RLR: Malkin could be No. 1 Pick

[Brodeur]

About a month before the 2001 draft, Redline vaulted Stan Chistov #1 over Ilya Kovalchuk. But they had Kovalchuk ranked back at #1 by draft time.

 

[Epsilon]

This is just an attempt to drum up some interest and intrigue when in reality there is none. People have a natural desire for the #1 overall pick to have an "anything can happen" feel.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

About a month before the 2001 draft, Redline vaulted Stan Chistov #1 over Ilya Kovalchuk. But they had Kovalchuk ranked back at #1 by draft time.

Exactly. This is the usual bonehead RedLine disturbance in hopes to get some attention.

 

[MagnusJondus]

It's amusing to me how about a month ago most everyone was wondering whether AO would stack up against Gretzky and Lemieux... and now the majority of the talk on these boards are saying he has a Naslund/Forsberg type cieling. I think people were getting bored with hearing how great AO was going to be and find the EM/AO debate far more interesting (although it has some merit based on EM's post-concussion play and his upside). However, AO should not be devalued in anyway as he has in the past month on the ice to warrant it. He's the best anyone has seen in a while regardless of many of the issues AO-haters are putting against him. He's special.

Malkin's value may have risen, but I seriously doubt that everyone in the NHL (not the media) who's come out and praised AO so greatly were buying into some sort of hype machine. They've all seen him play since he was 14 or 15 years old. As long as I've been following the draft, I can't remember someone being so hyped two years before and through their draft year (Lindros was and now Crosby is also). No one reputable has come out and said that AO has regressed in anyway I dont think.

However, there are a couple things in my eyes that could make for a good argument for the AO/EM debate. First, I think it's possible that since AO plays an All-round game and has such amazing speed that scouts may have been a bit awestruck in seeing him at first. Is it possible that he's not as great offensively as once thought because people are starting to look past his physical gifts? Maybe he's been slightly overrated because he was so mature all-around for a player as a 16 year old. Eventually, most players gain maturity. As all these players get into their early 20's most of the successful ones will be able to play an all-round game.

Secondly, AO has been bigger physically than most players for his age. When he played in the U-18's as a 16 year old he was still above average weight and height-wise with the older players. This was the year everyone started to gush over AO as he dominated with 18 points (much of which were against Germany, Norway, and Slovakia... but that's another issue). He may have been dominate in part because he was so advanced strength-wise and now scouts are seeing that. Anyone can watch him play and see how talented he is, so I'm not questioning his skill. I'm just throwing these out there to question why he may have been a bit overrated heretofore.

Even though I'm a rabid Pens fan, I still think AO's the best player in this draft by far... and although some feel Malkin may possibly have what it takes to be better in the long-run, it will be a huge upfield battle to catch up. As much as EM has progressed, it would take awful big stones to say that a player such as AO who has always been so advanced for his age will not follow the path he has so far and keep improving. IMO, he would really have to Pejorative Slur for Malkin to overtake him. And unless you really like to gamble, I don't think there's any question who should be the #1 pick overall.

 

[Hockeycrazed07]

As long as I've been following the draft, I can't remember someone being so hyped two years before and through their draft year (Lindros was and now Crosby is also).

What about Bouwmeester (drafted 3rd overall)?

~Crazed.

 

[BrooklynCanuck]

It's amusing to me how about a month ago most everyone was wondering whether AO would stack up against Gretzky and Lemieux... and now the majority of the talk on these boards are saying he has a Naslund/Forsberg type cieling. I think people were getting bored with hearing how great AO was going to be and find the EM/AO debate far more interesting (although it has some merit based on EM's post-concussion play and his upside). However, AO should not be devalued in anyway as he has in the past month on the ice to warrant it. He's the best anyone has seen in a while regardless of many of the issues AO-haters are putting against him. He's special.

You have got to be kidding me. God forbid someone should say that his ceiling is *only* as high as Naslund or Forsberg. Give me a break, those are two of the most dominant players in the league in the last half decade. I would consider those people to be reasonable Ovechkin fans.

I think it's more out of line to compare ANY 17 year old to Gretz or Mario.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

However, AO should not be devalued in anyway as he has in the past month on the ice to warrant it. He's the best anyone has seen in a while regardless of many of the issues AO-haters are putting against him. He's special.

There ain't anything special I have seen apart from him blooming early.

