discussion: Prospects Off Season ... including Gauthier

[BertCorbeau]

Last one was full, continue here.

Previous Thread:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1870821

Click to read more...

 

[The_Chosen_One]

I don't think he was comparing to Bozak in that sense. More that he'd be the third best player on the line. Ie - if he plays for the Marlies next year between Brown and Nylander. I think his ceiling is going to be a player who allows offensive players to worry about scoring while he handles d. How many points that results for him, who knows.

Not to say Brown or Nylander are bad defensive players, but I think his role would be ideally suited playing with offensive guys that his skills can balance.

Correct. Unlike Bozak, Gauthier would be able to play that role more effectively. He's already quite strong without the puck.

 

[Semantics]

Bergeron only scored 73 points in 70 games in junior. He seemed to turn out okay.

Bergeron didn't play a single game in junior after the age of 17. When Bergeron was 19 he was posting a higher PPG in the AHL than Gauthier did in junior (and only in the AHL rather than the NHL because of the lockout).

I know you knew these facts, because you looked up Bergeron's stats. But you left them out of your post. Is it too much to ask for an honest discussion?

 

[theIceWookie]

This is horrible reasoning. People need to stop looking at Detroit and try to mimic there development. There drafting is what is to be admired if anything.

The vast majority of good players in the NHL either spend 0 time in the AHL or played less then haft a season of one. And most of them have made an impact with there team by age 21. So to say all our prospects need 2+ years in our development leagues after there 2 years of extra CHL hockey once drafted is asinine if we want to have good impactful players.


ECHL is a joke. If your draft year +2 (about 20 and can't make the jump to the nhl) when your eligible for AHL and your not good enough to make the squad, then your most likely not gonna end up being a good player. This isn't baseball, there's a lot of differences like contracts allowed, ELC status etc

You ruin development when players aren't pushed and they build bad lazy habits that they can get away with in the lower leagues but can't with the big one. The only thing worse then rushing a player, is over cooking them.

EDIT: Also if you wanna do this, your basically burning there ELC which is gonna hurt us with the cap eventually. The best teams get great production from there players on ELC so they dont to have to spend $ on free agents to fill those holes. Helps keep there best players under contract. Again, using the basball method of development in hockey is idiotic IMHO

EDIT: Also you said 24 should be the age they enter the NHL. Think logically. Nylander just finished his 18 year old season. According to your reasong, we should develop him for another 5-6 years before bringing him up to the nhl?

What about our #4 pick? Do you really see Hanafin spending another 2-3 years in college hockey or Marner spend his next 2 years playing against 16 year olds in the OHL? You get to a point when you outgrow your current league and there's nothing let to learn/prove.

This is pretty outdated thinking. The entire second line on Tampa spent good time in the AHL, doesn't seem to be a bad thing for them.

There are lots of other examples too. Development in the AHL isn't a bad thing by any means. Echl..I'll listen to an argument but the AHL has long been and will continue to be a strong development option for all but the best of the best prospects.

 

[ULF_55]

Bergeron didn't play a single game in junior after the age of 17. When Bergeron was 19 he was posting a higher PPG in the AHL than Gauthier did in junior (and only in the AHL rather than the NHL because of the lockout).

I know you knew these facts, because you looked up Bergeron's stats. But you left them out of your post. Is it too much to ask for an honest discussion?

Bergeron has had a good career and scored 73 points in 70 games in his draft year.
Gauthier scored 60 points in 62 games his draft year.

PPG rate is not that much different. 1.04 versus 0.97

We don't know what Bergeron would have done if he stayed in junior, so we can't compare.

 

[ULF_55]

This is pretty outdated thinking. The entire second line on Tampa spent good time in the AHL, doesn't seem to be a bad thing for them.

There are lots of other examples too. Development in the AHL isn't a bad thing by any means. Echl..I'll listen to an argument but the AHL has long been and will continue to be a strong development option for all but the best of the best prospects.

Not every prospect is ready at junior graduation.

Heck, not every boy is finished growing then.

You'd hope a 1st. rounder would be knocking at the door at 20, but even that isn't the case, sometimes just physical strength is lacking.

Each have their own schedule, and if your team is a Cup contender, chances are that 1st. line winger you're developing in the minors is going to have to beat out a legit 1st. line winger in the NHL.

 

[Guy Boucher]

Bergeron has had a good career and scored 73 points in 70 games in his draft year.
Gauthier scored 60 points in 62 games his draft year.

PPG rate is not that much different. 1.04 versus 0.97

We don't know what Bergeron would have done if he stayed in junior, so we can't compare.

That's quite the disingenuous response. You might as well just say that you'd rather ignore all data that is inconvenient to your claim.

Gauthier is nowhere near the prospect Bergeron was.

