Prospect Info: Alexander Romanov (2018, 38th OA) - KHL, CSKA Moscow: Part IV

[Sterling Archer]

How are we going to know what his actual abilities are until he does it with consistency?

He has been consistent and in a men’s league where he’s improved consistently and given more ice time and responsibilities throughout the season. It’s pretty obvious you haven’t followed him at all and spend all your time going next over Brooks’ stats in junior because you’d know this and that playing on the KHL and consistently given more ice time as an 18 year old is almost completely unheard of. Yet you think he hasn’t proved himself more than other prospects who were playing against boys but were dominated when playing against Romanov. Don’t you see that makes no sense whatsoever?

 

[rickthegoon]

True, but they also proved more in league play. Heiskanen dominated the Liiga and Makar was really ****ing good in the NCAA. Romanov shown us nothing in the KHL. Yes, making the team is nice, but he showed nothing on the ice, and thats why no one can evaluate him.

What he did show is that he was the most dominant def among his group age ( and older) at the world juniors.
Kid looks like a real stud.
I'm just hoping the Russians dont get in a pissing Contest with the Habs like it happened with Emelin a few years back and Romanov ends up in the KHL for 6-7 years.

 

[Mrb1p]

He has been consistent and in a men’s league where he’s improved consistently and given more ice time and responsibilities throughout the season. It’s pretty obvious you haven’t followed him at all and spend all your time going next over Brooks’ stats in junior because you’d know this and that playing on the KHL and consistently given more ice time as an 18 year old is almost completely unheard of. Yet you think he hasn’t proved himself more than other prospects who were playing against boys but were dominated when playing against Romanov. Don’t you see that makes no sense whatsoever?

He got minutes throughout the year, his ice time didnt go up, it was inconsistent. Anyway, this isnt going no where and youve been trying to spin every thing. Call me when you want to debate honestly.

What he did show is that he was the most dominant def among his group age ( and older) at the world juniors.
Kid looks like a real stud.
I'm just hoping the Russians dont get in a pissing Contest with the Habs like it happened with Emelin a few years back and Romanov ends up in the KHL for 6-7 years.

Ya he did show that, but whats that worth over a full year or even two? Its 7 games.

And obviously he looked good every time Ive seen him, but hes still shown less than Dobson and Brook.

 

[Sterling Archer]

He got minutes throughout the year, his ice time didnt go up, it was inconsistent. Anyway, this isnt going no where and youve been trying to spin every thing. Call me when you want to debate honestly.



Ya he did show that, but whats that worth over a full year or even two? Its 7 games.

And obviously he looked good every time Ive seen him, but hes still shown less than Dobson and Brook.

How exactly was he “inconsistent” throughout the year? You wanted an honest debate, so shoot.

Hint: if he was not consistent and bringing value to the club, they wouldn’t hesitate for a millisecond to demote him. As I said before, the fact he even played the season in the KHL is a testament to how good he was as they are infamous for not playing kids.

 

[Natey]

Today I learned the AHL is better than the KHL.

 

[Mrb1p]

How exactly was he “inconsistent” throughout the year? You wanted an honest debate, so shoot.

Hint: if he was not consistent and bringing value to the club, they wouldn’t hesitate for a millisecond to demote him. As I said before, the fact he even played the season in the KHL is a testament to how good he was as they are infamous for not playing kids.

... this is getting ridiculous. Like read the post and the answer is in there. Take a few moment to actually read instead of just flying over what I write..

 

[Mrb1p]

Today I learned the AHL is better than the KHL.

A few years ago I wouldnt have said so but now IMO its better.

 

[Sterling Archer]

... this is getting ridiculous. Like read the post and the answer is in there. Take a few moment to actually read instead of just flying over what I write..

You mean this one?

He got minutes throughout the year, his ice time didnt go up, it was inconsistent. Anyway, this isnt going no where and youve been trying to spin every thing. Call me when you want to debate honestly.

This is what you want to debate honestly based on? “He played 12 min, it didn’t go up and it was inconsistent.” Blow me away with your in-depth knowledge of how he played, his usage and how he developed throughout the year.

This is a gong show. Just say you don’t know much about him so excluding Romanov, you think Brook is awesome. No problem. He is. But saying Romanov didn’t prove himself vs. Brook and Dobson is just patently false.

 

[Mrb1p]

You mean this one?


