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

[Mrb1p]

See the vision thing, I don't know about. The stretch passes are there but I didn't see great vision in the O zone. Yeah I mean he'd be more in the Weber mould. He's strong as an ox for his size and just strong period. Romanov seems to be smart like Weber as well. I guess he could be more that style of a #1. But a large part of Weber's production comes from having one of the most dangerous slap shots ever. If you take away Weber's production is he still a #1? Not so sure about that and I'm someone who values his defensive game pretty highly.

Good thing Romos much more monile and is a much more creative passer!

Ultimately, he probably wont be a 1D but still, hes there and the tools are good.

 

[montreal]

Collberg and Leblanc should be compared to Suzuki, Brook, and Juulsen. They had decent WJC. Romanov had a very good WJC at age 18 (turned 19 during the tournament). Subban had 0 points in his 1st WJC (7 games) and then followed it up at age 19 with 9 pts in 6 games with 3 goals. An argument can be made that Romanov showed his potential earlier than Subban. Romanov will play another WJC at age 19 (turning 20 during the tournament) too.

I know what you are saying but players who were performing as one of the best in the WJC tournament don't bust. It's very rare. The hype on Romanov is real. The real question is how hungry he is to get better. That is the ingredient that you or I can't predict.

This is more about the eye test and how players can stand out. Romanov clearly stood out like Subban did when he played his age 19 WJC but Romanov did it in his age 18 season.

Collberg had 4 goals, 7 pts in 6 games at 17, that's better then any of Romanov, Subban, etc.. Yet it led to nothing. Not many 17 year olds are over a ppg at the WJC's, Collberg was and followed it up with 12 pts in the next 2 WJC's.

 

[Goldenhands]

Collberg had 4 goals, 7 pts in 6 games at 17, that's better then any of Romanov, Subban, etc.. Yet it led to nothing. Not many 17 year olds are over a ppg at the WJC's, Collberg was and followed it up with 12 pts in the next 2 WJC's.

As far as I recall, Collberg was very skilled, but was on the small side and not particulary fast, he never could bring his game at the other level against men, I think a good comparison for Collberg at the same age is Ikonen, both on the small side and not that fast, but extremmely skilled with the puck and good shooting abilities... Those are boom or bust type of prospects...

 

[Habs Halifax]

Collberg had 4 goals, 7 pts in 6 games at 17, that's better then any of Romanov, Subban, etc.. Yet it led to nothing. Not many 17 year olds are over a ppg at the WJC's, Collberg was and followed it up with 12 pts in the next 2 WJC's.

I guess there are always exceptions to the rule but the exception is not the rule? From what I have noticed, players who perform both in production and in the eye test and they stand out in the WJC, they usually become very good NHL Players.

What's funny is people say you should calm down on hype and hope and it's a small tournament but if a guy like Poehling or Ikonen struggles to produce (2018 WJC), these same people are all over it saying they suck cause they didn't perform well in the WJC.

I will always value the WJC in the eye test and how they stand out. It's a very high level of competition for the best 17, 18, and 19 year olds in the world. I don't care if it's a short tournament, There is value to use in evaluation on how the player is developing. Players that dominate the WJC, usually become very good NHL players. I know this to be true but yes, there are always exceptions.

 

[Habs Halifax]

As far as I recall, Collberg was very skilled, but was on the small side and not particulary fast, he never could bring his game at the other level against men, I think a good comparison for Collberg at the same age is Ikonen, both on the small side and not that fast, but extremmely skilled with the puck and good shooting abilities... Those are boom or bust type of prospects...

Collberg is a perfect example to use but he classifies as an exception, not the rule. I think the better evaluation is the eye test and how the player stands out (like Subban and Romanov for example). Even Poehling didn't really stand out in terms of puck possession skills and I think he is a good example to use to calm down hype and hope. Expecting Poehling to be a 80 pts center in the NHL based on producing in a WJC for one tournament is premature. I agree with this narrative. Look at Suzuki... did he stand out? I don't think he did. He did show flashes of his play making and vision though. It's more about the eye test vs his 3 assist in 5 games.