 

[SprDaVE]

That's quite the disingenuous response. You might as well just say that you'd rather ignore all data that is inconvenient to your claim.

Gauthier is nowhere near the prospect Bergeron was.

I think at the time of their drafts, they were close and similar. The difference here is that Bergeron developed at a staggering rate and exploded on the scene. Ryan O'Reilly is another example.

Gauthier on the other hand hasn't developed his offensive game anywhere near the same pace (obviously).

 

[mydnyte]

you could argue that Gauthier is a generational talent "defensively" from all the praise he is given from his coaches, and around the league... so, even with no offense, he makes up for it.

If he becomes the next Gainey, who will complain? (btw, Gainey had really bad offensive stats considering he played in one of the highest scoring eras ever)

 

[ULF_55]

That's quite the disingenuous response. You might as well just say that you'd rather ignore all data that is inconvenient to your claim.

Gauthier is nowhere near the prospect Bergeron was.

I am ignoring data that doesn't suit my purpose.

D'ohh, that isn't my side of the discussion in this regards.

I wanted Gauthier, but would I re-draft him? Not a chance, that's an easy one! Some players drafted after he was are NHL playoffs contributors, and I doubt Gauthier will ever catch up to those players.

I don't care how fast he can skate, and I was not impressed at the WJC, without his size advantage I just didn't see anything to make me go wow, what a player! He has had that size advantage his entire career in the Q, and that immediately is diminished at the next level.

As I said, he was the player I wanted at that spot, and that was based on an expected improvement in all aspects of the game. Has he improved? Well, as a rookie/draft year he was nominated for the defensive forward award (Guy Carbonneau) he won this year. That is improvement? Well maybe.

So this year he scored 16 goals in 37 games, compared to 18 in 54 and 22 in 62, so that would be an improvement right?

If he has already been pigeonholed at his age playing against boys ... is it coaching or does he truly lack the ability to play a 200' game, even against much smaller players.

I hold out faint hope the Leafs new approach to not pigeonhole players gives him an opportunity to excel in the offensive zone.

Maybe the Leafs have a coach that can do for a shot what Underhill supposedly can do for skating.

 

[Babcocks Marner]

you could argue that Gauthier is a generational talent "defensively" from all the praise he is given from his coaches, and around the league... so, even with no offense, he makes up for it.

If he becomes the next Gainey, who will complain? (btw, Gainey had really bad offensive stats considering he played in one of the highest scoring eras ever)

The Goat will turn out great IMO. He will never be that "offensive" guy. He will be a shut down 3rd or 4th liner, who will also play some PK and be a faceoff specialist.

IMO, and JUST my opinion.... The Goat will be one of the best 4th liners in the NHL.

Toss Leipsic or a player like him on the same line, and LOOK OUT! One of the most frustrating lines in the NHL. I don't mind shut down men at all, you need a few of them sprinkled in there somewhere.

To have a GOOD 4th line and pay 3mil for it, can't go wrong.

Now let's get a Marner/Strome/Barzal to score some goals for us WHILE playing a 200ft game, God, that would be nice to see

 

[SeaOfBlue]

The Goat will turn out great IMO. He will never be that "offensive" guy. He will be a shut down 3rd or 4th liner, who will also play some PK and be a faceoff specialist.

IMO, and JUST my opinion.... The Goat will be one of the best 4th liners in the NHL.

Toss Leipsic or a player like him on the same line, and LOOK OUT! One of the most frustrating lines in the NHL. I don't mind shut down men at all, you need a few of them sprinkled in there somewhere.

To have a GOOD 4th line and pay 3mil for it, can't go wrong.

Now let's get a Marner/Strome/Barzal to score some goals for us WHILE playing a 200ft game, God, that would be nice to see

Honestly, we should just give our 3rd and 4th line more minutes. Next year specifically, I wouldn't be against our 2nd line playing as much time as our 3rd with our 4th line playing 10+ minutes a game.

1st line: 18-20 minutes
2nd line: 15 minutes
3rd line: 15 minutes
4th line: 10-12 minutes

1st pairing: 22 minutes
2nd pairing: 20 minutes
3rd pairing: 18 minutes

Something like that. Gauthier playing 15+ minutes a game, even if it's on the 3rd line, would still make him very valuable. Still taken too early, but a 3rd liner playing 15 hard minutes every night is very valuable.

 

[Guy Boucher]

I think at the time of their drafts, they were close and similar. The difference here is that Bergeron developed at a staggering rate and exploded on the scene. Ryan O'Reilly is another example.

Gauthier on the other hand hasn't developed his offensive game anywhere near the same pace (obviously).

Except that the majority of Gauthier's points in his draft year came in the first half of the season, after which he struggled tremendously. This was an indication that his draft year (first half) was due to an unsustainable uptick in shooting percentage.