This is what you want to debate honestly based on? “He played 12 min, it didn’t go up and it was inconsistent.” Blow me away with your in-depth knowledge of how he played, his usage and how he developed throughout the year.

This is a gong show. Just say you don’t know much about him so excluding Romanov, you think Brook is awesome. No problem. He is. But saying Romanov didn’t prove himself vs. Brook and Dobson is just patently false.

.... His ice-time... I talked about his ice-time.

 

[Sterling Archer]

.... His ice-time... I talked about his ice-time.

He was getting 12 min. Yes. Very very insightful. I’m amazed.

You might want to read this:

CSKA’s Coach Nikitin is not holding Alexander Romanov back, but rather offering him a good chance to succeed

Just looking at the ice time, one would miss a lot of the context behind Romanov’s solid start to the KHL season.

 

[montreal]

I agree with everything you wrote pretty much, the only thing I didn't understand with Romanov, is why, if they brought him along slowly all year, steadily increased his playing time and obviously having the trust of the coach to get the extra time, was he completely ignored by his team in the playoffs? Is this normal to go from an everyday player to a scratch or limited ice time in the KHL playoffs because of age?

He played for the top team in the KHL, in the playoffs when things were tighter they didn't play him much until the game broke open. Or that's how it was in the one game I saw, he had only 2-3 shifts or so as I'd have to look it up as I'm sure I posted in either his thread or the prospect thread, he didn't play at all in the 2nd while the game was still close but when they broke it open he played a regular shift in the 3rd. He ended up with an injury at some point during the playoffs which is why he didn't play at all past the 2nd round.

 

[HABitual Fan]

He played for the top team in the KHL, in the playoffs when things were tighter they didn't play him much until the game broke open. Or that's how it was in the one game I saw, he had only 2-3 shifts or so as I'd have to look it up as I'm sure I posted in either his thread or the prospect thread, he didn't play at all in the 2nd while the game was still close but when they broke it open he played a regular shift in the 3rd. He ended up with an injury at some point during the playoffs which is why he didn't play at all past the 2nd round.

Thanks, I was just curious about his not playing after the 2nd round as I wasn't aware he was injured

 

[Whitesnake]

So, I said he didnt dominate the KHL and somehow it means I expected him to dominate...?

Geez man....you compare Brook and Romanov by saying that one of the reasons why you say Brook is more proven than Romanov is that he dominated the WHL while Romanov didn't dominate the KHL. It has nothing to do with what you expected. It has EVERYTHING to do that your comparison to prove who progresses more is look at a player no matter the league he plays and if he dominated, it proves he's more proven.

 

[Whitesnake]

Romanov was surpassed by vets. At best, 8 years older than him like Nesterov. Marchenko, Dahlbeck, well known veterans. 30 years old guys like Robinson that was playing in his 6th season in the KHL. Naumenkov that nobody knows but has seen the KHL since 2013. And Blazhiyevsky that even less people know that you could think was the most serious competition to surpass for Romanov. STill 7 years younger than him.A guy that has been in the KHL since 2014. Tough crowd to surpass. And the proof? They won.

 

[Mrb1p]

Geez man....you compare Brook and Romanov by saying that one of the reasons why you say Brook is more proven than Romanov is that he dominated the WHL while Romanov didn't dominate the KHL. It has nothing to do with what you expected. It has EVERYTHING to do that your comparison to prove who progresses more is look at a player no matter the league he plays and if he dominated, it proves he's more proven.

The fact is Brook has done it, Romanov has not. No matter the ifs and buts. It didnt happen. I dont understand the outrage. Obviously the KHL is a tougher league and I dont hold both feat on the same level.

 

[montreal]

It's very hard to try and compare a CHLer to a KHLer, you have to ask yourself if 2018's Brook were on this years CSKA and this up coming season's Romanov were on last years MJ team, do you think Romanov puts up 75 pts and ends up one of the best defensemen in the CHL while Brook puts up more then 4 pts in the KHL while being moved all over the lineup in very inconsistent ice time and usage in the 1st half.

There's just really no way to know, if you watch Romanov do you see high end offensive skill? When you watch Brook do you see high end offensive skill? It's hard to produce a high number of offense without a high level of skill, Brook has proven that he was one of the best defensemen in the CHL this past season. Romanov was a huge surprise and showed that he can hang in the KHL at 18 but it's still hard to project what that means for his offensive upside when he wasn't used in a role to showcase that and was told not to push it offensively (if what I heard was true)

 

[JC Superstar]

The good thing about Brook and Romanov is that they might be on the same team so there is no need to compare them. The bad thing about Brook and Romanov is that neither of them has proven themselves in the NHL. Both of them still have a step or two to go before being in the top four, which I'd be delighted they do.