Romanov to me stood out. His mobility and skating was top notch and he was physical and engaged in the play. He also produced points. All positive signs just like Subban back when. Not saying he turns into Subban for sure but with me, it's the same evaluation eye test in terms of standing out.

 

[montreal]

As far as I recall, Collberg was very skilled, but was on the small side and not particulary fast, he never could bring his game at the other level against men, I think a good comparison for Collberg at the same age is Ikonen, both on the small side and not that fast, but extremmely skilled with the puck and good shooting abilities... Those are boom or bust type of prospects...

Collberg was speed and shot and not much else. But he sure killed it at the WJC's, which is my point that you have to be careful with short tournaments.

I guess there are always exceptions to the rule but the exception is not the rule? From what I have noticed, players who perform both in production and in the eye test and they stand out in the WJC, they usually become very good NHL Players.

What's funny is people say you should calm down on hype and hope and it's a small tournament but if a guy like Poehling or Ikonen struggles to produce (2018 WJC), these same people are all over it saying they suck cause they didn't perform well in the WJC.

I will always value the WJC in the eye test and how they stand out. It's a very high level of competition for the best 17, 18, and 19 year olds in the world. I don't care if it's a short tournament, There is value to use in evaluation on how the player is developing. Players that dominate the WJC, usually become very good NHL players. I know this to be true but yes, there are always exceptions.

The problem is that it's 5, 6, maybe 7 games. You don't know what's going on. A player could be sick, injured, etc... I've said I don't think people should put too much good or bad into the WJC's because it's a short tournament. People were freaking out when at 19 Lekonen had 1 pt and then he went on the next year to have one of the best playoffs in SHL history. Just as people were going nuts of Kostitsyn's U-18's.

You want a player to do well, the mere fact that Romanov was there at 18 is impressive, we'll see what that leads to next year and beyond.

 

[Habs Halifax]

The problem is that it's 5, 6, maybe 7 games. You don't know what's going on. A player could be sick, injured, etc... I've said I don't think people should put too much good or bad into the WJC's because it's a short tournament. People were freaking out when at 19 Lekonen had 1 pt and then he went on the next year to have one of the best playoffs in SHL history. Just as people were going nuts of Kostitsyn's U-18's.

You want a player to do well, the mere fact that Romanov was there at 18 is impressive, we'll see what that leads to next year and beyond.

I get what your saying. It's a short tournament. However, I will never look past a player who stands out and performs well in both the eye test and points production. Trends tell us that players who stand out and produce points, typically are very good NHL players.

Look at Kotkaniemi in the U18's for example. Don't you think this is a huge part of why his stock increased heading into the draft? Wasn't that a short tournament too?

The problem I would have is to overrate Poehling based on his WJC (round 2). I like this kid but do I think he is a pt/game center in the NHL based on his WJC performance? NO. He did very well in production but so so in the eye test. We are not talking about a puck possession center who dominated and stood out. He had one very good game where he scored big goals and chipped in here and there in other games.

 

[montreal]

I get what your saying. It's a short tournament. However, I will never look past a player who stands out and performs well in both the eye test and points production. Trends tell us that players who stand out and produce points, typically are very good NHL players.

Look at Kotkaniemi in the U18's for example. Don't you think this is a huge part of why his stock increased heading into the draft? Wasn't that a short tournament too?

The problem I would have is to overrate Poehling based on his WJC (round 2). I like this kid but do I think he is a pt/game center in the NHL based on his WJC performance? NO. He did very well in production but so so in the eye test. We are not talking about a puck possession center who dominated and stood out. He had one very good game where he scored big goals and chipped in here and there in other games.

Kotka had one of the best seasons a 17 year old has had in Liiga, so I would think that's a huge reason why we were in on him.

