Pre-Game Talk: 2014 NHL Entry Draft - Part X

[LickTheEnvelope]

nobody here would suggest trading horvat for the #1 is a bad deal (though they can still be against it). trading horvat + 6 for 1 is a bad deal.

Of course. Yeay consensus!

 

[fancouver]

nobody here would suggest trading horvat for the #1 is a bad deal (though they can still be against it). trading horvat + 6 for 1 is a bad deal.

I don't think Tallon even wants Horvat. They have 3 forwards that are all more developed or have higher potential than Horvat.

They'd rather have another winger, like Shinkaruk.

 

[Iridescent*]

Of course. Yeay consensus!

No consensus. Anyone that wouldn't trade Horvat and Virtanen for Reinhart is out to lunch.

I make that trade every time. Do people realize how impossible it is to find legit #1 centers? Almost every single legit #1c plays for the team that drafted him. Nobody lets them go. Staal, Crosby, Malkin, Getzlaf, Sedin, Toews, Kopitar, Duchene, Stamkos, Datsyuk, Tavares, etc. The only one I can think of that plays for a team he wasn't drafted to is Thornton.

Toronto has not had a #1 center in almost 10 years of rebuilding and re-tooling. Why? Because no team trades #1 centers, or players they project to become #1 centers. They don't trade picks when they believe that pick will acquire a #1 center. And Toronto did not themselves draft a #1 center, so here they are almost a decade into a rebuild with Tyler Bozak on the top line.

Do we want to end up like that? Because if we do what people here are advocating, that is what we're going to end up as. Bo Horvat will be a good hockey player, but he will not be a #1c. I'm not high on Virtanen at all, which is who Vancouver would pick at 6.

Seriously people, give your heads a shake. I would trade Horvat and Virtanen for Reinhart in the blink of an eye. I'd probably even add to it.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

Of course. Yeay consensus!

This is the wrong place to try and build a consensus.

 

[Canucks LB]

No consensus. Anyone that wouldn't trade Horvat and Virtanen for Reinhart is out to lunch.

I make that trade every time. Do people realize how impossible it is to find legit #1 centers? Almost every single legit #1c plays for the team that drafted him. Nobody lets them go. Staal, Crosby, Malkin, Getzlaf, Sedin, Toews, Kopitar, Duchene, Stamkos, Datsyuk, Tavares, etc. The only one I can think of that plays for a team he wasn't drafted to is Thornton.

Toronto has not had a #1 center in almost 10 years of rebuilding and re-tooling. Why? Because no team trades #1 centers, or players they project to become #1 centers. They don't trade picks when they believe that pick will acquire a #1 center. And Toronto did not themselves draft a #1 center, so here they are almost a decade into a rebuild with Tyler Bozak on the top line.

Do we want to end up like that? Because if we do what people here are advocating, that is what we're going to end up as. Bo Horvat will be a good hockey player, but he will not be a #1c. I'm not high on Virtanen at all, which is who Vancouver would pick at 6.

Seriously people, give your heads a shake. I would trade Horvat and Virtanen for Reinhart in the blink of an eye. I'd probably even add to it.

Honestly, I would do it also just because I don't see horvat being anything more then a great third liner. Average 2nd liner

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Honestly, I would do it also just because I don't see horvat being anything more then a great third liner. Average 2nd liner

Yes, but you are going to be wrong about Kassian, so I'll take your assessment with a grain of salt.

 

[Peen]

I hope he fell in love with Jensen when he scored in Florida. Jensen needs to improve a whole lot, so if the price to move up includes Jensen, I'm interested.

 

[Canucks LB]

Yes, but you are going to be wrong about Kassian, so I'll take your assessment with a grain of salt.

I was right about JS

1/2, Not bad

 

[Bitz and Bites]

I hope he fell in love with Jensen when he scored in Florida. Jensen needs to improve a whole lot, so if the price to move up includes Jensen, I'm interested.

I'd do Jensen and the #6 pick in a heartbeat.I think FLA would ask for more,though,probably Tanev or Kassian which I'd reluctantly do but preferably with the #10 pick we should get from ANA if Kes goes there.

 

[tc 23]

Hey guys, lets keep that stuff in the Armchair GM thread and keep this thread discussing the draft and potential draft picks outside of the first round.

 

[biturbo19]

I agree. Very underrated; definitely have him top20 for me. I don't understand the skating concerns, I think he moves fairly well. I like him more than McCann, more in your face and more jam in his game. Skill wise, I think Bleackley is definitely underrated. Good hands, good shot. Nice frame. Intangibles. Would love to get him at 36.

