Prospect Info: 6th Overall

[Oddbob]

Wow, people are quick to give up on players! Rasmussen just played his 19 year old rookie season and did far better than many of you are saying. He may not be exciting to watch as far as stick handling and fancy moves, but he is very good around the net. He just needs to fill in a little and be more confident in his size. Truth is, we don't know how good he will be, lots of really good players start off slow and get better. Not everyone is going to storm in and be a 50-70 pt guy right off the hop. From what I have seen from him, he has more talent than Tomas Holmstrom ever had, and skates better as well, so if he can bring us a new Holmstrom with more skill that won't be so bad.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Wow, people are quick to give up on players! Rasmussen just played his 19 year old rookie season and did far better than many of you are saying. He may not be exciting to watch as far as stick handling and fancy moves, but he is very good around the net. He just needs to fill in a little and be more confident in his size. Truth is, we don't know how good he will be, lots of really good players start off slow and get better. Not everyone is going to storm in and be a 50-70 pt guy right off the hop. From what I have seen from him, he has more talent than Tomas Holmstrom ever had, and skates better as well, so if he can bring us a new Holmstrom with more skill that won't be so bad.

After watching the San Jose/Vegas game last night, I couldn't help comparing Timo Meier to Michael Rasmussen. I am not suggesting that they play a similar style or that Rasmussen will become as good as Meier is, but Meier was drafted about 5 years ago as the 9th overall pick. Meier was a beast last night, specifically in the overtime period, but it's taken him 5 years of developing to get his game to this level. Even some top ten picks require time to catch up to or grow into the NHL game. Credit to San Jose for not giving up on Meier I guess, but it seems such an easy, common sense thing to do with kids this young. Show patience, give them time to grow and develop and in a few years they may reward you for that patience - if not, you move on from them, but it just seems rash and pointless to be crying "bust" so early in a player's career.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

Could also see this kid being like Timo Meier who has became a pretty good player. (Watching this SJ game)

Damnit, I don’t know... just makes me nervous.

Cool. Glad to read this and glad I am not the only one who sees a correlation between the two players. Hopefully Ras continues to improve and develops into a player of similar value.

 

[jkutswings]

Cool. Glad to read this and glad I am not the only one who sees a correlation between the two players. Hopefully Ras continues to improve and develops into a player of similar value.

That's what I don't understand.

I am fairly confident that he WILL eventually develop into a 20-20 kinda guy that's hard to play against around the net.

And that's still a disappointing result from a top ten pick.

Would I be glad that he turned into a solid player? Sure. But good execution of a bad plan doesn't make it a good plan. If there's not a first line caliber forward at 9, then either take a chance on a defenseman you like, or try to trade down and get more picks.

It's not a matter of whether I think Rasmussen will grow into his frame. It's that I think even the ceiling of Rasmussen is a good but not great player, and that's not what I want to chase with a top ten pick.

 

[Frk It]

Cool. Glad to read this and glad I am not the only one who sees a correlation between the two players. Hopefully Ras continues to improve and develops into a player of similar value.

I was talking about Podkolzin, I'm only interested in talking about the 2019 Draft in this thread.

 

[Shaman464]

After watching the San Jose/Vegas game last night, I couldn't help comparing Timo Meier to Michael Rasmussen. I am not suggesting that they play a similar style or that Rasmussen will become as good as Meier is, but Meier was drafted about 5 years ago as the 9th overall pick. Meier was a beast last night, specifically in the overtime period, but it's taken him 5 years of developing to get his game to this level. Even some top ten picks require time to catch up to or grow into the NHL game. Credit to San Jose for not giving up on Meier I guess, but it seems such an easy, common sense thing to do with kids this young. Show patience, give them time to grow and develop and in a few years they may reward you for that patience - if not, you move on from them, but it just seems rash and pointless to be crying "bust" so early in a player's career.

Meier wasn't a 6'6'' 210+ pound giant playing against kids. That's Rass's biggest knock. Its all well and good being able to dominate in front of the goal when you're a man playing against kids, but, it that's not enough in the NHL. I have real questions about how well he actually sees the game. And his vision/IQ will make or break him at this level.

 

[Nut Upstrom]

That's what I don't understand.

I am fairly confident that he WILL eventually develop into a 20-20 kinda guy that's hard to play against around the net.

And that's still a disappointing result from a top ten pick.

Would I be glad that he turned into a solid player? Sure. But good execution of a bad plan doesn't make it a good plan. If there's not a first line caliber forward at 9, then either take a chance on a defenseman you like, or try to trade down and get more picks.