Watching Gauthier, I could see immediately that his offensive awareness/creativity with the puck is extremely limited. I'm also fairly sure that I can shoot the puck way better than him.

These factors were not present in Bergeron/O'Reilly. Jansen Harkins is a prospect in the same regard as Bergeron or ROR. His production has been consistent. He's had top line offensive and defensive responsibilities.

By the way, I posted this kind of stuff the day Gauthier was drafted. This isn't revisionist history on my part.

 

[Babcocks Marner]

Honestly, we should just give our 3rd and 4th line more minutes. Next year specifically, I wouldn't be against our 2nd line playing as much time as our 3rd with our 4th line playing 10+ minutes a game.

1st line: 18-20 minutes
2nd line: 15 minutes
3rd line: 15 minutes
4th line: 10-12 minutes

1st pairing: 22 minutes
2nd pairing: 20 minutes
3rd pairing: 18 minutes

Something like that. Gauthier playing 15+ minutes a game, even if it's on the 3rd line, would still make him very valuable. Still taken too early, but a 3rd liner playing 15 hard minutes every night is very valuable.

Babcock's style.

I would not mind that at all, but you need the right team for it. Definitely higher skill/skating on the 4th line than most teams.

EDIT* I also think he was drafted too early, but we got what we got now, and I don't mind him at all.... Defensive beast. Will be useful in that aspect.

 

[SprDaVE]

Except that the majority of Gauthier's points in his draft year came in the first half of the season, after which he struggled tremendously. This was an indication that his draft year (first half) was due to an unsustainable uptick in shooting percentage.

Watching Gauthier, I could see immediately that his offensive awareness/creativity with the puck is extremely limited. I'm also fairly sure that I can shoot the puck way better than him.

These factors were not present in Bergeron/O'Reilly. Jansen Harkins is a prospect in the same regard as Bergeron or ROR. His production has been consistent. He's had top line offensive and defensive responsibilities.

By the way, I posted this kind of stuff the day Gauthier was drafted. This isn't revisionist history on my part.

I don't disagree. I'm just saying they were a lot closer in terms of value then you let on. They wouldn't have been picked past the 1st round if their offensive output was closer then you stated. They had pretty big question marks about their skill level.

Gauthier's raw offensive tools along side his high IQ and size made him be ranked higher then he should have been. A late bloomer on the CHL scene by most standards. A lot of people thought he'd keep improving with more experience and development. Sort of like a high risk/high reward type of potential. The big thing here is that hi low ceiling is fairly safe as I think he'll at least be some sort of 4th line center and depth player.

I've defended Gauthier a lot since drafted but I won't disagree that he's been a big disappointment in his offensive output and overall skill level. Everything else about his game is at a very high level from my viewings. His skating isn't top end of course but probably a notch higher then average.

 

[Guy Boucher]

I don't disagree. I'm just saying they were a lot closer in terms of value then you let on. They wouldn't have been picked past the 1st round if their offensive output was closer then you stated. They had pretty big question marks about their skill level.

Gauthier's raw offensive tools along side his high IQ and size made him be ranked higher then he should have been. A late bloomer on the CHL scene by most standards. A lot of people thought he'd keep improving to the point with more experience and development. Sort of like a high risk/high reward type of potential.

I've defended Gauthier a lot since drafted but I won't disagree that he's been a big disappointment in his offensive output and overall skill level. Everything else about his game is at a very high level though. Skating is fairly good, definitely a little higher then average. It's more then adequate.

My point is that there were a lot of red flags for Gauthier but scouting/management likely rationalized ignoring those red flags by saying "if he doesn't develop, with his size, he'll still be an NHLer".

That's argument #1 in the Cowards Guide to Scouting.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Babcock's style.

I would not mind that at all, but you need the right team for it. Definitely higher skill/skating on the 4th line than most teams.

EDIT* I also think he was drafted too early, but we got what we got now, and I don't mind him at all.... Defensive beast. Will be useful in that aspect.

True, he's not a bust. And it's not even a major reach. I just think he should have been taken early 2nd round where all of the other defensive specialists are taken.

Our 4th line should be good. I think all of Carrick, Bailey and Frattin can handle 10-12 minutes a night. In fact, I think Bailey and Frattin need that amount of time to be effective. Carrick can be effective with less, but he can also be effective playing 10-12 minutes I'm sure also.

On defense, I like the approach where we would have a full time 7th defenseman that rotates in often. Maybe someone like T.J. Brennan. Keep everyone fresh and work hard for their ice time.

 

[darrylsittler27]

Gauthier and Bergeron.

