Prospect Info: #44 - RD Filip Westerlund

[PhoPhan]

It's not really a linear metric.

Think about someone like David Rundblad. Very intelligent with the puck on his stick, but iffy without it in the offensive zone and generally lost in his own zone. There was hope that because he was so gifted with the puck, he'd figure out the rest, but it didn't work out like that.

 

[Kaizen]

Agree to disagree on that one Pho. I can't say I've ever seen anyone described as having hockey sense also described as being lost on defense, aside from your post.

 

[PhoPhan]

I agree with you in general. Smart players are smart players. Guys who can think a step or two ahead on offense tend to have the same mental advantages in the defensive zone. But there are plenty of players who get credit for hockey IQ based solely on their offensive acumen.

Here's a scouting report on Rundblad from when he was drafted. It quotes a CSS scout saying, "He is a very smart player" and lists his hockey sense as "very good," while his defensive play is merely "average." He has "offensive instincts" under strengths and "defensive coverage" under areas for improvement.

Rundblad is the first guy that came to mind as an intelligent and skilled but relatively slow RHD whose offensive abilities were strong but not enough to overcome his shortcomings, but there are lots of players who fit the "great hockey IQ but below average on defensive positioning" description.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Rundblad is the first guy that came to mind as an intelligent and skilled but relatively slow RHD whose offensive abilities were strong but not enough to overcome his shortcomings, but there are lots of players who fit the "great hockey IQ but below average on defensive positioning" description.

I think, in an ideal world, there would be separate metrics for "hockey sense" and "hockey IQ." Players with high "hockey IQ" are Rundblad or DeAngelo types - guys who have elite instincts but who in various situations either panic (Rundblad in the D zone) or lose their minds (DeAngelo). I tend to think of a player with "hockey sense" being not just intelligent or instinctually sound, but who are capable of leveraging those instincts into the right plays at the right time.

 

[PhoPhan]

Both terms are rather imprecise, so let me elaborate on my feelings on Westerlund in particular.

He is very good with the puck. In transition and the offensive zone, he tends to make the right decisions with it, and he has the skills and vision to be a real playmaker. He tends to make the right call when given the choice to pinch or stay back. Without the puck on his stick, he usually knows where to go to support his teammates in the offensive zone.

Defensively, he struggles a bit with positioning and is caught in the wrong spot too frequently. He lacks the mobility to recover quickly when this happens, and he lacks the strength or stick skills to separate opponents from the puck when he is where he should be. He is smart enough to anticipate plays and break up passes, but generally, hi same defensive game needs a lot of work on the mental as well as the physical side. What he needs to fix is teachable, though, and while he'll always be undersized, his offensive abilities could make him a solid 2nd pairing guy if the rest of his game catches up.

 

[RufusG]

Both terms are rather imprecise, so let me elaborate on my feelings on Westerlund in particular.

He is very good with the puck. In transition and the offensive zone, he tends to make the right decisions with it, and he has the skills and vision to be a real playmaker. He tends to make the right call when given the choice to pinch or stay back. Without the puck on his stick, he usually knows where to go to support his teammates in the offensive zone.

Defensively, he struggles a bit with positioning and is caught in the wrong spot too frequently. He lacks the mobility to recover quickly when this happens, and he lacks the strength or stick skills to separate opponents from the puck when he is where he should be. He is smart enough to anticipate plays and break up passes, but generally, hi same defensive game needs a lot of work on the mental as well as the physical side. What he needs to fix is teachable, though, and while he'll always be undersized, his offensive abilities could make him a solid 2nd pairing guy if the rest of his game catches up.

I don't follow prospects and don't pretend to know hockey as well as most here, so I have to ask this question...

Ideally, all your players have size, speed, and skill. Since the world is not ideal, I would assume you work down from that and maybe hope for two out of three where you don't have everything.

So you have the 44th pick, and you're already down to guys with just one out of three (skill) and lacking two out of three (size, speed)? Is skill that much more important, or is his speed really not so bad?

 

[PhoPhan]

Size, speed and even skill are not valuable in a vacuum. They can be useful as proxies for a player's effectiveness, but how a player uses them is ultimately what's most important. There have been plenty of big, fast and/or endlessly skilled players who did very little as NHL players. When it comes to prospects, that's why I put hockey sense (as nebulous as it is) at the top of my priority list. Strong hockey sense is more likely to overcome shortcomings in other attributes than vice versa.

That said, you're evaluating prospects relative to one another. Westerlund's absolute projection is not particularly relevant. When you're drafting, you're taking the guy who is simply better than the other guys available. Westerlund has some potential of course, but there were a number of guys still there that I'd project as better players in the long run. Joni Ikonen, Ostap Safin or Alex Formenton would have been substantially better selections in my opinion. Even if they were dead set on a right-handed defenseman, I'd have gone for Josh Brook or Reilly Walsh. It's not because anyone was bigger or faster than Westerlund (though I think all of them are) but simply because I project them to be likely to be more
valuable players for the team that drafts them than Westerlund. That projection is certainly more art than science, but it's a more complex calculation than Size X Speed X Skill.

 

[XX]

Westerlund is some scout's passion project. Last time they took a flyer on a kid with little to no resume that high they got Dvorak, so I'll defer judgment for now. I really wish he'd come over to NA, because I immensely dislike stashing guys overseas unless they're goalies.

 

[PhoPhan]

For every Dvorak, there is a Ruuttus and Lane. For every Martinook, there is a Gistedt and a Stephenson.