It's not a matter of whether I think Rasmussen will grow into his frame. It's that I think even the ceiling of Rasmussen is a good but not great player, and that's not what I want to chase with a top ten pick.

I'm going to assume that the people who picked him have a more positive expectation as to what his ceiling might be. It's cool if that's what you think, but it's unrealistic to call it a bad plan assuming those who executed the plan see him developing beyond your expectations.

 

[WesNichols14]

That's what I don't understand.

I am fairly confident that he WILL eventually develop into a 20-20 kinda guy that's hard to play against around the net.

And that's still a disappointing result from a top ten pick.

Would I be glad that he turned into a solid player? Sure. But good execution of a bad plan doesn't make it a good plan. If there's not a first line caliber forward at 9, then either take a chance on a defenseman you like, or try to trade down and get more picks.

It's not a matter of whether I think Rasmussen will grow into his frame. It's that I think even the ceiling of Rasmussen is a good but not great player, and that's not what I want to chase with a top ten pick.

I get what your saying, him being the first top 10 pick in a 20 something years also doesn't help him. but another thing to consider is that the 2017 draft is looking like a pretty weak one. and if you get a 20-20 guy who is a pain to play against, that's not a bad thing when most other teams are getting full on busts or players who don't meet expectations. maybe in this years draft he would be a 15-25 guy, and that fair but you draft the players the year they are available in this case it was 2017 and he stacked up better than others that year.

 

[SirloinUB]

I will say McKenzie has a very firm handle on the OHL because of his son's role as the GM of the Kitchener Rangers. He attends a lot of their games and is having constant conversations about the OHL as a result. His results are as you say a collection of scouts, everything in this post is completely accurate. But just so people know that angle as well, Mike McKenzie runs the Kitchener Rangers, though Bob pretty much prides himself on reporting facts and not his own opinions when possible.

Yea I suspected Bobby Mac still watched quite a bit of junior hockey but Im not as directly aware of his schedule the way I am with Button. Like I said, Button spend several days a week on the road and has lots of first hand knowledge. Again, I’ll let everyone draw their own conclusions about which method they prefer.

I didnt realize his son wa the GM of Kitchener, that’s cool info, thanks for sharing.

 

[ricky0034]

I get what your saying, him being the first top 10 pick in a 20 something years also doesn't help him. but another thing to consider is that the 2017 draft is looking like a pretty weak one. and if you get a 20-20 guy who is a pain to play against, that's not a bad thing when most other teams are getting full on busts or players who don't meet expectations. maybe in this years draft he would be a 15-25 guy, and that fair but you draft the players the year they are available in this case it was 2017 and he stacked up better than others that year.

I feel like on some level there's just a fundamental disagreement here

i'd say that with a top 10 pick(and don't take these exact numbers too seriously this is just a hastily thrown together hypothetical) taking a guy that has a 20% chance of becoming an impact player and a 50% chance of busting entirely is a better idea than taking a guy that has a 5% chance of becoming an impact player and a 20% chance of busting entirely

you can take the latter guy but them becoming a bottom 6 guy while the former guy busts is never gonna be enough to convince me that it was a good idea

 

[Red Stanley]

I feel like on some level there's just a fundamental disagreement here

i'd say that with a top 10 pick(and don't take these exact numbers too seriously this is just a hastily thrown together hypothetical) taking a guy that has a 20% chance of becoming an impact player and a 50% chance of busting entirely is a better idea than taking a guy that has a 5% chance of becoming an impact player and a 20% chance of busting entirely

you can take the latter guy but them becoming a bottom 6 guy while the former guy busts is never gonna be enough to convince me that it was a good idea

Lol where did you pull those numbers from with regards to Rasmussen? How do you figure a big kid with decent hands/skating ability and a ton of work ethic has only a 5% chance of becoming an impact player (whatever that means)? If a few years from now he's a bottom 6 on this team, it probably means we have a damned good team at that point. What's wrong with having a great 3rd line? What's wrong with having a 4th line that's a nightmare to play against? Wtf are we talking about Rasmussen in a thread about the 2019 draft? Some questions we'll never know the answers to.

P.S. Dach/Turcotte/Cozens/Byram in no particular order at 6. If trading down, Zegras/Krebs in no particular order.

 

[lomekian]

Rasmussen is already a competent bottom 6 forward (if not a good one yet) at 19/20 when he hasn't remotely grown into his size or adjusted to NHL speed. He probably should have been playing in the AHL this year, but the rules didn't allow it. If he'd put up 50+ points as a 19 year old in the AHL would people still be so determined to limit his projection to being a bottom 6 forward?

