2014 NHL Re-Draft

[Leaf19]

Lol are you ****ing kidding me? Nylander was totally **** in the WJC. He was skating around like a total snob the whole tournament, thinking he could do everything by himself. I'm from Sweden and i've NEVER seen such an egoistic guy in the WJC. You should have seen the critics he faced here in Sweden. I will also never forget what he said going into the 3rd period against Slovakia, when Sweden were down by a couple of goals. "I wanna score". Grade A character right there ladies and gentlemen!

Only a Leafs fan would say that only McDavid was better than Nylander, joke of the ****ing year. I would say Nylander probably had 1 good game in the whole tournament, against Czech Republic. The rest of the tournament, he was pretty much invisible for the major part of the games, making a good play here and there, and every now and then he tried to make his famous solo-rushes, failing miserably, letting his team down. Nylander wasn't even Swedens best player in the tournament. All he did was setting up Forsling on the PP, with Holmstrom doing an amazing job in front of the net. Forsling, Holmstrom and Soderstrom were all better, to mention just a few. I was also impressed with Jens Looke, considering the role he had.

Nylander's WJC was a major disappointment. Anyone who actually watched the games,and not just the stats, knows that. Maybe he couldn't handle the pressure playing in Toronto, i don't know.

I think you need to refresh your memory



Watch that video and then re-read your post.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

The WJC's mean nothing, please stop using them in these threads

 

[Leaf19]

The WJC's mean nothing, please stop using them in these threads

I just used a video that completely contradicts that guys post. But I agree, WJC doesn't mean much.

 

[Community]

I agree with this, its way too early. LD could be the best forward in the draft for all we know at this point, or he might have been picked 10 spots to early. Nurse could be a #1D, or just a solid top 4D. None of this is set in stone for at least a few more years, and even then, you should always wait 4-5 years after drafting.

I guess people are going to say some bold things participating in a 2014 re-draft not even one year later, but its just your opinions. Seeing people treat their opinions as facts that others should accept, despite the early judgement, are the ones I tend label as worthless.

Right now i see the top 5 as:

Ekblad
Bennett
Reinhart
Draisaitl
Dal Colle

To me Bennett is the only one who has been impressive enough to warrant any movement at this time, and i was high on him before he went to one of my least favorite teams. Ehlers and Nylander have been great in their +1 years, but so have everyone that was picked ahead of them.

I'm fine with people ranking Nylanders/Ehlers out of the top 5 still (I think both players had very similar years and should be ranked A/B with each other... Although I still prefer Nylander's year since it was against AHL/SHL, but that may be the Leaf fan in me), but everybody in the top 5 did not have great years.


Reinhart and Draisaitl both had poor years relative to their draft years IMO. While I'm not saying they had bad enough years to force them out of being top 5 in their draft class, I definitely don't agree with saying they had great years.

Reinhart went from a 1.75ppg pace in his draft year to a 1.38ppg. His playoff production was 9pts in 7 games this year while last year he had 23pts in 13 games.

Draisaitl played good when he was put back in jrs with almost the exact same ppg as last year, but was very underwhelming in the NHL. He's obviously a good prospect, but it's at least a slightly disappointing year from him.

Dal Colle/Bennett have definitely had their ups and downs (injuries and Dal Colle getting cut from World Jrs), but overall had good years. Ekblad obviously had a fantastic year.

 

[ZeroPT*]

The WJC's mean nothing, please stop using them in these threads

apart from small sample sizes, why does a tournament where the top young players go head to head, meaningless? Is it blown out of proportion because it's the only way people get to see prospects and they take it as gospel but to say it means nothing is wrong.

 

[Community]

apart from small sample sizes, why does a tournament where the top young players go head to head, meaningless? Is it blown out of proportion because it's the only way people get to see prospects and they take it as gospel but to say it means nothing is wrong.