I'm not saying Westerlund is dead on arrival. Only that there were lots of guys I think were smarter picks.

 

[XX]

For every Dvorak, there is a Ruuttus and Lane. For every Martinook, there is a Gistedt and a Stephenson.

I'm not saying Westerlund is dead on arrival. Only that there were lots of guys I think were smarter picks.

The scouting department has come miles since those picks. It's clear they were using the shotgun approach in later rounds, but they obviously felt passionate enough about Westerlund to take him some 40 or 50 picks early. If someone wants to bet their job on him, they're more than welcome to do so. There are a lot of 'smart' picks that never make it as well, so while you and I may not like the value or utilization of the pick, it's their reputation on the line. If they've got an angle on this kid, I'm inclined to believe them and let it play out.

If he makes it in a round that turns into a sea of crap, they'll look smart.

 

[rt]

For every Dvorak, there is a Ruuttus and Lane. For every Martinook, there is a Gistedt and a Stephenson.

I'm not saying Westerlund is dead on arrival. Only that there were lots of guys I think were smarter picks.

My first reaction was "whelp, there's an obvious bust. Checks every single box for bust." But I have to give the benefit of the doubt to our scouting department. I've never seen the player play. Based on what I know, this is a clear as day bad pick. But luckily I don't know much. Maybe he works out. It'll be against all odds but that's the most fun anyway.

 

[lanky]

Anyone catch him playing in this WJ summer showcase? He was on the roster for all three games and appears to have been paired mostly with Brannstrom.

 

[RABBIT]

I'm just gonna say that I'm pretty confident in any defenseman that comes out of Sweden that goes in the first two rounds.

 

[Mosby]

I'm just gonna say that I'm pretty confident in any defenseman that comes out of Sweden that goes in the first two rounds.

 

[RABBIT]

pretty confident. Not all the way

 

[_Del_]

Maybe if the "development" plan for him literally wasn't healthy scratching for 20 and 40 game stretches over the course of two years, he might have had some confidence and success.

 

[Jakey53]

Maybe if the "development" plan for him literally wasn't healthy scratching for 20 and 40 game stretches over the course of two years, he might have had some confidence and success.

Yeah, Chicago really screwed his development.

 

[_Del_]

I'm sure the fact he played only a handful otpf hockey games amidst being scratched for 40 game increments in a critical stage of his career did no damage. Also, if someone can't connect those dots, they are an idiot. Not you, of course, Jake. [mod] But other people. Broadly speaking. If they couldn't.

 

[rt]

Usually the league's top defensive defensemen put up great numbers prior to making the NHL. They're also usually at least 6'1 when drafted. Let's look at the top Defensive D in the league today in their draft years:

6'2 Hjalmarsson - 0.50ppg in J20 Swedish league
6'2 Tanev - .80ppg in OJHL (followed by .70ppg in NCAA in D+1 yr)
6'3 Larsson - 17pts in 49 games in the SHL not Swedish jr league.
6'1 Vlasic - over a ppg in the Q
6'2 Braun - 14pts in 39 games but in a top D1 NCAA program

Compared to 5'10 Westerlund and his 7pts in the J20 league and 4pts in the SEL.

I've never seen him play. But if he reaches his projection the Coyotes made for him, he'll be a truly unique player. A guy drafted in the 2nd round to be a defensive D who puts up no points at all and is short is not a player I can recall seeing in the NHL at any point in recent history. He will be the extreme outlier if he reaches hisnnhlnpotential.

 

[rt]

Even going back a bit, each of Scuderi, Hannan, and Michalek were 6'1 and had better than a half a point per game in the NCAA, Dub, and Q respectively.

Can you guys help me think of a really good NHL defensive D that was taken fairly early (call it first 100 picks) in the last 15yrs that had lousy offensive output and was short?

 

[hbk]

Catching up on weekend games. He's got a good first pass. Lost his man against US for a goal against (Tufte who isn't a inconspicuous guy). Small. Only offence he will put up Will likely come from the rush where he is outlet. Is on first line PK duty. I'm 4 periods into his tournament so far.

 

[avco]

Usually the league's top defensive defensemen put up great numbers prior to making the NHL. They're also usually at least 6'1 when drafted. Let's look at the top Defensive D in the league today in their draft years:

6'2 Hjalmarsson - 0.50ppg in J20 Swedish league
6'2 Tanev - .80ppg in OJHL (followed by .70ppg in NCAA in D+1 yr)
6'3 Larsson - 17pts in 49 games in the SHL not Swedish jr league.
6'1 Vlasic - over a ppg in the Q
6'2 Braun - 14pts in 39 games but in a top D1 NCAA program

Compared to 5'10 Westerlund and his 7pts in the J20 league and 4pts in the SEL.

I've never seen him play. But if he reaches his projection the Coyotes made for him, he'll be a truly unique player. A guy drafted in the 2nd round to be a defensive D who puts up no points at all and is short is not a player I can recall seeing in the NHL at any point in recent history. He will be the extreme outlier if he reaches hisnnhlnpotential.

Although it is not recent history Lars Erik Sjoberg did reasonably well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars-Erik_Sjöberg

 

[rt]

Although it is not recent history Lars Erik Sjoberg did reasonably well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars-Erik_Sjöberg

In those days you could be blind in one eye, smoke three packs a day, and skate drunk.

 

[Matias Maccete]

Westerlund's game grew from playing with Dahlin in Sweden

 

[Summer Rose]

Draft ALL the Swedish defensemen!