Top-20 for Bleackley? Ahead of McCann? I can't get on board with that. He'd be a great pick at #36, and he probably will be gone in the back end of the 1st round with the desire for size around the NHL and the relative scarcity of it in that area of the draft. But McCann has a lot more upside to me. Between his significantly better skating and the much better shot...though i can understand why you'd compare the two. Relatively similar type of players, and they're probably quite equal right now...i just think the upside clearly lies with McCann in terms of having room to grow as a player. Whether or not he can put it all together and does that is certainly the question with McCann, but he has the better tools right now and i feel like they have a very similar floor.

I don't think Bleackley is a particularly poor skater, but he's not a good one either. When he gets up a head of steam his speed can be pretty good. He has heavy kind of clunky feet though, and some pretty ugly edgework. He's not Gaunce bad, and his much more "active" style of play helps in that as well, but when contrasted with McCann, it's not even close. Personally, his skating reminds me a fair bit of an NHL version Lucic skating (not the prospect Lucic). And Bleackley has made it pretty clear from what i've read and heard from him, that he's put quite a bit of work into trying to work on it...which is both good and bad. Good in that he recognizes the problem and is willing to work on it obviously...but bad in that he's already done a lot of work on it and i worry how much of that ends up being the end of the line as far as big improvements in that area of his game.

Basically, i wouldn't call it a huge problem, and i'd have no issues drafting him late 1st early 2nd as is...but relative to someone like McCann, it's a problem.

 

[thefeebster]

Top-20 for Bleackley? Ahead of McCann? I can't get on board with that. He'd be a great pick at #36, and he probably will be gone in the back end of the 1st round with the desire for size around the NHL and the relative scarcity of it in that area of the draft. But McCann has a lot more upside to me. Between his significantly better skating and the much better shot...though i can understand why you'd compare the two. Relatively similar type of players, and they're probably quite equal right now...i just think the upside clearly lies with McCann in terms of having room to grow as a player. Whether or not he can put it all together and does that is certainly the question with McCann, but he has the better tools right now and i feel like they have a very similar floor.

I don't think Bleackley is a particularly poor skater, but he's not a good one either. When he gets up a head of steam his speed can be pretty good. He has heavy kind of clunky feet though, and some pretty ugly edgework. He's not Gaunce bad, and his much more "active" style of play helps in that as well, but when contrasted with McCann, it's not even close. Personally, his skating reminds me a fair bit of an NHL version Lucic skating (not the prospect Lucic). And Bleackley has made it pretty clear from what i've read and heard from him, that he's put quite a bit of work into trying to work on it...which is both good and bad. Good in that he recognizes the problem and is willing to work on it obviously...but bad in that he's already done a lot of work on it and i worry how much of that ends up being the end of the line as far as big improvements in that area of his game.

Basically, i wouldn't call it a huge problem, and i'd have no issues drafting him late 1st early 2nd as is...but relative to someone like McCann, it's a problem.

I don't agree. McCann is truly lacking something in his game, very rarely did i come away impressed with the full 60 minutes of his game (more often, i felt drawn towards Michael Bunting). Floats in and out of a game, in effort and in intensity. Only flashes his skill, flashes some physicality maybe one out of 5 games. Some tunnel vision and lack of finish. Currently, i see a guy not unlike Darren Helm.

That's an under-sell of Bleackley's skating. He is an average skater, but certainly would not say he has ugly edgework. I don't see the Lucic skating comparison. Bleackley moves around the ice significantly better. I'd say Bleackley's skating is comparable to Horvat's.

Not the only one to have Bleackley above McCann. I feel Bleackley has better vision, better intensity/mental fortitude, very good one on one moves, a better frame, much harder to take away his ice/space. I feel he is under-valued just like Barbashev.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Not the only one to have Bleackley above McCann. I feel Bleackley has better vision, better intensity/mental fortitude, very good one on one moves, a better frame, much harder to take away his ice/space. I feel he is under-valued just like Barbashev.

My opinion on McCann has changed throughout the year. Much like it did with Ho-Sang. Only, I went from negative to positive on the latter. McCann was better earlier, and then just faded. Even with the Greyhound PP essentially using him as a focus, he still failed to impress down the stretch.

As a centre, he carries extra value. However, I would now take other centres over him. Barbashev without question. Larkin, yes. Bleackley, it's close but I'd lean that way too.

I will be very surprised if Bleackley fails to get picked in the 1st round. So versatile and gritty. Though I don't think he's that great 1 on 1, he'll definitely make himself a factor in games.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

http://video.sabres.nhl.com/videocenter/?id=625434

Whole bunch of draftee interview/highlight montages on the Sabres website.

 

[LiquidSnake]

http://video.sabres.nhl.com/videocenter/?id=625434

Whole bunch of draftee interview/highlight montages on the Sabres website.

