Prospect Info: 2018 Draft: 1st pick: Evan Bouchard (D) - Sent back to London (11/02/18)

[780il]

It amazes me people cant see how much Bouchard's game changes the dynamic of our defence. I have a very very hard time sending him back simply because of that. Also theres the fact he'd be going to London which doesn't focus at all on defence.

Edit: If he played in the WHL for a team like Red Deer, the decision would be much tougher. As at least at the junior level he could focus on developing his defensive game.

Thats why I dont see a point in sending him down. He needs to learn defense, the best place to do that for him rn is the AHL. Since thats not an option we need to keep him up and get Yawney to work his magic. We get point production from him that we sorely need while developing his game. Sending him to junior does nothing for him except give him a ton of time and space to do things, time and space he wont have in the NHL.

 

[Raab]

Thats why I dont see a point in sending him down. He needs to learn defense, the best place to do that for him rn is the AHL. Since thats not an option we need to keep him up and get Yawney to work his magic. We get point production from him that we sorely need while developing his game. Sending him to junior does nothing for him except give him a ton of time and space to do things, time and space he wont have in the NHL.

Yep exactly. He wont learn anything in London.

 

[Bank Shot]

How much Bouchard learns in juniors, the AHL, or the NHL is on Bouchard.

Plenty of Norris Trophy winners played their post draft season in major junior.

Including players you might remember such as Duncan Keith, PK Subban, Scott Niedermayer, and Zdeno Chara.

 

[belair]

Yep exactly. He wont learn anything in London.

He'll get a chance to lead a Championship calibre London team and likely play in the WJ tournament for Team Canada. This kid's not Ray Bourque. He's got plenty left to learn in terms of playing his position. Besides, why waste a developmental year just to burn a year off his entry level deal to help prop up a powerplay that shouldn't have issues scoring anyway?

 

[Bryanbryoil]

It amazes me people cant see how much Bouchard's game changes the dynamic of our defence. I have a very very hard time sending him back simply because of that. Also theres the fact he'd be going to London which doesn't focus at all on defence.

Edit: If he played in the WHL for a team like Red Deer, the decision would be much tougher. As at least then he could focus on developing his defensive game at the junior level.

His transition and offensive game are top notch, anyone with a pair of eyes should be able to see that like you and I have. The questions that I and a number of others have are:

1) Will he produce more offensively than he'll give up defensively?
2) Can we afford to have a young D costing us games especially early in the season in a season where we must get out of the gates strong?
3) Will it hurt his confidence if his gaffes keep ending up in the back of our net?
4) What are the cap and expansion implications if he plays more than 9 games this season (more concerned about future cap implications than current implications).
5) What is his learning curve like, does he absorb coaching like a sponge or does it take him a bit to get concepts, learn about proper positioning, etc.

He needs to show better than he did in his last game if he is going to help this team win games.

 

[Raab]

He'll get a chance to lead a Championship calibre London team and likely play in the WJ tournament for Team Canada. This kid's not Ray Bourque. He's got plenty left to learn in terms of playing his position. Besides, why waste a developmental year just to burn a year off his entry level deal to help prop up a powerplay that shouldn't have issues scoring anyway?

London plays a flat out offensive style. He's not going to learn defensive positioning in that environment. He'd actually be better off getting traded. And he can still be sent to the WJC's if he stays with the team. That would actually help him develop.

People should look at the dmen London has developed in it's history. Pretty concerning considering the amount of talent that has gone through that organization. Especially when you contrast it against a team like Kelowna.

 

[LaGu]

I'd try out a Klefbom and Bouchard pair, but listening to Todd it sounds very much like they will go back to 16/17 pair and they count on them being the top dogs.

Klefbom had a very interesting stretch playing with Schultz before he got the staph infection. At the time (seems eons ago) he was the one helping Schultz out defensively, as some here may remember, and credited to an extent with Schultz looking better than he had for years. It was the time when Klefbom was called an offensive black hole, but then he started nudging at Schultz for PP time.

For whatever reason that worked, and I think that this last season has clouded the judgement of some because before this one he wasn't really considered weak defensively. Maybe not strong, but not weak except for the occassional bad stretch of games (which I think is fairly justified for a young D in development).

Klefbom Bouchard could work imo.

 

[780il]

I'd try out a Klefbom and Bouchard pair, but listening to Todd it sounds very much like they will go back to 16/17 pair and they count on them being the top dogs.

Klefbom had a very interesting stretch playing with Schultz before he got the staph infection. At the time (seems eons ago) he was the one helping Schultz out defensively, as some here may remember, and credited to an extent with Schultz looking better than he had for years. It was the time when Klefbom was called an offensive black hole, but then he started nudging at Schultz for PP time.

