2021 QMJHL Draft

[HKYEAST]

2021 Q prospect Tyler Peddle with a nice profile article over the weekend. He certainly did not show his cards or his plans for next season and beyond. Without question, he can score. How does he compare to the 2 dominant U18 players ahead of him, Carruthers and MacDonald. Both lit up the Bantam league in NS as well, both are with the Sea Dogs now. Can Peddle play his style of game in the Q at 16? The ability to play a role far less then you are used to is a skill in its own. GM's will be doing some extensive homework on this fine young player before making their selection. Personally, I hope he is Q bound, both Halifax and CB will have a high 1st round pick!

 

[ATLHockeywatcher]

He will be the 1st Atlantic Canadian taken in the draft if he decides on the Q path. It would have been interesting to see his impact here in the Midget league but following the proverbial path of other big name NS talent to SSM looks like a wise move. Since his performance in Bantam he has benefited from more structured ice time than any other draft eligible player at a flagship program. I don't think GM's expect 16 year olds to be dominant but Peddle will be an impact Q player at 18.

 

[HkyTalk]

Looking for feed back:

I witness with lots of impact players that we have talked about here do have the ability to score on one side and on the other side I see terrible defence IQ with the same players. My question or the qualm I'm having is at what + - does a impact player become a liability? Is it when he scores 2 goals and he has 3 goals against his line day in and day out or does the +- never come into play when looking for those impact players. Cause to me those high IQ players or goal scores that we mention in this forum are only running at 50% IQ if they only play at one end of the ice. Or is my thinking as we say off the charts....

 

[Lap2000]

Looking for feed back:

I witness with lots of impact players that we have talked about here do have the ability to score on one side and on the other side I see terrible defence IQ with the same players. My question or the qualm I'm having is at what + - does a impact player become a liability? Is it when he scores 2 goals and he has 3 goals against his line day in and day out or does the +- never come into play when looking for those impact players. Cause to me those high IQ players or goal scores that we mention in this forum are only running at 50% IQ if they only play at one end of the ice. Or is my thinking as we say off the charts....

I hate +- because I don't know what to do with it. This stat has the potential to be very skewed without showing anything about a player. On the other hand it's a real stat and the one that matters most at the end of the day if you want to win. I dumb it down now, if a player scores goals, +- do not matter - I don't care, they have talent. If a player scores few goals +- does matter. If they are a defencemen - if it's a good number great, if it's a bad number though - I don't weigh it very high. The problem is that I have watched too many games where high end defencemen end up with a lower +- then lesser talent, purely because of luck, or because of something not related to them. Sometimes it because they play more or at more critical times, sometimes it's just random luck.

 

[HkyTalk]

Appreciate the feed back. You brought too light a couple points I've never thought of. I started thinking about this topic after what happened to, Patrik Laine, when his play in his own end made his Coach bench him during a tight game. That is telling me loud and clear that even if you are our goal scorer and I need a goal but I don't want you on the ice because your a liability in our end. So defending is more important or as important as scoring. No matter who they are or how much we pay you. What would happen to our 05 players that have the scoring touch like him but need BINOCLARS to see their end during their shifts. I guess they would be benched as well or traded for a depenable two way player that is effective in both ends and not just one. Tough lesson. In U18 leagues in the Atlantic zone I see that same player get double shifted and not benched and more times lose the game and those coaches would be wondering how they lost because they think they had their top players out on the ice but they didn't, they just went by points the player has and they think like many others that they are good/great but really I think they come with a disability or a character flaw that if you don't coach them out of it they will be a liability to a team at the end of the game. You will win more games with a good work ethic in your own end then in the offensive zone but you need all 5 players back to defend to accomplish it. Thanks for your input....

 

[HKYEAST]

HKYTalk, I have to assume you are talking exclusively about forwards? Bottom line, you have to get noticed, once noticed, scouts will start breaking down a players game, looking at all aspects of it. You need to stop with the hard sell on the defensive side of the game. Everyone , Scouts included understand the importance of it, so discrediting offensive stats by focusing solely on defense is moot point. They will take a chance on an offensively gifted player every time and work with him on the defensive side of game, if they feel the IQ is there. BTW, backchecking hard and throwing hits is not hockey IQ, in many cases it's just wasted energy. The game is all about efficiancy, quick puck movement and transitions, this is why the high IQ players win at the draft.