Cool. Thanks for posting

 

[biturbo19]

I don't agree. McCann is truly lacking something in his game, very rarely did i come away impressed with the full 60 minutes of his game (more often, i felt drawn towards Michael Bunting). Floats in and out of a game, in effort and in intensity. Only flashes his skill, flashes some physicality maybe one out of 5 games. Some tunnel vision and lack of finish. Currently, i see a guy not unlike Darren Helm.

That's an under-sell of Bleackley's skating. He is an average skater, but certainly would not say he has ugly edgework. I don't see the Lucic skating comparison. Bleackley moves around the ice significantly better. I'd say Bleackley's skating is comparable to Horvat's.

Not the only one to have Bleackley above McCann. I feel Bleackley has better vision, better intensity/mental fortitude, very good one on one moves, a better frame, much harder to take away his ice/space. I feel he is under-valued just like Barbashev.

Bleackley tends to ride his inside edges like it's his job. At least, that's always been my impression from watching him. It's where any power he generates comes from, and what he constantly falls back on for stability. His transitions from edge to edge are...shaky, and relatively infrequent for what i'd like to see. Like i said, once he gets going in a straight line, he gets going just fine, but he lacks in explosive change of direction ability, balance and agility in his skating, and the ability to really lean into things. Along with that sort of "plodding" heavy feet quality. It's not an extreme thing, but it's definitely noticeable imo.

Maybe it sounds like i'm being overly harsh on him, and that's not really my intention. I like Bleackley. He'd be a solid pick, and his skating isn't a dealbreaker by any means. It's just...not great as a whole, and for me that's worth valuing in my ranking of him. McCann may be missing something in terms of consistency, but he flashes high end abilities beyond what i've seen from Bleackley, and has the better toolset. I'd take a chance on that over the "consistent effort" of a guy like Bleackley that still only gets him to a similar level overall. There's "upside" there. Might be a red herring, but worst case...he can't put it all together consistently and i still don't think he projects any worse than Bleackley, even if slightly more frustrating.

Either guy though, i would be beyond extremely surprised if they're there at #36. McCann to me is a just inside the top-20 guy, while Bleackley is a mid-20s type of prospect to me. Heck, i like Bleackley better than i did Gaunce as a prospect, largely because of the more direct and aggressive way he plays, and we all knew Gaunce wasn't falling out of the 1st round.

 

[ahmon]

just my 2 cents. I watch McCann and he has tunnel vision.

Skates well, hard shot but little upside IMO. I remember people around here keep including him in the top 10, and I was shocked.

Bleackley is quite a bit smarter, but he is slightly undersized.

Push comes to shove I take Bleackley(higher hockey IQ) but both are only great value in the 2nd IMO.

 

[biturbo19]

just my 2 cents. I watch McCann and he has tunnel vision.

Skates well, hard shot but little upside IMO. I remember people around here keep including him in the top 10, and I was shocked.

Bleackley is quite a bit smarter, but he is slightly undersized.

Push comes to shove I take Bleackley(higher hockey IQ) but both are only great value in the 2nd IMO.

Bleackley is "slightly undersized"? Compared to what? Stonehenge? Zdeno Chara? The Empire State Building?

as a Hockey Player, Bleackley's size is one of his advantages over some others. He's at least as big, if not bigger than McCann, though it's too close to really matter to me much. Both have very "average" size. More than enough really.

 

[The Iron Goalie]

just my 2 cents. I watch McCann and he has tunnel vision.

Skates well, hard shot but little upside IMO. I remember people around here keep including him in the top 10, and I was shocked.

Bleackley is quite a bit smarter, but he is slightly undersized.

Push comes to shove I take Bleackley(higher hockey IQ) but both are only great value in the 2nd IMO.

On Bleackleys height... He measured 6'1, and almost 200 lbs...not really undersized if you ask me.

 

[thefeebster]

Bleackley tends to ride his inside edges like it's his job. At least, that's always been my impression from watching him. It's where any power he generates comes from, and what he constantly falls back on for stability. His transitions from edge to edge are...shaky, and relatively infrequent for what i'd like to see. Like i said, once he gets going in a straight line, he gets going just fine, but he lacks in explosive change of direction ability, balance and agility in his skating, and the ability to really lean into things. Along with that sort of "plodding" heavy feet quality. It's not an extreme thing, but it's definitely noticeable imo.

Maybe it sounds like i'm being overly harsh on him, and that's not really my intention. I like Bleackley. He'd be a solid pick, and his skating isn't a dealbreaker by any means. It's just...not great as a whole, and for me that's worth valuing in my ranking of him. McCann may be missing something in terms of consistency, but he flashes high end abilities beyond what i've seen from Bleackley, and has the better toolset. I'd take a chance on that over the "consistent effort" of a guy like Bleackley that still only gets him to a similar level overall. There's "upside" there. Might be a red herring, but worst case...he can't put it all together consistently and i still don't think he projects any worse than Bleackley, even if slightly more frustrating.