For whatever reason that worked, and I think that this last season has clouded the judgement of some because before this one he wasn't really considered weak defensively. Maybe not strong, but not weak except for the occassional bad stretch of games (which I think is fairly justified for a young D in development).

Klefbom Bouchard could work imo.

Having Nurse-Larsson as the shutdown top pair and then pairing Klef with Bouch is another decent option. Yeah, it could work..

 

[MessierII]

I'd try out a Klefbom and Bouchard pair, but listening to Todd it sounds very much like they will go back to 16/17 pair and they count on them being the top dogs.

Klefbom had a very interesting stretch playing with Schultz before he got the staph infection. At the time (seems eons ago) he was the one helping Schultz out defensively, as some here may remember, and credited to an extent with Schultz looking better than he had for years. It was the time when Klefbom was called an offensive black hole, but then he started nudging at Schultz for PP time.

For whatever reason that worked, and I think that this last season has clouded the judgement of some because before this one he wasn't really considered weak defensively. Maybe not strong, but not weak except for the occassional bad stretch of games (which I think is fairly justified for a young D in development).

Klefbom Bouchard could work imo.

I don’t see it. Klefbom needs someone looking out for him because he makes some bad giveaways and bad defensive reads frequently. This is just a bad situation for both players.

 

[LaGu]

I don’t see it. Klefbom needs someone looking out for him because he makes some bad giveaways and bad defensive reads frequently. This is just a bad situation for both players.

I'd like to see it just in case

As I said, playing with Schultz his misstakes were not that glaring imo. He was considered the steady D which Schultz could lean on. Maybe in that role, i.e. with that responsability, he plays a bit differently. With Larsson he could roam free, maybe too much.

I don't know, just spitballing, but I think I'd give those guys a shot, at least once in the pre-season.

 

[MessierII]

I'd like to see it just in case

As I said, playing with Schultz his misstakes were not that glaring imo. He was considered the steady D which Schultz could lean on. Maybe in that role, i.e. with that responsability, he plays a bit differently. With Larsson he could roam free, maybe too much.

I don't know, just spitballing, but I think I'd give those guys a shot, at least once in the pre-season.

I don’t know I remember that pairing getting lit up pretty bad in their own zone. That was the peak of the jultz.

 

[oobga]

Having Russel with him is not good imo. If TMac is hell bent on having him on the third pair and not with Nurse in the top 4, then I would put Russel with Nurse. Then have Bouch on the bottom pair with one of Garrison/Gravel who can both somewhat get the puck out and wont negatively affect his stats.

Yeah, agree. I think Russell-Nurse was actually a really good pair last year. A more mobile D might actually be a better compliment for Russell. I think Russell-Larsson was one of the worst pairs we've seen these last couple years. Larsson just didn't have the mobility or puck moving ability to compensate for Russell.

Just in general, I think you really need someone that's on their game in terms of transporting or moving the puck quickly with Russell. If that isn't happening on the other side, it's just not gonna be happening enough to keep that pair from spending a lot of time in their own end. Nurse was really on his game in his time with Russell last year and it went well. As much as Russell can't move the puck, if his partner is moving it well, Russell is still good at doing his thing and eliminating the high quality chances against with his positioning and shot blocking. Nurse may be up to the task again this year, and it would definitely be nice to have a more balanced D to pair with Bouchard.

 

[PBandJ]

London plays a flat out offensive style. He's not going to learn defensive positioning in that environment. He'd actually be better off getting traded. And he can still be sent to the WJC's if he stays with the team. That would actually help him develop.

People should look at the dmen London has developed in it's history. Pretty concerning considering the amount of talent that has gone through that organization. Especially when you contrast it against a team like Kelowna.

Bingo.

London doesn't give two shits about what's best for the Oilers. They'll play him 3o minutes a night in a full bore offensive style and he won't learn anything about defending.

If he came out of Kelowna, I'd send him back in a heartbeat. But going back to London might be one of the worst things for his development.

 

[Fourier]

One thing Bouchard has going for him is that he has already played three years in th OHL and last year was like 1 1/4 years because he played so many minutes. Typically a guy who plays those kind of minutes in his draft year with his skill is a top 5 draft choice.

I actually agree that I don't think he learns much on the defensive side in London. They look like they are really loading up this year. I think the decision with Bouchard comes down to whether or not having him in the Oilers line-up gives them a better chance to win.

 

[McYoungGuns]

How much Bouchard learns in juniors, the AHL, or the NHL is on Bouchard.

Plenty of Norris Trophy winners played their post draft season in major junior.