 

[Locks]

Collberg did put up points but he was far from dominating. In fact, I think his last WJC he was pretty disappointing. He was a perimeter shooter mainly effective on the PP. It was Wennenberg and Jonsson who made things happen on that line. I found him very one-dimensional - it was his shot and nothing else. Even his skating was rather average. For him to really succeed he needed to have good hockey sense to get lost in the coverage to unleash his shot a la Brett Hull, or more realistically, Mike Cammi. But he did not have that hockey sense, unfortunately.

Romanov is a total different story. While his offensive upside is hard to predict at this point, he demonstrated a very nice set of tools, including great hockey sense, top end skating, impressive physique and passing, and a booming shot. And while WJC was his coming out party, he was rather consistent in his performances: led Russia with +5 at U18 and led Russia in scoring at WJCA ahead of the likes of Denisenko, Ivan Morozov and Ishakov (+/- is not available there). Not to mention what he has done in the KHL at 18 as a defenseman.

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

I get what your saying. It's a short tournament. However, I will never look past a player who stands out and performs well in both the eye test and points production. Trends tell us that players who stand out and produce points, typically are very good NHL players.

Look at Kotkaniemi in the U18's for example. Don't you think this is a huge part of why his stock increased heading into the draft? Wasn't that a short tournament too?

The problem I would have is to overrate Poehling based on his WJC (round 2). I like this kid but do I think he is a pt/game center in the NHL based on his WJC performance? NO. He did very well in production but so so in the eye test. We are not talking about a puck possession center who dominated and stood out. He had one very good game where he scored big goals and chipped in here and there in other games.

I think it's a case of who's the real Poehling. One doesn't want to overrate the WJCs but you also don't want to ignore it either (not saying you are). I think with really good wingers he can possibly produce like a legit top 6 C. I don't think his bros are doing him any favours production wise (and production projection wise for us). I don't watch him at all so I really can't say definitively. That 2nd goal of his hat trick at the WJCs was a pretty crazy snipe that I just didn't know he could do. I'm just thinking we're not necessarily seeing the best of Poehling at St. Cloud. I could easily be wrong. I've been pretty cautious about his upside but I can definitely see a realistic scenario where he can be a really good #2C (whether Domi goes back to wing or not is a different story).

 

[Mike Mike Caron]

I remember watching Collberg in a pre-season game and be amazed at how he wouldn't do anything, he would just skate around the ice with no intensity until his shift was done. The complete contrary of Subban or Romanov.

 

[montreal]

Collberg did put up points but he was far from dominating. In fact, I think his last WJC he was pretty disappointing. He was a perimeter shooter mainly effective on the PP. It was Wennenberg and Jonsson who made things happen on that line. I found him very one-dimensional - it was his shot and nothing else. Even his skating was rather average. For him to really succeed he needed to have good hockey sense to get lost in the coverage to unleash his shot a la Brett Hull, or more realistically, Mike Cammi. But he did not have that hockey sense, unfortunately.

Romanov is a total different story. While his offensive upside is hard to predict at this point, he demonstrated a very nice set of tools, including great hockey sense, top end skating, impressive physique and passing, and a booming shot. And while WJC was his coming out party, he was rather consistent in his performances: led Russia with +5 at U18 and led Russia in scoring at WJCA ahead of the likes of Denisenko, Ivan Morozov and Ishakov (+/- is not available there). Not to mention what he has done in the KHL at 18 as a defenseman.

Collberg did disappoint at the last WJC because he didn't improve off his first which was great, you just don't see that many 17 year olds over a ppg. So it at least made sense as to why Timmins was hyped on him at draft day.

 

[cphabs]

Gardiner scored 50 points in the NHL. Is it huge? I mean, a lot of Toronto fans would be happy to get rid of him...

Ok

 

[Habs Halifax]

I remember watching Collberg in a pre-season game and be amazed at how he wouldn't do anything, he would just skate around the ice with no intensity until his shift was done. The complete contrary of Subban or Romanov.