 

[Lap2000]

I started thinking about this topic after what happened to, Patrik Laine, when his play in his own end made his Coach bench him during a tight game

The decision to bench a player is that you think it will change his behavior in most cases. It is not that you think overall he is a worse player then everyone else. Laine is very talented and his draft position reflects that as does his contract. The coach is trying to make him a better player by motivating him to play both ends with equal passion. His benching is not a reflection of his talent and I'd still draft him, although I don't really like him and his work ethic.

I once heard of this person who didn't play defense much and was a minus player for half of his seasons. I think his last name was Gretzky or something like that.

In all seriousness, magic in the offensive end is more noticeable. You are always looking for something special. It is quite infrequent where someone has that and is a complete disaster on the defensive end. They may be worse then some on the same team though that are not really draft players.

 

[HkyTalk]

HKYTalk, I have to assume you are talking exclusively about forwards? Bottom line, you have to get noticed, once noticed, scouts will start breaking down a players game, looking at all aspects of it. You need to stop with the hard sell on the defensive side of the game. Everyone , Scouts included understand the importance of it, so discrediting offensive stats by focusing solely on defense is moot point. They will take a chance on an offensively gifted player every time and work with him on the defensive side of game, if they feel the IQ is there. BTW, backchecking hard and throwing hits is not hockey IQ, in many cases it's just wasted energy. The game is all about efficiancy, quick puck movement and transitions, this is why the high IQ players win at the draft.

Brian Burke would disagree with your points here. I feel that you may not have played the game of hockey with how you explained HOCKEY IQ. I've never ever heard a coach say not to back check or not to give a body check, teams have practices/drills just to practice in those areas. So if that's the test and the Question (1)to back check or not back check, the answer is not to and their Hockey IQ goes up and/or stays the same. (2) to take the body check or swing your stick as you pass by, the answer is to swing stick as you pass by. Hockey IQ goes up cause he is not wasting energy. It seems like if you can't read the stats in the paper/score sheet then it's a moot point for you all the time. Believe it or not the highest ranking forwards have great back checking ability and take the body when that play presents itself. McDavid for expample....Your right with one point that those hockey players that do those things, it does use up energy, I believe you hit the nail on the head. If that skilled/ High IQ player doesn't get involved in trying to break up a play coming back or putting body on body plays. Then they have fresher mind and legs in the offensive zone to get a shot on net. My theory is many times they won't get the chance because the puck is in their net while they try to find those binoculars to see who scored. They should put it on the score sheet as a power play goal cause it was a 5 on 3 in their end when they scored.

 

[HkyTalk]

The decision to bench a player is that you think it will change his behavior in most cases. It is not that you think overall he is a worse player then everyone else. Laine is very talented and his draft position reflects that as does his contract. The coach is trying to make him a better player by motivating him to play both ends with equal passion. His benching is not a reflection of his talent and I'd still draft him, although I don't really like him and his work ethic.

I once heard of this person who didn't play defense much and was a minus player for half of his seasons. I think his last name was Gretzky or something like that.

In all seriousness, magic in the offensive end is more noticeable. You are always looking for something special. It is quite infrequent where someone has that and is a complete disaster on the defensive end. They may be worse then some on the same team though that are not really draft players.

Agree fully, a team can't have too many of those type of players on their roster cause a hockey game still has to happen once the puck is dropped. Maybe in time the game will change and drop two pucks *one in each end*so each High IQ player on each team has something to play with without breaking a sweat. When Hockey changed the rule of no two line passes, hurt hockey orginal state/core values and hurt hockey players mindset.

 

[HKYEAST]

Brian Burke would disagree with your points here. I feel that you may not have played the game of hockey with how you explained HOCKEY IQ. I've never ever heard a coach say not to back check or not to give a body check, teams have practices/drills just to practice in those areas. So if that's the test and the Question (1)to back check or not back check, the answer is not to and their Hockey IQ goes up and/or stays the same. (2) to take the body check or swing your stick as you pass by, the answer is to swing stick as you pass by. Hockey IQ goes up cause he is not wasting energy. It seems like if you can't read the stats in the paper/score sheet then it's a moot point for you all the time. Believe it or not the highest ranking forwards have great back checking ability and take the body when that play presents itself. McDavid for expample....Your right with one point that those hockey players that do those things, it does use up energy, I believe you hit the nail on the head. If that skilled/ High IQ player doesn't get involved in trying to break up a play coming back or putting body on body plays. Then they have fresher mind and legs in the offensive zone to get a shot on net. My theory is many times they won't get the chance because the puck is in their net while they try to find those binoculars to see who scored. They should put it on the score sheet as a power play goal cause it was a 5 on 3 in their end when they scored.