I seriously doubt that everyone in the NHL (not the media) who's come out and praised AO so greatly were buying into some sort of hype machine. They've all seen him play since he was 14 or 15 years old. As long as I've been following the draft, I can't remember someone being so hyped two years before and through their draft year (Lindros was and now Crosby is also).

You need to get out more. The hype machine is strong almost every year now. These kids are hyped to death yearly, then devalued near the draft. This is what a lot of us have predicted would happen with Ovechkin for as long as he has been hyped.

The reason you haven't seen a case like Ovechkin happen very often is because the hype machine is getting stronger. There are a couple of sad souls digging deeper and deeper and hyping guys who are getting younger. They are thrown in the spotlight way more often.

Cases like Ovechkin have happened before (Lindros, Bouwmeester, Spezza, Crosby) and it will only increase because of the drastic rise in media coverage, the internet and clownish scouting publications now being legion.

Meanwhile, players who are less hyped (Nash, Heatley) will continue to be just as good, proving that those "special" tags are bull**** and leaving armchair scouts all confused and scratching their heads asking themselves what's wrong.

And with the increase of international so-called presence and the claims of magical tapes, you will also hear more and more urban legends. People who claim to know what's going on on the other side of the atlantic are legions but few of them have the brain to process the correct information 9that's when they don't make it up completely). So you end up with stuff like "Miettinen is the next Lehtinen and way better than Ott", or "Huselius is awesom and would be a top 10 stickhandler in the NHL and an offensive wizard" or "Chistov is so gifted, he is possibly better than Kovalchuk and the next Kariya" and finally the priceless "Frolov is the next Jagr!". Or Zetterberg being the next Forsberg. That kind of stuff.

 

[CH Wizard]

NO way the #1 will be Ovechkin he is the complete package and I now at 100 % that the caps will pick him

 

[Crosbyfan]

NO way the #1 will be Ovechkin he is the complete package and I now at 100 % that the caps will pick him

WHEN will they pick him then? Second round?

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Mckeens and practically ever other outlet see things differently.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/columnist/allen/2004-05-13-allen_x.htm

Some scouts believe it is possible that No. 2-rated draft prospect Evgeni Malkin could end up in the long run being as successful as Alexander Ovechkin, who is a can't-miss prospect.

 

[EroCaps]

"some scouts"=Ovechkin #1.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

"some scouts"=Ovechkin #1.

Two years of hype can brainwash the masses.

Very interesting phenomenon we are seeing.

 

[EroCaps]

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

I submit exhibit A

 

[EroCaps]

Get over yourself man. The "masses"? How pretentious.

Malkin certainly will be a superstar, but better than AO? Non-comformist apologetics.

If the Caps turn around and trade the pick to Pittsburgh, and take Malkin at 2, I'll hold to my opinion.

 

[Crosbyfan]

So is Malkin as good as Ovechkin was a year ago? (OK 10.5 months)

If not, and Ovechkin was better then than Malkin is now, has Ovechkin developed at an average pace over the last year? Better than average improvement? Not quite where he was projected/hoped to be?

 

[me2]

What about Bouwmeester (drafted 3rd overall)?

~Crazed.

I wouldn't read anything into the 3rd overall. Deals were in place to make sure no one else took him. Florida wouldn't have risked it otherwise and would have taken him 1st.

http://nhl.com/futures/2002draft/nash_sidebar.html

 

[Evilo]

IMO Ovechkin>Malkin
Either now or in the future.
That's an opinion of course, but it's mine.

That said, as a Pens fan, I'm happy with Malkin. I'd be happier with Ovechkin, but I'll survive with Malkin

This article just states the gap has closed, and I see nothign wrong with that.
Will Malkin be picked #1? No way.
Does he have the potential to be a better player than Ovechkin? Maybe, but the key word is potential. The sure bet is to pick Ovechkin, and Washington has a no-brainer on their hands here.

As for the "consider the source" type of posts, well I'd say consider the source of the posters as well.
Whether you like them or not, RLR and the scouts that have claimed the gap is close (like Conte) are certainly better sources than any poster here.
So please get down to earth.
So once again, Ovechkin is IMO a better player and a better prospect, but I see nothing wrong in saying Malkin has closed the gap.

 

[paul99]

Up to now,Ovechkin has definitively been a better hockey player than Malkin. And there is a general consensus that he should be a better NHLer. That is the reason he will be the number one pick. But it doesn't mean he will have a better career neither than Malkin or some of other 2004 draft picks.

