Prospect Info: 9OA: Nate Danielson

Shaman464

No u
May 1, 2009
10,271
4,466
Boston, MA
So Aho (26) with 89 points is elite, but Raymond (22) with 72 points not only isn't, but doesn't look like he will get there. Uh huh.

It sounds more like you're fixated on stats and think that a 100-point player is mandatory to win a Cup. Which isn't the case.

Edit: FYI, when Aho was 22, he scored 66 points.
FYI 66 points was almost a PPG in a season when the leading scorer in the NHL had 110 points and 66 points was good for 20th in points. Raymond was 49th. Aho was still around 20th in scoring this year. So he hasn’t progressed much compared to the rest of the NHL. Also playing center is much different than playing wing. So in his 22 year old season Aho was a significantly better scorer and played a harder position.
 
Last edited:

DamonDRW

Registered User
Dec 23, 2007
3,005
1,567
Tampere, Finland
So Aho (26) with 89 points is elite, but Raymond (22) with 72 points not only isn't, but doesn't look like he will get there. Uh huh.

It sounds more like you're fixated on stats and think that a 100-point player is mandatory to win a Cup. Which isn't the case.

Edit: FYI, when Aho was 22, he scored 66 points.
Aho is an all-around 1st line center that makes everyone around better. He proved that over the last few seasons. Raymond is a PPG winger in his contract year. There is a huge difference between these two. Still Raymond has time to prove that he is as good as Aho. I really hope he does.
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
11,107
8,879
Aho is an all-around 1st line center that makes everyone around better. He proved that over the last few seasons. Raymond is a PPG winger in his contract year. There is a huge difference between these two. Still Raymond has time to prove that he is as good as Aho. I really hope he does.
My point isn't that Raymond it's equivalent to Aho (or one day will be). It's that:

1) It's unreasonable to think that Raymond does not have room for further improvement.
2) If the criteria of a successful rebuild is to produce at least one 100-point player, then stop watching because it's not going to happen. Detroit is doing well with the awful lottery luck they were handed, and has a chance to further improve the team via prospects and trades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shultzyfeelinirie25

Roomba With a Bauer

Registered User
Sep 11, 2007
4,398
2,994
Danielson doesn't play a style that translates well to huge offensive numbers at the junior level. He doesn't cheat on offense. There are lots of guys that put up gaudy numbers in juniors but likely won't translate to the NHL (like Danielson's teammate, Gabe Klassen). Danielson plays a pro game and once he hits the NHL where has both pro wingers and pro defenseman to rely on his game is going to flourish.

Danielson has some similarities to Larkin and I can see why people like to compare them because they both play with a high-end motor, but IMO Danielson is more of a playmaker and has a better east-west aspect to his game than Larkin's almost straight up north-south game. IMO most of Larkin's success comes from his drive and superb fundamentals while Danielson occasionally makes some really, really impressive skill plays.

If you compare Danielson's pre-draft scouting report to Brayden Point's, they have a lot of similarities, and I'm like 99% sure that's why Yzerman took him.

Edit: People look at Danielson and see high floor, low ceiling player, but the fact is that Danielson is a high-floor, high ceiling player. Danielson is almost certainly going to end up at least as an elite 3c kind of guy but he also has a very good shot at being a better center than Larkin.
 
Last edited:

Steve Yzerlland

Registered User
Jul 18, 2018
8,237
4,062
Danielson doesn't play a style that translates well to huge offensive numbers at the junior level. He doesn't cheat on offense. There are lots of guys that put up gaudy numbers in juniors but likely won't translate to the NHL (like Danielson's teammate, Gabe Klassen). Danielson plays a pro game and once he hits the NHL where has both pro wingers and pro defenseman to rely on his game is going to flourish.

Danielson has some similarities to Larkin and I can see why people like to compare them because they both play with a high-end motor, but IMO Danielson is more of a playmaker and has a better east-west aspect to his game than Larkin's almost straight up north-south game. IMO most of Larkin's success comes from his drive and superb fundamentals while Danielson occasionally makes some really, really impressive skill plays.

If you compare Danielson's pre-draft scouting report to Brayden Point's, they have a lot of similarities, and I'm like 99% sure that's why Yzerman took him.