This is what I am talking about. It's not just about point production. It's about the eye test and then when the produce, you start to open your eyes and say wow, this guy could be good. I had that feeling with Subban and I have that feeling with Romanov now. I never had the feeling with Collberg. I didn't even have that feeling with Poehling or Suzuki in the last WJC. I like their game but did they stand out? Well here and there at times I guess but nothing like Romanov.

 

[Mike Mike Caron]

This is what I am talking about. It's not just about point production. It's about the eye test and then when the produce, you start to open your eyes and say wow, this guy could be good. I had that feeling with Subban and I have that feeling with Romanov now. I never had the feeling with Collberg. I didn't even have that feeling with Poehling or Suzuki in the last WJC. I like their game but did they stand out? Well here and there at times I guess but nothing like Romanov.

Poehling brings intensity to the game, Suzuki has a Collberg feeling for sure.

 

[cphabs]

Romanov has the luxury of just staying in the KHL or returning to it if treated like poop by us. He has the balls to do it too. Why am I bringing this up? Galchenyuk, Markov, Radulov etc.

 

[Sam I Am]

I remember watching Collberg in a pre-season game and be amazed at how he wouldn't do anything, he would just skate around the ice with no intensity until his shift was done. The complete contrary of Subban or Romanov.

A better comparable would be Nick Suzuki who despite his obvious skills managed to be strangely uninvolved in the play during the WJC. Often on the outside, waiting for the play to come to him. Very reminiscent of Collberg's play in his 2nd WJC.

 

[Whitesnake]

Romanov is on his way to FINALLY be the best WTF pick in Timmins career.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

The WJC was a great chance to watch Romanov, Poehling, Yolo, etc against their peers.

But let’s not overrate it when it comes to Suzuki and Brook who we already knew who they were. Brook had a forgettable tournament too, though he’s getting a pass, but both guys have already shown so much at the CHL level that we can’t let a few games with new teammates override what we’ve seen already for multiple years. Pretty much everyone on Canada had a disappointing tourney, even Glass, Comtois, and Tippett who were supposed to dominate disappeared when it counted.

Players coming from the CHL are at a disadvantage at the tourney as they are facing a bump up in competition. While guys from the NCAA and Europe men’s league are facing a dip down.

 

[JustAHabFan]

Romanov is on his way to FINALLY be the best WTF pick in Timmins career.

For me it's PK Subban.

 

[OldCraig71]

I don't ever see Romanov playing for this franchise, we have moved on from all of our Russian players. He is probably the prospect with the highest chance of being traded if we try and acquire someone at the tdl.

 

[EveryDay]

I don't ever see Romanov playing for this franchise, we have moved on from all of our Russian players. He is probably the prospect with the highest chance of being traded if we try and acquire someone at the tdl.

How many years did Markov play in MTL? yeah MTL don't like Russian.....

 

[OldCraig71]

How many years did Markov play in MTL? yeah MTL don't like Russian.....

I was apprehensive about typing what I did because I anticipated a response just like this one! You must be the type that blames Price after a goal as well. We got rid of every single Russian player we had and didn't resign Markov when even at his age would have arguably have been our best defender, it is not just a conspiracy theory of mine.

 

[yianik]

Romanov is on his way to FINALLY be the best WTF pick in Timmins career.

Lol. I know you have been waiting for TT to produce one of those completely off the chart scores. So far so great, but time will tell.

 

[loudi94]

I was apprehensive about typing what I did because I anticipated a response just like this one! You must be the type that blames Price after a goal as well. We got rid of every single Russian player we had and didn't resign Markov when even at his age would have arguably have been our best defender, it is not just a conspiracy theory of mine.

If you're referring to the group that were playing cards on the plane after being eliminated by the Rangers, yes they were Russion. However it was the act that supposedly soured management, not their nationality.