147th Overall - C Daniel Audette

[HBDay]

Not the greatest side by side. But the resemblence is certainly there.

 

[Darth Joker]

The magnitude of the number may be misleading, but the fact that he tied for the worst +/- on his team isn't.

Wouldn't that largely be a reflection of minutes played for a guy on a bottom feeder? If your team sucks and is getting scored on a lot, the more you're on the ice (excluding power play time) the more your +/- is likely going to suffer for it.

 

[Mario le Magnifique]

The magnitude of the number may be misleading, but the fact that he tied for the worst +/- on his team isn't. Hard enough worker, but relying on perimeter play (particularly with the man advantage) to be offensively productive in junior has its symptoms/by-products and that's one of them. Not that he's the "worst" defensively on the team (they wouldn't use him on the PK if that was truly the case, though it's his speed that makes him at least half useful out there), but if the puck isn't on his stick he typically isn't doing much toward the team cause.

That is true to some extent, but as an example, think about the Habs version with Cunneyworth as coach, and then the Therrien era. The roster changed a bit, but not enough to completely turn it around by itself. Good coaching and a stronger supporting cast did it. Team is still relying on the same players playing the same roles, except that now it acting like a real team instead of an uncoordinated group of individuals.

So Audette was their best player and therfore was put in all situations... bad coaching IMO. That team didnt have the supporting cast required to play hard minutes therefore they put their offensive line against any and all opposition, much like playing DD against Crosby. It fails. saying that, itk highlights the weaknesses of that pick, but remember, we can teach defense but not offense to a player. Hopefully this bad season lit up a fire under his ass and he understands that he needs to learn to play mor efficiently without the puck.

 

[MXD]

That is true to some extent, but as an example, think about the Habs version with Cunneyworth as coach, and then the Therrien era. The roster changed a bit, but not enough to completely turn it around by itself. Good coaching and a stronger supporting cast did it. Team is still relying on the same players playing the same roles, except that now it acting like a real team instead of an uncoordinated group of individuals.

So Audette was their best player and therfore was put in all situations... bad coaching IMO. That team didnt have the supporting cast required to play hard minutes therefore they put their offensive line against any and all opposition, much like playing DD against Crosby. It fails. saying that, itk highlights the weaknesses of that pick, but remember, we can teach defense but not offense to a player. Hopefully this bad season lit up a fire under his ass and he understands that he needs to learn to play mor efficiently without the puck.

Audette isn't exactly the best player defensively.

Doesn't float, just not great defensively.

But don't you think that's kindof the reason why he was still available in the 5th round?

 

[Darth Joker]

But don't you think that's kindof the reason why he was still available in the 5th round?

His size is probably the main reason for that.

 

[MXD]

His size is probably the main reason for that.

Yes and no.

A 5'9, 76 pts player with, say, a zero +/-, on a terrible, terrible team, probably gets drafted in the Top-15, if not Top-10.

But Audette is 5'9 and not better than your average junior player defensively, hence the whole -37 statline.

Put him on Gatineau, at the spot of, say, Karabacek, and you have a player with a WAY better statline (than Karabacek).

 

[Ezpz]

Yes and no.

A 5'9, 76 pts player with, say, a zero +/-, on a terrible, terrible team, probably gets drafted in the Top-15, if not Top-10.

But Audette is 5'9 and not better than your average junior player defensively, hence the whole -37 statline.

Put him on Gatineau, at the spot of, say, Karabacek, and you have a player with a WAY better statline (than Karabacek).

Zero players that were 5'9 got drafted in the first two rounds.

 

[MXD]

Zero players that were 5'9 got drafted in the first two rounds.

Because zero 5'9 players put up 76 points with neutral differential on a bottom-4 team of the CHL.

 

[le_sean]

Yes and no.

A 5'9, 76 pts player with, say, a zero +/-, on a terrible, terrible team, probably gets drafted in the Top-15, if not Top-10.

Not even close. A player that size would have to get 140+ points to get drafted that high. Look at Petan last year. 120 points and 43rd overall.

 

[MXD]

Not even close. A player that size would have to get 140+ points to get drafted that high. Look at Petan last year. 120 points and 43rd overall.

Petan put up 120 points on a team that went 57-12-0-1.

I don't think you realize how impressive getting 76 points and neutral differential on a terribad team would be.

That would mean that this "hypothetic player" would be the only reason why its team won games to begin with.

 

[Ezpz]

Because zero 5'9 players put up 76 points with neutral differential on a bottom-4 team of the CHL.

Even in past years Petan put up 120 points and only went second round. People do not take 5'9 players in the top 10-15 anymore after the recent string of busts from 07-09.

 

[MXD]

Even in past years Petan put up 120 points and only went second round. People do not take 5'9 players in the top 10-15 anymore after the recent string of busts from 07-09.

Look at the team he played on!

 

[Ezpz]

Look at the team he played on!

Doesn't matter when there are ZERO 5'9 players going in the first round in recent years no matter what they do.

 

[MXD]

Doesn't matter when there are ZERO 5'9 players going in the first round in recent years no matter what they do.

Again, you don't seem to realize how good my "hypothetical" season was.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Wouldn't that largely be a reflection of minutes played for a guy on a bottom feeder? If your team sucks and is getting scored on a lot, the more you're on the ice (excluding power play time) the more your +/- is likely going to suffer for it.

Yes, that's obviously true. But if we spend time clearly outlining the obvious generalities before trying to share impressions from actually watching specific individuals, post lengths will become even more unbearably long. Like I said, I've seen him kill penalties, so his coach obviously thinks his speed is an asset defensively, but the word "disengaged" applies big time to his play without the puck - in all zones.

 

[CaptainBenn]

Doesn't matter when there are ZERO 5'9 players going in the first round in recent years no matter what they do.

Is this true?

Do you guys remember Rocco Grimaldi? Most ppl said he would go top5 if he wasnt 5'6
He got drafted in the 2nd round but I didnt follow his dev, dont know if he will actually make the NHL one day

 

[VL55]

By the fifth round, guys like Audette are exactly what we should be picking.

Any big body that can even remotely play hockey has been long picked.

For example, all of the players drafted behind Gallagher in 2010 have scored 23 points in the NHL so far, which means that Brendan has scored exactly 3X as much as all those that followed combined. Good things we gambled on him despite his size.

Small and talented is what you draft when you are that deep because there is literally nothing left that has a chance of becoming an asset. The days of finding a Zetterberg in those rounds seem long past with scouting improvements.

Which does not mean I expect Audette to ever make the team, but I'm happy with the pick.

 

[Redux91]

Yes and no.

A 5'9, 76 pts player with, say, a zero +/-, on a terrible, terrible team, probably gets drafted in the Top-15, if not Top-10.

But Audette is 5'9 and not better than your average junior player defensively, hence the whole -37 statline.

Put him on Gatineau, at the spot of, say, Karabacek, and you have a player with a WAY better statline (than Karabacek).

well we drafted a 6"2 , 75 pts in 65 games player , respectable -6 on the worst team in the WHL and one of the worst in the CHL, and he went 26th sooo

 

[overlords]

well we drafted a 6"2 , 75 pts in 65 games player , respectable -6 on the worst team in the WHL and one of the worst in the CHL, and he went 26th sooo

But he's russian, which is pretty much the ethnic equivalent of being short by north american hockey standards.

 

[radicalcenter]

Doesn't matter when there are ZERO 5'9 players going in the first round in recent years no matter what they do.

Mikael Granlund was about 5'09, 5'10 and got drafted 9th overall in 2010

 

[MD thaivuN]

Mikael Granlund was about 5'09, 5'10 and got drafted 9th overall in 2010

Dominating a men's league is probably the only way for a small player to get drafted real high.

 

[NotProkofievian]

But he's russian, which is pretty much the ethnic equivalent of being short by north american hockey standards.

lel.

The russian factor's a hell of a cognitive bias...

 

[Whitesnake]

No matter how small you are, you still need to show you can play through traffic and won't always be on your ass with a significant lower body strength. Audette has some ways to go. But I would indeed love him on a much better team.

 

[QuebecPride]

The magnitude of the number may be misleading, but the fact that he tied for the worst +/- on his team isn't. Hard enough worker, but relying on perimeter play (particularly with the man advantage) to be offensively productive in junior has its symptoms/by-products and that's one of them. Not that he's the "worst" defensively on the team (they wouldn't use him on the PK if that was truly the case, though it's his speed that makes him at least half useful out there), but if the puck isn't on his stick he typically isn't doing much toward the team cause.

He got a ridiculous amount of ice and always faced the other teams best players. As we say in French, one plus one make two. Play a lot, on a terrible team, and see what happens.

He played over 25 minutes of ice, on one of the worse team of the league (I still believe Saint-John and Shawinigan were lesser teams).

Look at this, only Jérémy Roy and Dominic Talbot-Tassi played more than him, and both are defensemen.

http://www.extraskater.com/chl/players?sort=etoi_all&team=she

He has work to do in his own zone, but +/- is probably the worst stat used to analyze hockey. It tells you who was on the ice, but doesn't tell you if it was a certain player's fault, if it was a brutal turnover from a defender or just a weak goal allowed by the goaltender.

You're right to say that he's at his best with the puck on his stick, but his problem defensively to me is not necessarily in terms of position or coverage, but rather his puck decisions. He makes too many turnovers in dangerous areas of the ice (the two blue-lines notably). He's very confident in his abilities and always has his mind on 'Offense'. That's something he'll have to improve, play accordingly to the clock and accordingly to his position on the ice.

I'm confident that as he matures he'll get better at understanding when and where it's time to deke through a defender and when it's time to put the puck deep.

No matter how small you are, you still need to show you can play through traffic and won't always be on your ass with a significant lower body strength. Audette has some ways to go. But I would indeed love him on a much better team.

I expect Sherbrooke to end in the 8-12 area in the standings and they should be amongst the contender in 2015-2016. Daniel will again get a lot of ice and he will play with the best Defenseman of the league in Jérémy Roy. The Phoenix traded for David Storto who was a linemate of Audette's at Esther-Blondin in MAAA. That will finally give him options other than creating plays by himself.

Here's what the team looks like right now. We have a top3 D squad with Roy, Bahl, Neill, Hoyles and Grégoire. Goaltending is average but is an improvement on last year. And offense is definitely better than last year. Wieser will be older and should be good for a PPG. They'll pick up a 17/18 year old Euro at the draft. They finally have a decent checking line with Lafontaine and O'Brien and the Debiens/Harwell/Deslauriers line showed promise at the end of last year and should explode offensively, especially Harwell and Deslauriers.


Storto(19) - Audette(18) - Wieser(19)
Euro - Lafontaine(20) - O'Brien (20)
Desbiens (19) - Harwell (17) - Deslauriers (18)
Stacey (17) - Fontaine (17) - Murphy(19)/Domingue (19)
Lavoie (18)

Neill (18) - Roy (17)
Hoyles (20) - Bahl (18)
- Grégoire (16)
Labbé (19) - Villeneuve (18)


Bureau (18)
Fitzpatrick (16)

 

[Treb]

Yes and no.

A 5'9, 76 pts player with, say, a zero +/-, on a terrible, terrible team, probably gets drafted in the Top-15, if not Top-10.

But Audette is 5'9 and not better than your average junior player defensively, hence the whole -37 statline.

Put him on Gatineau, at the spot of, say, Karabacek, and you have a player with a WAY better statline (than Karabacek).

Not a terrible team (actually a good team, but...)
Brendan Gallagher 41 goals 81 points +9
10 goals 21 points in the PO

Drafted #147 (OMG, the same as Audette )