Either guy though, i would be beyond extremely surprised if they're there at #36. McCann to me is a just inside the top-20 guy, while Bleackley is a mid-20s type of prospect to me. Heck, i like Bleackley better than i did Gaunce as a prospect, largely because of the more direct and aggressive way he plays, and we all knew Gaunce wasn't falling out of the 1st round.

I can't say i agree about the edgework; he is very balanced, doesn't fall over a lot compared to say Pollock, who is a guy who i'd considered unbalanced, but correctable. What skater doesn't favour their inside edges to their outside? Inside edges are definitely what most skaters fall back on for stability. Again, don't see many issues that can't be corrected, very similar to Horvat's skating.

I don't think McCann's infrequent flashes of skill are unlike Bleackley's. Their skill level is relatively similar, IMO. McCann with the better shot and release, but Bleackley with the better vision and perhaps a more accurate shot. But as I mentioned there are many other qualities why i like Bleackley over McCann, a consistent effort level is only one of them.

@Bleach, when i said one on one moves, I don't necessarily mean dangles like a Ho-Sang per se, but like a quick fake and he cuts around a defender, works very well.

 

[Canucks LB]

Wait.....It's EEEEEEEEEEELers. Not "elllllllllerrrrs".

I hate his name.

 

[biturbo19]

I can't say i agree about the edgework; he is very balanced, doesn't fall over a lot compared to say Pollock, who is a guy who i'd considered unbalanced, but correctable. What skater doesn't favour their inside edges to their outside? Inside edges are definitely what most skaters fall back on for stability. Again, don't see many issues that can't be corrected, very similar to Horvat's skating.

I don't think McCann's infrequent flashes of skill are unlike Bleackley's. Their skill level is relatively similar, IMO. McCann with the better shot and release, but Bleackley with the better vision and perhaps a more accurate shot. But as I mentioned there are many other qualities why i like Bleackley over McCann, a consistent effort level is only one of them.

@Bleach, when i said one on one moves, I don't necessarily mean dangles like a Ho-Sang per se, but like a quick fake and he cuts around a defender, works very well.

I guess we're just not going to agree on that. But to my eyes, there are some issues with Bleackley in that regard. They're not nail in the coffin type issues, but they're there nonetheless.

It's not that "inside edges" are bad by any means, that's obviously the most "stable" platform and most players use that platform heavily. It's more in the degree to which Bleackley relies on them for generating power, stability, momentum, everything. And the fact that he seems to spend the bulk of his game on BOTH inside edges. And he doesn't seem to consistently transition between edges cleanly and aggressively. It's often a bit...tentative, waiting until he's got that other inside edge planted to really shift the weight.

Easiest clear example i can think of to clearly express what i'm getting at visually is when you see him "driiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiive to the net" -Doc Emrick. When you see an elite skater like Virtanen drive to the net, he's powering through the whole thing and exploding off both legs, and inside and outside edges equally. When you see Bleackley "driiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiive to the net" -Doc Emrick, he often defaults to a "stability platform" riding both inside edges. He's not powering through it, he's riding it out. There's a time an place for that, and you'll see everyone do that including Virtanen, but to me, that's where Bleackley looks comfortable and what he defaults to even when it's not the "best option". And it's not just in that instance, it's a general tendency throughout his game, in open spaces, driving a lane, or in short areas alike. You see him loop back around on a breakout from his own zone, he somewhat tentatively loops around and as soon as he's pointed in the right direction, then he really accelerates.

I mean, we're talking about 1st round NHL prospects here...it's bigtime nitpicking. That's the name of the game. But it's something that has always stuck with me when i've seen Bleackley. I know you've probably watched a lot more of Bleackley than i have, and have a lot more film archived on him...but i would be curious to see how you feel about his skating when re-watching for what i'm talking about.

I guess i can't reinforce enough that it doesn't mean i hate him as a prospect. I just favour the great skater and better shooter in McCann by...a margin.

 

[biturbo19]

Wait.....It's EEEEEEEEEEELers. Not "elllllllllerrrrs".

I hate his name.

I heard if you throw salt on him, he shrivels up and dies in the playoffs.

 

[LiquidSnake]

Wait.....It's EEEEEEEEEEELers. Not "elllllllllerrrrs".

I hate his name.

He'd also be a good pick but I see about 3% chance of the canucks taking him based on what they've been saying.

 

[LiquidSnake]

I also believe that the Canucks are in the right draft spot (6) for Florida to potentially strike a deal with.

Ehlers or Nylander is almost 90% guaranteed to be there and we're sandwiched by 2 eastern teams that they may be hesitant to deal with.

Just depends what the asking price is.

I'd be somewhat disappointed if we got #1 and took Reinhart but that's just solely based on personal preference.