Agreed... It should be just another set of games to help judge a player's potential, but not determine whether they are good or not. It's part of the season and while a prospect shouldn't be doomed because of their play, it's nice to see top prospects play against other players their same age in an elimination tournament. It helps to gauge where they are relative to their peers, especially when comparing players playing that come from different leagues (SHL, KHL, NCAA, CHL, etc.). Like you said, it gets more hype because people see the top players head to head and it gets used too much to say player X or Y is good/bad, but it's still a useful tool to help figure out a prospect's potential.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

apart from small sample sizes, why does a tournament where the top young players go head to head, meaningless? Is it blown out of proportion because it's the only way people get to see prospects and they take it as gospel but to say it means nothing is wrong.

that's exactly why it doesn't matter
look at the award history of the event
it means nothing because prospects do not all develop at the same rate, everyone has different learning curves

 

[DFF]

I think you need to refresh your memory



Watch that video and then re-read your post.

Against the SUI? Does that mean much?

 

[McDoused]

I'm fine with people ranking Nylanders/Ehlers out of the top 5 still (I think both players had very similar years and should be ranked A/B with each other... Although I still prefer Nylander's year since it was against AHL/SHL, but that may be the Leaf fan in me), but everybody in the top 5 did not have great years.


Reinhart and Draisaitl both had poor years relative to their draft years IMO. While I'm not saying they had bad enough years to force them out of being top 5 in their draft class, I definitely don't agree with saying they had great years.

Reinhart went from a 1.75ppg pace in his draft year to a 1.38ppg. His playoff production was 9pts in 7 games this year while last year he had 23pts in 13 games.

Draisaitl played good when he was put back in jrs with almost the exact same ppg as last year, but was very underwhelming in the NHL. He's obviously a good prospect, but it's at least a slightly disappointing year from him.

Dal Colle/Bennett have definitely had their ups and downs (injuries and Dal Colle getting cut from World Jrs), but overall had good years. Ekblad obviously had a fantastic year.

If you are only going to use stat lines to measure progression, I think you need to re-evaluate your scouting process.

 

[Leaf19]

Against the SUI? Does that mean much?

Clearly you didn't even watch the video since only the thumbnail is against SUI

It's a compliation of Nylander's plays during the tourney against pretty much every team and it shows how far off that posters comments were. Nylander had an amazing WJC. Whether that means something or not, can't discredit that fact.

 

[ulvvf]

Lol are you ****ing kidding me? Nylander was totally **** in the WJC. He was skating around like a total snob the whole tournament, thinking he could do everything by himself. I'm from Sweden and i've NEVER seen such an egoistic guy in the WJC. You should have seen the critics he faced here in Sweden. I will also never forget what he said going into the 3rd period against Slovakia, when Sweden were down by a couple of goals. "I wanna score". Grade A character right there ladies and gentlemen!

Only a Leafs fan would say that only McDavid was better than Nylander, joke of the ****ing year. I would say Nylander probably had 1 good game in the whole tournament, against Czech Republic. The rest of the tournament, he was pretty much invisible for the major part of the games, making a good play here and there, and every now and then he tried to make his famous solo-rushes, failing miserably, letting his team down. Nylander wasn't even Swedens best player in the tournament. All he did was setting up Forsling on the PP, with Holmstrom doing an amazing job in front of the net. Forsling, Holmstrom and Soderstrom were all better, to mention just a few. I was also impressed with Jens Looke, considering the role he had.

Nylander's WJC was a major disappointment. Anyone who actually watched the games,and not just the stats, knows that. Maybe he couldn't handle the pressure playing in Toronto, i don't know.

I hardly think you watch the games very carefully, I think you where just annoyed by his personality. Because he was dominating like crazy. Also 10p as a underages in a low scoring team is very good. But Nylander certainly have his share of haters (I would say most of the haters are from sweden) because of his personality, but saying he was not good in WJC 20 is just ridiculous, you need to re view the games with a more open and less hateries.

Forsling? He did get the points, but he didnt have a good tournament otherwise, very many mistake from Forsling and nothing special about his game at all in that tournament. But he did have good shoot that translated to a lot of goals. Aho was overall much much better than him.

Btw, WJC 20 is certainly a good measure, but nothing is certain and it is just part of the equation. But saying it is not a good measure to evaluate players in when that is the only tournament the best juniors play in against each other is weird.

 

[Atomos2]

The WJC's mean nothing, please stop using them in these threads

Maybe by itself, but what about the SHL, WJC and AHL. Would they mean something all together?