Sorry HkyTalk, you are completely missing my point. But anyway, I am not on this chat to change your mind on anything, just to review players and discuss the upcoming draft.

 

[dwgs]

I feel that you may not have played the game of hockey

Can I respectfully ask that we don't do this? This is generally a good discussion board, I really don't want it to devolve to one of those "you never played above single letters, so you don't get to have an opinion" places. It's disrespectful and doesn't do anything to prove your argument.

 

[HkyTalk]

DWGS, taking a few words out of text can be left to politicians. My point has merits, Hockey IQ that we talk about should have a broader look at all situations in the game for each player and not just in the offensive zone. I may of came off alittle disrespectful and I apologize for my choice of words but the game of hockey and the players that are involved deserve to be rated in all factors of the game and not just limited to stick handling/passing/shooting skills.. Although all of them are important, we can do a better job in evaluating players and saying the same things over and over and ending the sentence by saying off the charts does nothing for the player or the discussion. If we are valuing players in this forum it would be refreshing to have some content about players work habits and how they use the rules of the game to their advantage or if they are cheating on plays that don't exists. (meaning reading the developing plays wrong)...There are many intelligent minds that give information in this forum and I would like to see more of it to give a proper rating or paint a clearer picture about each player that is worth talking about.

 

[dwgs]

HkyTalk, all your other points are valid, all I'm asking is that we leave the ad hominem stuff out of it. The few words that I referred to were the only ones where you accused someone else of being ignorant, that's why I focused on only those words.

 

[HKYEAST]

DWGS, taking a few words out of text can be left to politicians. My point has merits, Hockey IQ that we talk about should have a broader look at all situations in the game for each player and not just in the offensive zone. I may of came off alittle disrespectful and I apologize for my choice of words but the game of hockey and the players that are involved deserve to be rated in all factors of the game and not just limited to stick handling/passing/shooting skills.. Although all of them are important, we can do a better job in evaluating players and saying the same things over and over and ending the sentence by saying off the charts does nothing for the player or the discussion. If we are valuing players in this forum it would be refreshing to have some content about players work habits and how they use the rules of the game to their advantage or if they are cheating on plays that don't exists. (meaning reading the developing plays wrong)...There are many intelligent minds that give information in this forum and I would like to see more of it to give a proper rating or paint a clearer picture about each player that is worth talking about.

You are arguing what Scouts / GM's already know. Do you think for one minute Halifax will draft Cam Squires if they think he is a complete defensive liability? Not a chance. They will do their homework , they will spend hours breaking down video, talking with coaches, they will interview the kid, possibly multiple times, they will get several character references and from an opinion on his attitude and willingness to learn, compete, etc. ..does he party, does he drink, does he have a girlfriend, how does he do in school.....This is a business for them, they take if very seriously. You are not making any points that these guys do not take into consideration...but you can be assured of one thing...you had better have some skill or you overlooked and the process ends there.,

 

[HkyTalk]

HkyTalk, all your other points are valid, all I'm asking is that we leave the ad hominem stuff out of it. The few words that I referred to were the only ones where you accused someone else of being ignorant, that's why I focused on only those words.

I was just astonished that a hockey minded person went as far a saying that the ability to read the play as it's transitioning back towards his end and back check to cause interference and playing defence once the play is there or a body check doesn't need Hockey sense. Not sure why HKYEAST was dumbing down the core values of the game, he must have a young fella that stands at the far blueline while the play is 150 feet away. Now thats hockey and being creative.

Nothing nicer to see in Hockey when both teams go one way together and when the play reverses they all go with the play the other way but that's just the way I see the game being played right. I feel too many players cheat the game and get caught being not effective. I believe that this is the result of a poor coaching staff. All 05 in U18 league's can be taught right but it must happen before then. Peewee/Bantam

 

[HKYEAST]

It has not been done in awhile, so I will throw out my Top rankings from Atlantic in order that they will get drafted, based on what I have seen year to date. I will not put a "round" on each player, just the order that I see them going in. List is in order by position, for example, Rotondi could go ahead of Burbidge, but he will be the 2nd d-man selected. Now, I am not sure that either Peddle or Nadeau will go the Q route, this list is assuming that they do. Sleeper picks are those that are quickly moving up the rankings, that will likely get drafted in the first 5 rounds. Goalies are by order and could stretch beyond round 5.
Forwards
Peddle
Nadeau
Gendron
Squires
Pelletier
J. Campbell
Patterson
Burbidge
McPhee
Strapp
Sleepers - C. MacDonald, Todd, Lounsbury, Green, Plandowski, Grant, Shortall

Defense
Coughlin
Rotondi
MacKinnon
McGilivery
Martin
Topilnyckjy
Sleepers - Clements, Mossey,

Goalies
Richardson
Flannagan
S. Leblanc
Sleepers- Thompson, Farrah

 

[HkyTalk]

Made some sight changes to your list, reason made below:
Would be nice to see these players get to the next level to see how they develop as well rounded Hockey talents...


Forwards
Gendron
Peddle
Lounsbury
Patterson
Pelletier
Burbidge
Macphee
Nadeau
Squires
J. Campbell
Strapp
Sleepers - C. MacDonald, Todd, Sentner,Green, Plandowski, Grant, Shortall, J. MacDonald

Nice list of Forwards. I would put Gendron first. I would also put Lounsbury in the Top eight with Patterson, Pelletier, Burbidge and Macphee ahead of Squires. I like size over small forwards to be of more value in a pick. I also believe Sentner would be a solid pick as he made ground in the last 6 exhibition games being 1.16 points a game. J. MacDonald has size and the ability to play a great game. (05 Mount)

Defense
Coughlin
Rotondi
MacKinnon
McGilivery
Martin
Topilnyckjy
Sleepers - Clements, Mossey,

Goalies
Richardson
Flannagan
S. Leblanc
Sleepers- Thompson, Farrah​

 

[ATLHockeywatcher]

Always an interesting discussion, tough to leave guys like Ryan, Henderson, and Collette out up front. The Vito's had a number of young D prospects that were playing key minutes before things shut down and Jake MacDonald in Halifax has a lot of upside.

 

[IslandScouter]

Made some sight changes to your list, reason made below:
Would be nice to see these players get to the next level to see how they develop as well rounded Hockey talents...


Forwards
Gendron
Peddle
Lounsbury
Patterson
Pelletier
Burbidge
Macphee
Nadeau
Squires
J. Campbell
Strapp
Sleepers - C. MacDonald, Todd, Sentner,Green, Plandowski, Grant, Shortall, J. MacDonald

Nice list of Forwards. I would put Gendron first. I would also put Lounsbury in the Top eight with Patterson, Pelletier, Burbidge and Macphee ahead of Squires. I like size over small forwards to be of more value in a pick. I also believe Sentner would be a solid pick as he made ground in the last 6 exhibition games being 1.16 points a game. J. MacDonald has size and the ability to play a great game. (05 Mount)

Defense
Coughlin
Rotondi
MacKinnon
McGilivery
Martin
Topilnyckjy
Sleepers - Clements, Mossey,

Goalies
Richardson
Flannagan
S. Leblanc
Sleepers- Thompson, Farrah​

Coughlin looks like he could be a stud, Brett Arsenault could be another sleeper just because he was injured. He should go ahead of Sentner

 

[Wintersun]

It has not been done in awhile, so I will throw out my Top rankings from Atlantic in order that they will get drafted, based on what I have seen year to date. I will not put a "round" on each player, just the order that I see them going in. List is in order by position, for example, Rotondi could go ahead of Burbidge, but he will be the 2nd d-man selected. Now, I am not sure that either Peddle or Nadeau will go the Q route, this list is assuming that they do. Sleeper picks are those that are quickly moving up the rankings, that will likely get drafted in the first 5 rounds. Goalies are by order and could stretch beyond round 5.
Forwards
Peddle
Nadeau
Gendron
Squires
Pelletier
J. Campbell
Patterson
Burbidge
McPhee
Strapp
Sleepers - C. MacDonald, Todd, Lounsbury, Green, Plandowski, Grant, Shortall

Defense
Coughlin
Rotondi
MacKinnon
McGilivery
Martin
Topilnyckjy
Sleepers - Clements, Mossey,

Goalies
Richardson
Flannagan
S. Leblanc
Sleepers- Thompson, Farrah

For the forwards, I'd say Strapp isn't a lock for the top 5 rounds. I think Todd, Green and Caleb MacDonald are likely to go first 5 rounds.

I'd add Philippe Collette as a lock for the first 5 rounds. Logan Crosby, Alexander Christmas, Lane Lochead, Mitchell Wagner, Noah Ryan, Will Allen, Brett Arsenault should also go in the first 5 rounds or close to it for some of them. Jonah MacDonald will also go in the first 5 rounds.