 

[jkutswings]

I'm going to assume that the people who picked him have a more positive expectation as to what his ceiling might be. It's cool if that's what you think, but it's unrealistic to call it a bad plan assuming those who executed the plan see him developing beyond your expectations.

But it's not just me that wasn't rating him high:

https://thehockeywriters.com/michael-rasmussen-2017-nhl-draft-prospect-profile/


"NHL Draft Projection

He’s not a top-10 pick by any means – even though some scouts have him in the six to eight range. That being said, he should go at some point in the top 20 of this year’s NHL Entry Draft. I would look for his name to get called somewhere between 18 and 20, but he could fall as far as 22nd overall."


"NHL Potential

Rasmussen has the size to become a prototypical power forward in the NHL someday. While we’re not ready to compare him to the best in the game who carried a similar role, he has a high ceiling on the offensive end. That being said, he might end up being a top-nine rather than a top-six forward. Keep your hopes high, but look for him to be a second or third line middle-man."


So yes, that's the opinion of just one site, but it's a documented pre-draft evaluation by a well-known site that echoes my reasons to not have taken him.

 

[ricky0034]

Lol where did you pull those numbers from with regards to Rasmussen? How do you figure a big kid with decent hands/skating ability and a ton of work ethic has only a 5% chance of becoming an impact player (whatever that means)? If a few years from now he's a bottom 6 on this team, it probably means we have a damned good team at that point. What's wrong with having a great 3rd line? What's wrong with having a 4th line that's a nightmare to play against? Wtf are we talking about Rasmussen in a thread about the 2019 draft? Some questions we'll never know the answers to.

P.S. Dach/Turcotte/Cozens/Byram in no particular order at 6. If trading down, Zegras/Krebs in no particular order.

did I not literally say in the exact same paragraph as those numbers not to take them too seriously because they are nothing more than hastily thrown together hypotheticals?

that said what the hell i'll defend it anyways,I do think it captures the spirit of it well enough,I would define an impact player as a 1st liner and honestly(ever since before he was drafted and i've still yet to see any reason to change that opinion) I view Rasmussen's realistic ceiling as a 2nd line winger

that doesn't necessarily mean he can't be better than that but honestly 5% probably isn't too far off the mark here judging from the date of the draft(so at this point it would probably be slightly higher since his chance of washing out of the NHL entirely is lower at this point but that doesn't change the odds at the time of the draft)

 

[Red Stanley]

did I not literally say in the exact same paragraph as those numbers not to take them too seriously because they are nothing more than hastily thrown together hypotheticals?

Sure, but you're still explicitly implying that Rasmussen has only a tiny chance of becoming an impactful player (again, whatever that means). That seems rather bizarre to me, considering he's only 19 and not exactly devoid of skill or drive.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

Anyone got predictions on who goes top 5?

I'll go with:

Hughes
Kakko
Byram
Dach
Cozens

My take this week:

Hughes
Kakko
Dach
Boldy
Byram


I think one of Zegras or Boldy are going higher than everyone is expecting. I could imagine teams thinking Boldy isn't too far off.

Ask me again next week and I will have a different answer for you.

 

[Red Stanley]

did I not literally say in the exact same paragraph as those numbers not to take them too seriously because they are nothing more than hastily thrown together hypotheticals?

that said what the hell i'll defend it anyways,I do think it captures the spirit of it well enough,I would define an impact player as a 1st liner and honestly(ever since before he was drafted and i've still yet to see any reason to change that opinion) I view Rasmussen's realistic ceiling as a 2nd line winger

that doesn't necessarily mean he can't be better than that but honestly 5% probably isn't too far off the mark here judging from the date of the draft(so at this point it would probably be slightly higher since his chance of washing out of the NHL entirely is lower at this point but that doesn't change the odds at the time of the draft)

Wow, that seems like an awfully high and unrealistic standard. Do you apply it universally or within context? For example, some people would argue Larkin isn't a first line center on a championship team. If we draft someone better than Larkin and he slots down to the second line, would you consider him non-impactful? Is Bertuzzi impactful regardless of which line he plays on? Is Malkin non-impactful, because Crosby is the #1 center? Would Rasmussen becoming a PP specialist, thus improving our PP considerably, but still playing in a bottom 6 role still make him non-impactful?

 

[Frk It]

Take this shit to another thread or drop it.

This thread is for the 2019 thread and who we should pick.