Geesh, summer in HF!

 

[Andrei79]

I would personally add the nuance that Brook probably is more proven, offensively that is. That might be the product of playing in a lesser league, but we have a fairly good idea of how well his numbers compare to past offensive defensemen.

Romanov is proven, in the sense that we know he's a already an effective defender at the pro level, which we still don't know about Brook. He just hasn't had a long enough period of offensive production to project what his abilities are offensively, and that includes the MHL.

 

[Kshahdoo]

How are we going to know what his actual abilities are until he does it with consistency?

Well, he played on the team with 32M euro salary budget, add to this 13% taxation, and this budget was 40+M euro. That's the most you can get outside the NHL, so they could obviously sign almost any non an NHL regular in the world, but they played Romanov. Of course, the KHL has the rule, that obligates teams to dress U20 players for every game, but most teams do it the way, that young kids get on the rosters, but stay in the press box or play 2-3 min when games are done.

Romanov actually played in all situations, management trusted him, he made the team because of his skill, not because of his age. And he was 18 yo and defenseman, the position, that considered tougher one, than forwards. To me it proves a lot. Still not enough, of course, but a lot. More than anything in kids leagues. Especially considering, the only tournament he played vs his peers, he was named the best defenseman at, being actually 1 year younger, than most of his competitors.

 

[Mrb1p]

Brook has shown he can do it, those skills are not going to disappear when he goes up a level, his skating, wrister and his great head for the game are all real assets, he's shown he can use them over and over. Romanov has not shown that, he's flashed skills here and there and had a monster WJC.

 

[Mrb1p]

Well, he played on the team with 32M euro salary budget, add to this 13% taxation, and this budget was 40+M euro. That's the most you can get outside the NHL, so they could obviously sign almost any non an NHL regular in the world, but they played Romanov. Of course, the KHL has the rule, that obligates teams to dress U20 players for every game, but most teams do it the way, that young kids get on the rosters, but stay in the press box or play 2-3 min when games are done.

Romanov actually played in all situations, management trusted him, he made the team because of his skill, not because of his age. And he was 18 yo and defenseman, the position, that considered tougher one, than forwards. To me it proves a lot. Still not enough, of course, but a lot. More than anything in kids leagues. Especially considering, the only tournament he played vs his peers, he was named the best defenseman at, being actually 1 year younger, than most of his competitors.

He's a great prospect for sure, never denied that, thats why I have him in him LEAGUE-WIDE (@dackelljuneaubulis02 ) list of prospects, but he hasn't shown the offensive consistency that Dobson and Brook have.

 

[Kshahdoo]

He's a great prospect for sure, never denied that, thats why I have him in him LEAGUE-WIDE (@dackelljuneaubulis02 ) list of prospects, but he hasn't shown the offensive consistency that Dobson and Brook have.

Brook didn't show that consistancy at WJC, Brook didn't show that consistency in the AHL, and he's 7 months older, than Romanov. Why do you expect any offensive consistancy from 18 yo defenseman in the KHL?

 

[danyhabsfan]

Brook didn't show that consistancy at WJC, Brook didn't show that consistency in the AHL, and he's 7 months older, than Romanov. Why do you expect any offensive consistancy from 18 yo defenseman in the KHL?

you mean in his 7 AHL games?

 

[Mrb1p]

Brook didn't show that consistancy at WJC, Brook didn't show that consistency in the AHL, and he's 7 months older, than Romanov. Why do you expect any offensive consistancy from 18 yo defenseman in the KHL?

Thats 14 games total in a year span, thats why I don't mind it.

 

[Goldenhands]

The fact is Brook has done it, Romanov has not. No matter the ifs and buts. It didnt happen. I dont understand the outrage. Obviously the KHL is a tougher league and I dont hold both feat on the same level.

Looking at how great Romanov was against the best U20 in the world, winning the best defenseman award in his d+1 year only, let you think Romanov would have been a force in the CHL too, on another side, if Brook was Russian, we dont know if he would have cracked the best team in the KHL as early as Romanov did... Romanov could pretty much end up as a better all around defenseman than Brook, time will tell...