 

[ZeroPT*]

that's exactly why it doesn't matter
look at the award history of the event
it means nothing because prospects do not all develop at the same rate, everyone has different learning curves

then by that stretch the memorial cup doesn't matter, small sample sizes and all. Is the WJC blown way out of proportion? yes. But to say it's completely irrelevant because of sample size is frankly just plain wrong.

EDIT: The point is, games/tourneys where the top prospects in the world go head to head, is a good measure of potential and ability. People take it as gospel and hype the tournament out of control, yes but it does matter and it's a good indicator.

 

[Le Golie]

that's exactly why it doesn't matter
look at the award history of the event
it means nothing because prospects do not all develop at the same rate, everyone has different learning curves

Actually it does matter to people who understand how to evaluate players in the context of their age, competition and team.

If you don't understand that, and think the awards history reflects player development, then you're right, WJC shouldn't matter to you.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

then by that stretch the memorial cup doesn't matter, small sample sizes and all. Is the WJC blown way out of proportion? yes. But to say it's completely irrelevant because of sample size is frankly just plain wrong.

EDIT: The point is, games/tourneys where the top prospects in the world go head to head, is a good measure of potential and ability. People take it as gospel and hype the tournament out of control, yes but it does matter and it's a good indicator.

except history shows that it is not, lots of players have had great WJC tourney's and been total duds as prospects

 

[LT]

1. Aaron Ekblad, D
2. Sam Reinhart, C
3. Sam Bennett, C
4. Leon Draisaitl, C
5. Michael Dal Colle, W
6. Nikolaj Ehlers, W
7. Jake Virtanen, W
8. Anthony DeAngelo, D
9. William Nylander, W
10. Julius Honka, D

 

[Sundinisagod]

except history shows that it is not, lots of players have had great WJC tourney's and been total duds as prospects

Usually the older players in the tourney though right?

 

[bobbyt911]

1. Aaron Ekblad, D
2. Sam Reinhart, C
3. Sam Bennett, C
4. Leon Draisaitl, C
5. Michael Dal Colle, W
6. Nikolaj Ehlers, W
7. Jake Virtanen, W
8. Anthony DeAngelo, D
9. William Nylander, W
10. Julius Honka, D

thats an interesting list

 

[Black Noise]

1. Ekblad
2. Reinhart
3. Draisaitl
4. Bennett
5. Dal Colle
6. Virtanen
7. Fluery
8. Nylander
9. Ehlers
10. Ritchie

 

[Rufio65*]

Ekblad
Bennett
Dal Colle
Reinhart
Ritchie
DeAngelo
Larkin
Sanheim
Ehlers
Virtanen

 

[Whileee]

1. Ekblad
2. Reinhart
3. Draisaitl
4. Bennett
5. Dal Colle
6. Virtanen
7. Fluery
8. Nylander
9. Ehlers
10. Ritchie

We get it... another full season of observing these prospects much more closely than before they were drafted hasn't given us any further information about their relative potential.

 

[Rufio65*]

Oops forgot about Draisatl**

Ekblad
Bennett
Dal Colle
Reinhart
Ritchie
DeAngelo
Draisatl
Larkin
Sanheim
Ehlers

 

[Whileee]

Ekblad
Bennett
Dal Colle
Reinhart
Ritchie
DeAngelo
Larkin
Sanheim
Ehlers
Virtanen

Hmmmm...

On what basis does DeAngelo pass Ehlers, based on their respective seasons? DeAngelo played a ton an an absolute offensive juggernaut. He ended up with points on about 36% of his team's goals. Just a bit above Chris Bigras, as an example.

I know he's a D, but he's pretty small and has some question marks in terms of how he would translate pure offense to today's NHL from defense.

 

[Community]

If you are only going to use stat lines to measure progression, I think you need to re-evaluate your scouting process.

I try to watch as many games as possible for top prospects, although I don't have the time or resources to watch all of their games.

I watched a fair amount of Draisaitl's games when he was in EDM and found him pretty underwhelming. Reinhart had a MUCH lower ppg than his previous year. Obviously it's not everything, but that's significant enough to be a bit of a concern. Do you really think Draisaitl or Reinhart had great years?

 

[bobbyt911]

Oops forgot about Draisatl**

Ekblad
Bennett
Dal Colle
Reinhart
Ritchie
DeAngelo
Draisatl
Larkin
Sanheim
Ehlers

also forgot Nylander