Andrej Sekera

[Hiishawk]

This Slovakian defenseman has been getting some good last-minute press from scouts. I must admit that when I saw him I liked him- very intense, excellent work ethic, fine balanced skater, sense of poise and control in all 3 zones, makes mistakes only out of over-eagerness.

But since nobody seemed to making any noise about him I assumed there must be something wrong with him that I wasn't aware of. Yeah- he's not big but neither is Sweden's Fransson. Foolishly, I left him off of my top 60 list because there was no confirming buzz about him (I did the same with Grigorenko in his draft year). Perhaps I was seeing only his best games, I thought. I guess everybody was trying to keep him as one of their little secrets. That secret seems to be out now.

Any other thoughts or comments on him? He could be a riser come draft day.

Click to read more...

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=1316854&highlight=#post1316854



Regarding this Sekera, I think it's a shame you did not list him. It is my personal opinion but I would find your stuff even more enjoyable if you strongly use your own feelings and views.

I don't think you have to care about current trends or concensus. I don't need you to tell me Sekera did not generate buzz at that time, for instance. I know that by looking at other lists.

I can compile a "list of lists" and have a relative idea of what's concensus or not.

Your value to me is your own perspective. I do acknowledge that it would be foolish not to use one's network but sometimes you gotta go with what you see/think. Other lists will tell me what others think.

And I still don't understand why your list had to be final *then*. To me, that just does not make sense. Final list of undrafted prospect is done a minute before the draft as far as I'm concerned, with the best, latest and most polished information I can have.

Now, I understand you want a list in the open before the draft, but I would still wait until about a week before the draft. And any final list before the combine is pointless, again IMO. As good as it is *at the time* it will still risk missing on key information.

Hope you will take all of this as constructive criticism. And again, as opinion/preferences on my part.

 

[Hiishawk]

Actually Vlad, I did the list then because I didn't want people telling me afterwards that I was just copying one of the major agencies or magazines. I wanted to be first (or close to first) with rankings on some of the players, especially the 'new' guys who hadn't appeareed on many lists until then.

As for Sekera, I think my doubts were normal ones- have I missed something bad in his game? Does he have some off-ice history? Are these few games just an aberration? A pro scout would have (or could get) information that could allow one to answer these questions more easily.
Turns out he has no problems at all and has played well all year.

Of course I (and you) know now that it would have been a gutsy (and ultimately justifiable) move to list him. If I were still scouting and had or got the info I wanted, I'm sure I would have.

 

[czechhockeyfan]

This Slovakian defenseman has been getting some good last-minute press from scouts. I must admit that when I saw him I liked him- very intense, excellent work ethic, fine balanced skater, sense of poise and control in all 3 zones, makes mistakes only out of over-eagerness.

But since nobody seemed to making any noise about him I assumed there must be something wrong with him that I wasn't aware of. Yeah- he's not big but neither is Sweden's Fransson. Foolishly, I left him off of my top 60 list because there was no confirming buzz about him (I did the same with Grigorenko in his draft year). Perhaps I was seeing only his best games, I thought. I guess everybody was trying to keep him as one of their little secrets. That secret seems to be out now.

Any other thoughts or comments on him? He could be a riser come draft day.

I watched him several times and I agree with you even if I wouldn´t put him into TOP 60. Without doubt interesting prospect even if he is only 6-0.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Actually Vlad, I did the list then because I didn't want people telling me afterwards that I was just copying one of the major agencies or magazines. I wanted to be first (or close to first) with rankings on some of the players, especially the 'new' guys who hadn't appeareed on many lists until then.

Fair enough and understandable!

 

[Chief]

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=1316854&highlight=#post1316854



Regarding this Sekera, I think it's a shame you did not list him. It is my personal opinion but I would find your stuff even more enjoyable if you strongly use your own feelings and views.

I don't think you have to care about current trends or concensus. I don't need you to tell me Sekera did not generate buzz at that time, for instance. I know that by looking at other lists.

I can compile a "list of lists" and have a relative idea of what's concensus or not.

Your value to me is your own perspective. I do acknowledge that it would be foolish not to use one's network but sometimes you gotta go with what you see/think. Other lists will tell me what others think...

Vlad, I agree with you wholeheartedly. When we do our rankings on younggunshockey.com, we go with our gut and if our opinions fly in the face of conventional wisdom, so be it. Otherwise, why bother? And I hope steblick doesn't take this the wrong way because from what little time I spend on this site, I think he's a very knowledgeable poster.

It's just funny to me how in a lot of ways, some scouting reports seem to become more valid because everybody keeps repeating the same scouting report. We had someone in another thread get on us because we had Stafford rated over Olesz. I would be willing to bet there are NHL teams who feel the same way. If there's one thing I know it's that if you looked at the different NHL teams' draft boards, none of them would be exactly like any other. Scouting isn't an exact science. People have different biases and a lot of it has to do with "when" you see a player.

I remember hearing an interview with LA's QMJHL scout on a Moosehead postgame radio show 2 seasons ago and they asked him what he thought of goalie Jonathan Boutin. The scout replied that he'd been out to see him twice...and he got pulled in both games! Obviously, that scout will have a different opinion than a scout who wasn't at those two games.

 

[Hiishawk]

Chief-
Of course if I was a scout I'd be expected and be willing to go out on a limb. I'd also have the requisite information to do so. But in my position I have to put some stock in what other respected hockey people say before making any claims here.

 

[Chief]

Understand totally. Believe me, even if you get to see players, you often wonder why other "respected" sources have a different opinion than you do. Some differences of opinion are to be expected but if some player is totally under everyone else's radar you will find yourself wondering "what do they know that you don't know? In any case that was a very nice recap on those players.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Chief-
Of course if I was a scout I'd be expected and be willing to go out on a limb. I'd also have the requisite information to do so. But in my position I have to put some stock in what other respected hockey people say before making any claims here.

As I said earlier, I think your position is totally understandable. But here's a suggestion:

How about a small section titled: Steblick's picks? Or Steb's darkhorse? In a way, that's what you're already doing because you already start a couple of threads on lesser known players every now and then as it is.

Those threads are usually my favorites because there were many players I had not heard much from, or anything at all.

 

[Kirk- NEHJ]

I saw a team's 2001 list (well after the fact of course) and my jaw dropped.

What a lot of people fail to understand is how differently the various teams and their scouts look at the players in a given year. Everyone has their own set of parameters and characteristics that they place more stock in than others. Yet, year after year, the teams who grab the big names and the Central Scouting darlings are declared "winners" right off the bat, while people can't wait to anoint teams "losers" for going off the board early, or taking players who Central has rated lower than others.

I remember the Bruins catching heat for picking Shaone Morrisonn in '01 and Hannu Toivonen in '02. Yet, afterwards, both guys have certainly made strides and have come off as two of the more respectable selections in those years, at least so far.

But, it never ceases to amaze how some on here are so outspoken about what a certain team will or will not do, who they will or will not pick, and how someone else is "ridiculous" because they dare to suggest that a kid rated 72nd by Central will end up going in the first round.

I was there in Toronto when Edmonton grabbed Jesse Niinimaki, and a lot of people were shocked and surprised at the pick. Get ready for a lot more of that where he came from in Raleigh...it's gonna happen, folks. The scouts aren't talking and teams are keeping their cards close to the vest. We are in for one interesting time next Saturday once the top tier goes off the board.

Can't wait.