From 1979 to 2000, only 3 of the 22 first selections overall became clearly the best of their vintage: Hawerchuk (1981), Lemieux (1984) and Sundin ( 1989).

Few became very good NHLers without beeing clearly the best of all, as Modano over Roenick (8th, 1988), Hamrlik over Yashin, Thornton over Luongo (4th in 1997) and Lecavalier over Tanguay (12th in 1998).

Keep in mind that the first pick overall is not the garanteed best of his promotion.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Get over yourself man. The "masses"? How pretentious.

Malkin certainly will be a superstar, but better than AO? Non-comformist apologetics.

If the Caps turn around and trade the pick to Pittsburgh, and take Malkin at 2, I'll hold to my opinion.

This is the kind of junk that makes me want to puke. "Certainly will be a superstar?." Right............. Can't we give these kids a few years in North America before we anoint them superstars? I don't care who the prospect is, it's pre-mature.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

Ovechkin's allround game isn't rated by stats in the RSL. He is extremely strong, physical, fast, accelerates fast, lightning quick wrist shot and great hockey sense. There is noway in hell any scouts would have Malkin over Ovechkin.....well maybe Toronto or Vancouver.

 

[TVanek26*]

Up to now,Ovechkin has definitively been a better hockey player than Malkin. And there is a general consensus that he should be a better NHLer. That is the reason he will be the number one pick. But it doesn't mean he will have a better career neither than Malkin or some of other 2004 draft picks.

From 1979 to 2000, only 3 of the 22 first selections overall became clearly the best of their vintage: Hawerchuk (1981), Lemieux (1984) and Sundin ( 1989).

Few became very good NHLers without beeing clearly the best of all, as Modano over Roenick (8th, 1988), Hamrlik over Yashin, Thornton over Luongo (4th in 1997) and Lecavalier over Tanguay (12th in 1998).

Keep in mind that the first pick overall is not the garanteed best of his promotion.

Pierre Turgeon....

 

[X-SHARKIE]

Redline is just soooooo smart some times.

According to them...the top 10 in 2004 well be like this....Malkin could go #1 over a hybrid player, who has some of the most sick skills and all around play that drawas comparisons to Foppa...... Alexander Radulov well go #3 overall simply because of a dominating tournament....and Robby Schremp wont even touch the top 10 because of what?

Redline lovesss to stir up some talk about them, so i'm not surprised they see Malkin this way.

Malkin could be a very very good hockey player, but if you go to the draft table and think he's neck and neck right now with Ovechkin, then you have completly ignored Ovy..... I think the scouts that say it's dead even, have seen allllottt of Malkin and not much of Ovechkin, Malkin has the skills and play to be a #1 overall pick some years, but not with OVechkin in the same draft.

but the number they go overall argument is moot because in 6 years, for all we know A.J. THelen, or Lauri TUkonen could be better then both or Malkin could be lighting it up, when Ovechkin just couldnt cut it (wont happen)

Ovechkin has soooo much upside to him, and so so little downside....It doesnt get much better then this for a #1 overall selection.

 

[Mr Jiggyfly]

Get over yourself man. The "masses"? How pretentious.

Malkin certainly will be a superstar, but better than AO? Non-comformist apologetics.

If the Caps turn around and trade the pick to Pittsburgh, and take Malkin at 2, I'll hold to my opinion.

Pretentious is labeling a AO "better" than a superstar before he ever hits the NHL. Does this mean he will be a legend in the making according to your opinion? Because being "better" than a superstar, means you are a legend ala. Mario/Wayne/Orr.

You base this on what? Media hype, obviously.

How do you compare who is better of the two in five years if they are both stars?

What makes one player better than another? Points? Value to his team? Leadership abilities? Is he clutch in the big games?

You can't tell me AO will have all of these attributes over Malkin in the NHL.

You have zero evidence to base your opinion on, except hype.

If you were never subjected to the Ovechkin hype, and went to watch both Malkin and Ovechkin play together, there is no way you walk out of that arena thinking Ovechkin is "much better" than Malkin.

Also, no matter what anyone tells you, there is a huge difference between the year of development AO has over Malkin. Any reputable scout will tell you that.

There is a reason the scouting community is starting to question which player has more long term potential.

 

[MePutPuckInNet]

I would not be surprised in the least....I've been saying it for a while now. I'd take Malkin before Ovechkin...said it in February, and got criticized for it, but I still believe it's possible....I also think that Schremp could be an earlier than expected pick [at least by many]....

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=53450&page=5&pp=15&highlight=Malkin