Who said he was the next Bergeron? He is way bigger without the offensive game which takes longer in big players (see Colbourne.) Gauthier will play in the NHL but in which capacity? His curve says he may become a 3rd line C. No one is even calling 2nd line C. Still, he is hardly a bust and has erased that label, now let's give him time to develop.

 

[FlareKnight]

My point is that there were a lot of red flags for Gauthier but scouting/management likely rationalized ignoring those red flags by saying "if he doesn't develop, with his size, he'll still be an NHLer".

That's argument #1 in the Cowards Guide to Scouting.

They probably rationalized those red flags by saying "even if his offense doesn't develop, he'll be a damn good defensive player." They didn't draft him simply because he'd make it in some capacity as a grinder. Red flags. Make it sound like his only hope of playing hockey in the future is in a bar league somewhere.

They certainly played it safer than they could have. But this wasn't a Biggs pick either. They picked him as much for what he could do well as what was possible down the road.

I'm all for the Leafs changing things up and going for the home run picks, you need more of those. So long as you have more than no luck at all you will get guys that will be worth it. But at the same time I think the complaining about the Gauthier selection all this time is silly. It wasn't a bad pick for where they were and he's not a bust who has nothing that he does extremely well either.

 

[ULF_55]

Who said he was the next Bergeron? He is way bigger without the offensive game which takes longer in big players (see Colbourne.) Gauthier will play in the NHL but in which capacity? His curve says he may become a 3rd line C. No one is even calling 2nd line C. Still, he is hardly a bust and has erased that label, now let's give him time to develop.

He isn't even in the NHL bust-star situation yet.

He could very well bust, or be a star, but until he's graduated from junior he's just a prospect.

Brian Boyle was 23 before he really made a mark in the AHL, and he's now a solid NHL player.


Brian Boyle

Center -- shoots L
Born Dec 18 1984 -- Hingham, MA
[30 yrs. ago]
Height 6.07 -- Weight 244 [201 cm/111 kg]
Drafted by Los Angeles Kings
- round 1 #26 overall 2003 NHL Entry Draft


Not an ideal 1st. round pick, but valuable to his team.

 

[Guy Boucher]

They probably rationalized those red flags by saying "even if his offense doesn't develop, he'll be a damn good defensive player." They didn't draft him simply because he'd make it in some capacity as a grinder. Red flags. Make it sound like his only hope of playing hockey in the future is in a bar league somewhere.

The Leafs used that logic on Gauthier and likely used it with Biggs. They will likely have used two first round picks (+ with the Biggs trade) to get one 4th liner and one borderline AHLer.

Does that sound like a smart way to draft a team?

 

[FreeBird]

The Leafs used that logic on Gauthier and likely used it with Biggs. They will likely have used two first round picks (+ with the Biggs trade) to get one 4th liner and one borderline AHLer.

Does that sound like a smart way to draft a team?

Your right I see a lot of Biggs in The Goat hopefully I'm wrong because if that's the way it turns out the rebuild will be years in the making. Nylander has a nice package but I don't see a Marner in him, they would be a decent start. Don't know what's going on with Strome he looks more like Scott Thornton than cousin Joe.

 

[darrylsittler27]

So ,which players are better.

Go look at the draft and with hindsight there are only 1 or 2 guys in the first and second better right now. You can't use hindsight when your drafting. He was a safe pick, when the draft had thinned right out. It wasn't a great draft, it happens.

 

[shelf]

This is pretty outdated thinking. The entire second line on Tampa spent good time in the AHL, doesn't seem to be a bad thing for them.

There are lots of other examples too. Development in the AHL isn't a bad thing by any means. Echl..I'll listen to an argument but the AHL has long been and will continue to be a strong development option for all but the best of the best prospects.

Tyler Johnson went undrafted. Palat went un-selected for two years and then was picked in the 7th round. You can absolutely let these guys "cook" in the AHL.

Kucherov(2nd round) however did not spend much time "cooking". He only spent 17 games in the AHL and was in the NHL at 20 years old.

There is a big difference between these 2 situations. You can absolutely let your long-shot prospects spend lots of time in the AHL but your top prospects like a guy like Nylander or Kucherov you dont leave down in the minors for an extenden period of time.

 

[Semantics]

I think at the time of their drafts, they were close and similar. The difference here is that Bergeron developed at a staggering rate and exploded on the scene. Ryan O'Reilly is another example.

Gauthier on the other hand hasn't developed his offensive game anywhere near the same pace (obviously).

Could not agree more. Production wise they were similar, but it just goes to show that size + production isn't everything (hence Crouse being rated much higher).

Our scouts should have been able to recognize that Gauthier's stone hands and lack of offensive IQ would put a cap on his upside. I don't like saying that he's only a worse pick than Bergeron in hindsight, but at the time was okay; the scouts are supposed to be able to predict these things.