Edit: People look at Danielson and see high floor, low ceiling player, but the fact is that Danielson is a high-floor, high ceiling player. Danielson is almost certainly going to end up at least as an elite 3c kind of guy but he also has a very good shot at being a better center than Larkin.
Where do you see him having a good shot to being a better center than Larkin? Larkin at his age was far superior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lilidk

Roomba With a Bauer

Registered User
Sep 11, 2007
4,398
2,994
Where do you see him having a good shot to being a better center than Larkin? Larkin at his age was far superior.
That's debatable.

There's also the fact that Larkin hasn't really progressed as a player much since entering the league. His offensive numbers haven't really changed since 2017 and it could be argued that the changes in his scoring are more due to roster and systems changes than his own growth as a player. League scoring has also increased significantly over the same period.

That's not a put down on Larkin, but he's pretty much in his prime years right now and is barely a PPG player while playing 3:11 of PP time per game. 17 Cs have a higher P/GP.

So yeah, there's a lot of room for a very skilled C to be better than him. We're not talking about McDavid. If you think there is 0% chance for any forward prospect in our system to be better than Larkin then you may as well start watching another team because the Wings aren't competing in the next decade.
 

PullHard

Jul 18, 2007
28,426
2,524
I don't disagree with shaman necessarily but using Reinhart specifically in that post is hilarious. At Raymond's age most people probably thought he'd wash out or become a role player and was heralded as a bust by 90% of hockey fans. The fact he scored 50+ goals in a contract year as a passenger on a stacked Florida team doesn't prove much of a point. If Raymond played exclusively with Barkov this season he might have hit 50 goals himself, especially because his shooting% was also unsustainably high
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrisnick

Oddbob

Registered User
Jan 21, 2016
15,960
10,503
Danielson doesn't play a style that translates well to huge offensive numbers at the junior level. He doesn't cheat on offense. There are lots of guys that put up gaudy numbers in juniors but likely won't translate to the NHL (like Danielson's teammate, Gabe Klassen). Danielson plays a pro game and once he hits the NHL where has both pro wingers and pro defenseman to rely on his game is going to flourish.

Danielson has some similarities to Larkin and I can see why people like to compare them because they both play with a high-end motor, but IMO Danielson is more of a playmaker and has a better east-west aspect to his game than Larkin's almost straight up north-south game. IMO most of Larkin's success comes from his drive and superb fundamentals while Danielson occasionally makes some really, really impressive skill plays.

If you compare Danielson's pre-draft scouting report to Brayden Point's, they have a lot of similarities, and I'm like 99% sure that's why Yzerman took him.

Edit: People look at Danielson and see high floor, low ceiling player, but the fact is that Danielson is a high-floor, high ceiling player. Danielson is almost certainly going to end up at least as an elite 3c kind of guy but he also has a very good shot at being a better center than Larkin.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is no such thing as elite 3C.
 

Astyanax

Registered User
May 5, 2020
421
131
Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is no such thing as elite 3C.
I agree the term elite is used too frequently these days, as is generational, but I will counter with ideal 3 line center is an obtainable goal. Larionov was such for our team during our cup runs. And Bobby Holik was an ideal 3c, but of a different type, until the rangers decided to pay him like a 1c.
 

NickH8

Registered User
Jul 3, 2015
3,721
3,889
Sorry to interrupt everyone .. 3 primary assists in the first 10 minutes tonight
Wasn't a critique of his during his draft year that he wasn't a good playmaker? Cool to see him not only fix that but seemingly make it a strength
 

schuelma24

Registered User
Jul 14, 2023
673
1,134
Wasn't a critique of his during his draft year that he wasn't a good playmaker? Cool to see him not only fix that but seemingly make it a strength

You're not going to get any argument from me - I've said since January it was clear he was being held back to some extent by his teammates in Brandon. He's close to 1.5 PPG in Portland and doing it when it counts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Realgud

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Denmark vs Great Britain
    Denmark vs Great Britain
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $5.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Kazakhstan vs Germany
    Kazakhstan vs Germany
    Wagers: 4
    Staked: $2,335.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Austria vs Czechia
    Austria vs Czechia
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $101.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • USA vs Poland
    USA vs Poland
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $262.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Pittsburgh Pirates @ Chicago Cubs
    Pittsburgh Pirates @ Chicago Cubs
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $94.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad