Prospect Info: 2020 NHL Draft 25th Overall - Justin Barron, RD

[Northern Avs Fan]

The more I read about Barron... The more I feel ambivalent about the pick. From what I can tell, all the things that drive us nuts about Zadorov are present in his game. Losing focus in the D zone, things like that. Those kind of IQ issues don't bode well for hockey at higher levels where the structure only gets more involved (and more important).

I wish I had time to watch prospects again so I could actually judge for myself. Maybe I'll be able to find some footage somewhere that isn't just a highlight reel.

From the clips I’ve seen he’s light years ahead of Zadorov in terms of skating and moving the puck.

In terms of defence, I really have no idea. But, most defenceman at that age aren’t that good defensively.

 

[MarkT]

The more I read about Barron... The more I feel ambivalent about the pick. From what I can tell, all the things that drive us nuts about Zadorov are present in his game. Losing focus in the D zone, things like that. Those kind of IQ issues don't bode well for hockey at higher levels where the structure only gets more involved (and more important).

I wish I had time to watch prospects again so I could actually judge for myself. Maybe I'll be able to find some footage somewhere that isn't just a highlight reel.

What I like about this though is they got a guy with the kind of physical skills that are very hard to teach, whereas hockey IQ can certainly be taught unless the kid is literally low IQ. I love big Z, but he's never struck me as above average intelligence. Graves also doesn't strike me as a deep thinker. So my hope with Barron is that over time he learns how to behave in the D zone and what to do when he has the puck.

 

[John Mandalorian]

What I like about this though is they got a guy with the kind of physical skills that are very hard to teach, whereas hockey IQ can certainly be taught unless the the kid is literally low IQ. I love big Z, but he's never struck me as above average intelligence. Graves also doesn't strike me as a deep thinker. So my hope with Barron is that over time he learns how to behave in the D zone and what to do when he has the puck.

People shouldn’t underrate his shot.

 

[Patagonia]

Barron was a pre-season Top 10 pick and fell to mid-2nd round choice. Fall in rankings could be the Blood Clot, poor team performance or having an off draft year. Next choice is 3rd - 75th and most likely gone well before having another opportunity. CBJ drafted a player completely off the Board.

AVs have a choice of forwards, but really liked this pick. Timmins can't be relied upon after so many setbacks, he could moved or never reach his potential. Barron is the best available RHD and due to a poor draft year, became available.

He fits and balances the character of the team, outstanding skater, tremendous two-way and plays a disciplined defensive game. More than enough DMen to carry the offensive scoring with Makar, Byram and Girard. Potential is 2nd or 3rd line pairing which is the need of the team.

 

[McMetal]

What I like about this though is they got a guy with the kind of physical skills that are very hard to teach, whereas hockey IQ can certainly be taught unless the kid is literally low IQ. I love big Z, but he's never struck me as above average intelligence. Graves also doesn't strike me as a deep thinker. So my hope with Barron is that over time he learns how to behave in the D zone and what to do when he has the puck.

Scouts who pounded the table for Zadorov in Buffalo said the same thing. So did we when we traded for him. I love him too but you have to be honest about the fact that he's never going to be more than a bottom pair guy who sometimes plays like a way better player despite having all the physical tools to be Chara 2.0.

I hope I'm wrong. Like I said, I haven't actually watched him hardly at all. But seeing what people who did watch him had to say was disheartening.

 

[MarkT]

Another thing I like about this pick, is given we already have Makar, Girard, and hopefully Byram on the team as point-producing defensemen, we need guys who aren't going to put up big offensive numbers, and thus aren't going to demand huge contracts. If we're talking purely about future team needs, shut-down defensemen who can skate and make a good first pass are high on the list.

 

[Islay1989]

Hockey IQ cannot be taught. Certainly not to an extent that would make a huge difference. Either you can process things at high enough speed to function in the NHL or you can't. Cognitive ability doesn't magically improve just like that.

 

[MarkT]

Scouts who pounded the table for Zadorov in Buffalo said the same thing. So did we when we traded for him. I love him too but you have to be honest about the fact that he's never going to be more than a bottom pair guy who sometimes plays like a way better player despite having all the physical tools to be Chara 2.0.

I hope I'm wrong. Like I said, I haven't actually watched him hardly at all. But seeing what people who did watch him had to say was disheartening.

The big difference between Zadorov and Chara is that Chara is a very smart guy. That's my point. If the player has tons of physical skill but isn't all that intelligent, they're unlikely to reach their full potential, especially playing a complex defensive system. Now, I don't know much about Barron. For all I know he's dumber than a sack of bricks, in which case I totally agree with your worries. But if he's a smart kid, he should, in theory, be able to improve his hockey IQ over time.

 

[MarkT]

Hockey IQ cannot be taught. Certainly not to an extent that would make a huge difference. Either you can process the thing at high enough speed to function in the NHL or you can't. Cognitive ability doesn't magically improve just like that.

Hockey IQ and regular IQ are not the same thing. Kerfoot went to Harvard. It doesn't mean he automatically knew where to be on the ice all the time or always made the smart play. It does me, however, that with the right coaching I'm confident Kerfoot to learn that.

 

[The Mars Volchenkov]

Scotia strong. Not a bad idea to draft a high ceiling, high character kid that will work out with Nate and Sid in the offseason.

Does every Nova Scotian get a golden key in the mail to these workouts the second they’re drafted?

 

[Islay1989]

Hockey IQ and regular IQ are not the same thing. Kerfoot went to Harvard. It doesn't mean he automatically knew where to be on the ice all the time or always made the smart play. It does me, however, that with the right coaching I'm confident Kerfoot to learn that.

No kidding. Good thing I didn't mention "regular IQ". Hockey IQ cannot be taught, what can be taught is how to react to certain patterns that happen in the game. The difference is that someone who can process the game will pick it up in an instant, the guys who have trouble processing it will need repetition after repetition before they pick it up, and hockey isn't a super repetitive game.

 

[MarkT]

No kidding. Good thing I didn't mention "regular IQ". Hockey IQ cannot be taught, what can be taught is how to react to certain patterns that happen in the game. The difference is that someone who can process the game will pick it up in an instant, the guys who have trouble processing it will need repetition after repetition before they pick it up, and hockey isn't a super repetitive game.

"how to react to certain patterns that happen in the game" Is literally how I define hockey IQ. We clearly have different definitions of the term.

 

[Islay1989]

"how to react to certain patterns that happen in the game" Is literally how I define hockey IQ. We clearly have different definitions of the term.

That's not IQ. IQ is the mark of how easy one can pick up things and adjust to them. Remembering what to do when someone shows you repeatedly is just not being daft and not a sign of good IQ. Every NHL player will learn the basics of the game, how to do this, how to do that. What separates good or even great ones is how they react in situations you can't repeat to no end, how they process things out of the norm, how they see the play unfolding, etc.

 

[MarkT]

That's not IQ. IQ is the mark of how easy one can pick up things and adjust to them. Remembering what to do when someone shows you repeatedly is just not being daft and not a sign of good IQ. Every NHL player will learn the basics of the game, how to do this, how to do that. What separates good or even great ones is how they react in situations you can't repeat to no end, how they process things out of the norm, how they see the play unfolding, etc.

I know what IQ is. I studied psychology. There's no point in arguing over a definition though. In my above comments, whenever I wrote 'Hockey IQ" please replace it in your head with "how to react to certain patterns that happen in the game" and see if you still disagree with me. If you do, then we have a genuine disagreement and can keep going with the discussion. If you don't, then all we really disagree with is the definition of the term "Hockey IQ", and semantic arguments are for the most part pointless and lead nowhere.

 

[McMetal]

Yeah, hockey IQ is about versatility and thinking on your feet, not remembering things you've been taught. This isn't the NFL where you just have to memorize dozens of plays and what your job is. Hockey is a dynamic game and players who can be unpredictable and creative in a split second are always going to have an advantage over someone who needs to take time to remember that Y always follows X. It even puts them at a disadvantage when somebody with high IQ follows X with Z or Q and they don't know how to react.

That being said though, I don't know that Barron has low hockey IQ necessarily. It seems like he just has a lack of focus sometimes, or even just "controller disconnected" moments in the D zone. Which, of course, calls to mind a certain lovable Russian goofball. I don't think Z is dumb, he just doesn't focus, and the Avs never managed to iron that flaw out of his game.

 

[PAZ]

"how to react to certain patterns that happen in the game" Is literally how I define hockey IQ. We clearly have different definitions of the term.

Hockey IQ isn't something that can be taught, either a player has it or they don't. Gretzky is the greatest player of all time because of his hockey IQ, he knew where the players and the puck were going to be before the play happened.

What can be taught is learning a system and learn players and teams tendencies, it's why players like Graves can look great in the regular season but suck in the playoffs. Grave couldn't read the play fast enough in more intense situations and be able to adapt when the other team made in-game adjustments. What Graves can potentially learn is how to play more safe and minimize his shortcomings, but many players can't take this step and why many end up just being bottom pairing defenseman.

 

[Balthazar]

I really like the fact that we picked a defenseman in the first round 3 times in the last 4 years.

 

[MarkT]

Yeah, hockey IQ is about versatility and thinking on your feet, not remembering things you've been taught. This isn't the NFL where you just have to memorize dozens of plays and what your job is. Hockey is a dynamic game and players who can be unpredictable and creative in a split second are always going to have an advantage over someone who needs to take time to remember that Y always follows X. It even puts them at a disadvantage when somebody with high IQ follows X with Z or Q and they don't know how to react.

Hockey IQ isn't something that can be taught, either a player has it or they don't. Gretzky is the greatest player of all time because of his hockey IQ, he knew where the players and the puck were going to be before the play happened.

What can be taught is learning a system and learn players and teams tendencies, it's why players like Graves can look great in the regular season but suck in the playoffs. Grave couldn't read the play fast enough in more intense situations and be able to adapt when the other team made in-game adjustments. What Graves can potentially learn is how to play more safe and minimize his shortcomings, but many players can't take this step and why many end up just being bottom pairing defenseman.

Right, so you both have a different definition of "hockey IQ" than I do. I clearly meant something different when I used the term.