Including players you might remember such as Duncan Keith, PK Subban, Scott Niedermayer, and Zdeno Chara.

Keith was leaving Michigan state after 15 games and going to the whl, also drafted in the second round 54th overall, not sure how he's a comparable of Bouchards right out of the draft ?

Subban was drafted in the 2nd round 43rd, an offensive D man, id argue he learned nothing Defensively in the OHL and his point totals suffered, he spent his D+2 in the ohl as well, again not a comparable for 10th overall Bouchard

Chara was drafted in the 3rd as Defensive man that spot only one season in the whl... he was drafted out of Sol u20 and then joined the whl after he was drafted

Niedermayer is the only one you have a point with, he sticked around for the devils first 9 games and played the last 4 of those 9, putting up no points

 

[Up the Irons]

typical Oilers. blatantly leave a position open so that ur 18 yr old high draft pick easily wins the job.

lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[Bank Shot]

Keith was leaving Michigan state after 15 games and going to the whl, also drafted in the second round 54th overall, not sure how he's a comparable of Bouchards right out of the draft ?

Subban was drafted in the 2nd round 43rd, an offensive D man, id argue he learned nothing Defensively in the OHL and his point totals suffered, he spent his D+2 in the ohl as well, again not a comparable for 10th overall Bouchard

Chara was drafted in the 3rd as Defensive man that spot only one season in the whl... he was drafted out of Sol u20 and then joined the whl after he was drafted

Niedermayer is the only one you have a point with, he sticked around for the devils first 9 games and played the last 4 of those 9, putting up no points

Here's all the defencemen drafted 5-10 since 2000 that stepped into the NHL directly after their draft season:

Luke Schenn- 70 games. 14 points. -12 +/-
Rasmus Ristolainen- 34 games. 4 points. -15 +/-
Noah Hanifin- 79 games. 22 points. -14 +/-

That's the whole list.

None of those seasons I feel were particularly note worthy. Not really worth burning a year of ELC for any of them.

What makes Bouchard different from every other defenceman drafted 5-10 in the last twenty years?

 

[snipes]

I think Russell-Bouchard could actually be a pretty good third pairing.

Me too.

Nurse - Bouchard in the future but for young Evan having Russell as a stabilizer would be good. Russell is very good in his own zone, he might not have a great corsi but his gf/ga ratio is good because he positions himself well and battles like crazy,

 

[Faelko]

typical Oilers. blatantly leave a position open so that ur 18 yr old high draft pick easily wins the job.

lather, rinse, repeat.

I think the Sekera injury had something to do with it, not that he was the PP QB we need but those are expensive apparently. The rumoured price on Faulk is ridiculous and there's some here that wouldn't take him for free.

 

[Raab]

Here's all the defencemen drafted 5-10 since 2000 that stepped into the NHL directly after their draft season:

Luke Schenn- 70 games. 14 points. -12 +/-
Rasmus Ristolainen- 34 games. 4 points. -15 +/-
Noah Hanifin- 79 games. 22 points. -14 +/-

That's the whole list.

None of those seasons I feel were particularly note worthy. Not really worth burning a year of ELC for any of them.

What makes Bouchard different from every other defenceman drafted 5-10 in the last twenty years?

How many of those dmen led the OHL in scoring by a dman?

 

[Bank Shot]

How many of those dmen led the OHL in scoring by a dman?

What's your point?

 

[Raab]

What's your point?

Im saying your sample size is to small. Why not include all defenceman taken in the top 20? Then focus on the ones that scored over a PPG?

 

[Bank Shot]

Im saying your sample size is to small. Why not include all defenceman taken in the top 20? Then focus on the ones that scored over a PPG?

How about you find me all the defencemen that won the league MVP in major junior in their draft +1 because they were "too good for juniors" and had "nothing left to learn there".

 

[Snippit]

Yep exactly. He wont learn anything in London.

He has tons to learn at the junior level. He still makes a lot of mistakes defensively against his own peers.

Edmonton should send him back and tell him to focus on becoming more solid in his own end.

 

[McYoungGuns]

Here's all the defencemen drafted 5-10 since 2000 that stepped into the NHL directly after their draft season:

Luke Schenn- 70 games. 14 points. -12 +/-
Rasmus Ristolainen- 34 games. 4 points. -15 +/-
Noah Hanifin- 79 games. 22 points. -14 +/-

That's the whole list.

None of those seasons I feel were particularly note worthy. Not really worth burning a year of ELC for any of them.

What makes Bouchard different from every other defenceman drafted 5-10 in the last twenty years?

you're ignoring Fowler, who is more comparable, both were supposed to go higher and both are high offensive D from ohl