Mossey is not a sleeper. He goes round 2 in my opinion. Might be the best puck mover in the whole draft to be honest. Clements is easily a top 5 round pick as well. All the other defensemen on that board will go in the first 5 rounds, except maybe McGillivray, but he could go in there as well.

As for the goalies, I have a strong feeling Richardson and Thompson are the first two to go of the bunch.

Overall I think it's a pretty deep year overall for the Atlantics. I don't see a first overall challenger in there, but a lot of top 3 rounders.

 

[HkyTalk]

Coughlin looks like he could be a stud, Brett Arsenault could be another sleeper just because he was injured. He should go ahead of Sentner

I like Coughlin, he does have a up side to his style of play. Arsenault with his recurring collar bone injury and out for the season is unfortunate. I've seen good players that were out for their draft year with injuries and never get drafted for that year and the next year they didn't either. Stranger things in hockey has happened but in this case Sentners stock is going up and Arsenault stock is going down...

 

[scoutman1]

It has not been done in awhile, so I will throw out my Top rankings from Atlantic in order that they will get drafted, based on what I have seen year to date. I will not put a "round" on each player, just the order that I see them going in. List is in order by position, for example, Rotondi could go ahead of Burbidge, but he will be the 2nd d-man selected. Now, I am not sure that either Peddle or Nadeau will go the Q route, this list is assuming that they do. Sleeper picks are those that are quickly moving up the rankings, that will likely get drafted in the first 5 rounds. Goalies are by order and could stretch beyond round 5.
Forwards
Peddle
Nadeau
Gendron
Squires
Pelletier
J. Campbell
Patterson
Burbidge
McPhee
Strapp
Sleepers - C. MacDonald, Todd, Lounsbury, Green, Plandowski, Grant, Shortall

Defense
Coughlin
Rotondi
MacKinnon
McGilivery
Martin
Topilnyckjy
Sleepers - Clements, Mossey,

Goalies
Richardson
Flannagan
S. Leblanc
Sleepers- Thompson, Farrah

You are missing Cam Henderson—F—Mount Charles USA 5’11/209 kid if he decides he is going QMJHL route will be a 1st round pick easy. He is from Nova Scotia. Also I have not seen Salem Johnson (a Defender) on your list...potential top 2 round pick as well

 

[HKYEAST]

You are missing Cam Henderson—F—Mount Charles USA 5’11/209 kid if he decides he is going QMJHL route will be a 1st round pick easy. He is from Nova Scotia. Also I have not seen Salem Johnson (a Defender) on your list...potential top 2 round pick as well

Sorry Scoutman , i am just not seeing Henderson in first round discussions. Henderson is playing at the Mount Acad in PEI this season on their U17 team which is all 05 players. There are 4-5 players from that team that will get drafted ahead of Cam, which will push him to at least the 4th. He skates well for a big guy, however I am missing that extra effort work ethic that would give him an edge. Salem, gets lost behind the other PEI based kids on D, at 5'9 is a smaller defender, skates well and is smart....just based on #'s of kids ahead of him, he ends up 5th or later.

 

[scoutman1]

Sorry Scoutman , i am just not seeing Henderson in first round discussions. Henderson is playing at the Mount Acad in PEI this season on their U17 team which is all 05 players. There are 4-5 players from that team that will get drafted ahead of Cam, which will push him to at least the 4th. He skates well for a big guy, however I am missing that extra effort work ethic that would give him an edge. Salem, gets lost behind the other PEI based kids on D, at 5'9 is a smaller defender, skates well and is smart....just based on #'s of kids ahead of him, he ends up 5th or later.

well i see him as a 1st round talent and for Johnson, hockey has changed defenders do not have to be 6'2 now. Im just on here saying Henderson has 1st round potential, was great in the USA last year, have great size, strong, good skater, good IQ and has a good shot.

 

[HKYEAST]

well i see him as a 1st round talent and for Johnson, hockey has changed defenders do not have to be 6'2 now. Im just on here saying Henderson has 1st round potential, was great in the USA last year, have great size, strong, good skater, good IQ and has a good shot.

Hey, you may well be right. Beauty of this is, it's just an opinion. Let's remember, a 4th round selection is still an amazing accomplishment and by no means is it a knock against a player. Hockey rankings a very fluid and can change a few times during the course of a season.