Here's an article where the Penguins try to define it: What does it mean to have a high hockey IQ?

It's clearly a term with no one set definition so there's no point in arguing over what it means.

That being said though, I don't know that Barron has low hockey IQ necessarily. It seems like he just has a lack of focus sometimes, or even just "controller disconnected" moments in the D zone. Which, of course, calls to mind a certain lovable Russian goofball. I don't think Z is dumb, he just doesn't focus, and the Avs never managed to iron that flaw out of his game.

I don't think you can boil down Z's issues to just a lack of focus. I think he literally has issues with pattern-recognition and problem solving, which to me points to a lack of plain old regular IQ since they haven't improved with experience.

 

[Islay1989]

Yeah, hockey IQ is about versatility and thinking on your feet, not remembering things you've been taught. This isn't the NFL where you just have to memorize dozens of plays and what your job is. Hockey is a dynamic game and players who can be unpredictable and creative in a split second are always going to have an advantage over someone who needs to take time to remember that Y always follows X. It even puts them at a disadvantage when somebody with high IQ follows X with Z or Q and they don't know how to react.

That being said though, I don't know that Barron has low hockey IQ necessarily. It seems like he just has a lack of focus sometimes, or even just "controller disconnected" moments in the D zone. Which, of course, calls to mind a certain lovable Russian goofball. I don't think Z is dumb, he just doesn't focus, and the Avs never managed to iron that flaw out of his game.

Yeah. Z isn't dumb, he has trouble focusing. And a spot-on assessment by @PAZ. Graves is the dummy out of the two. Nikita can react fast enough, he actually relishes the challenge. I think a lot of his inconsistency comes from being too lackadaisical in the regular season and playing on cruise control. When he is focused he can be a very good #4D as we've seen in two playoffs straight. Graves just looks like a guy who has sensory overload when the tempo picks up. If we move one of them I sure hope it's Graves and not Zadorov.

 

[Jeff_Dyck_#1]

Avalanche scouting is a joke.

Watch Red Wings draft William Wallinder 32.

 

[henchman21]

Z is a dumb dumb. People just don’t want to admit it.

Barron doesn’t have elite sense, but he’s not dumb either. He has high end physical tools and a raw skill set that has top pairing potential. Like Byram, you look as his size/reach/skating and there is excellent potential to be very good defensively. He has to grow the mental side of the game. Offensively there are tools there, but he’s not a 40+ guy. 25-35 is probably his ceiling in that area. This is a kid that basically has a throw away year last year in arguably the most important year in his development. That alone makes him a risk, but could make him a steal too. Scouting is very much what have you done for me lately and Barron just didn’t have anything. There is a solid chance he develops a lot this year compared to where he was thought to me. That doesn’t mean he becomes a sure thing top pairing guy, but he has good potential. Physically, he’s got the full skill set to be a 2 and a high end minute eater (great skating for 25 minutes). He can be a 2, I just wouldn’t pencil him in there. He’s also really unlikely to be a PP guy here so there are limits. I think he can be a very solid 3 who can pair up with Girard in 3 seasons. That is good upside at this point in the draft.

With who was around I would have taken Niemela , Brisson, or Gunler personally. Going defense, very likely Niemela. Niemela is an even better skater and has more offensive upside... but lacks the size and physical component that Barron does. Not that Barron is a big hitter, but Niemela will never have that while Barron will have some.

On SEPH’s point, you can take my the BPA myth and throw it out the window here. Hepple clearly went for organizational need and projection. They needed a long term Girard partner and they got a very reasonable projection with this pick.

 

[Pokecheque]

In a lot of ways it feels like the Avs drafted a faster version of EJ.

 

[henchman21]

In a lot of ways it feels like the Avs drafted a faster version of EJ.

EJ prior to injuries piling up, is a good comparison to his upside.

 

[Richard88]

My initial reaction was that I was "ok" with this pick. Then I got excited about it given our outlook at RHD. But now a few hours later I'm growing more lukewarm again.

He was obviously picked for his athleticism (size and skating), and right hand shot, but really beyond that he's a pretty uninspiring. He's not an offensive dynamo, nor is he particularly good defensively. His hockey IQ is questionable as well. However, this seems like a case where you simply have to be patient and see what our coaching and development system can do.

Personally I was looking more at the group of forwards available (Peterka, Mysak, Gunler, Khusnutdinov) and even suggested trading down a few picks due to the parity there to grab an extra pick. Taking a Dman at 25 in a forward heavy area might seem smart but it could also come back to bite us. The jury will probably remain out on this pick for like 3-4 years.

 

[Richard88]

What I like about this though is they got a guy with the kind of physical skills that are very hard to teach, whereas hockey IQ can certainly be taught unless the kid is literally low IQ. I love big Z, but he's never struck me as above average intelligence. Graves also doesn't strike me as a deep thinker. So my hope with Barron is that over time he learns how to behave in the D zone and what to do when he has the puck.

I disagree, hockey IQ isn't that teachable. If we wantd a RHD with higher IQ we should have taken Niemela, or taken a forward here and targetted a guy like Eamon Powell with a later pick. Can't teach height though.