EastonBlues22
Registered User
Along with others above, I think that you can make good cases for a lot of guys here.
Schmaltz looks like he has an NHL player's skill set when I watch him, but we haven't actually had much of a chance to see him become established at that level for various reasons. Combine that with his age and being buried a bit on the depth chart and it puts a damper on the enthusiasm surrounding him. I still think he has a middle-pairing ceiling (though obviously he won't be that here) if he defends well at the NHL level and builds enough confidence in his roster position to play a less timid game. Even if he doesn't hit it, he could make for a more well-rounded and skilled bottom pairing guy than most teams would have available.
I think Walman is generally more dynamic than Schmaltz, but less well-rounded (as might be expected given that he's two years behind on the development curve, more even if you count the late position switch). I still think he has a higher ceiling than Schmaltz if he puts it all together. Hard to know how much getting jerked around last year in the AHL affected his season. It certainly wasn't optimal for his development, but that shouldn't be an issue moving forward. The more I think about it, one bad year probably shouldn't drop his stock too much if you liked him before since he was always a longer-term project, anyway.
Mikkola has really come along and is on a nice upward trajectory. My biggest questions will be can he add enough in transition and in the offensive zone to be more than a 1-1.5 zone asset in the NHL, and does he have the puck skills and composure to beat heavy pressure and key zone exits with possession on NA size ice. Like Walman, his ceiling seems to be relatively high if he puts it all together, but they both still seem to have a lot of questions to answer. Walman has the more dynamic offensive tools and IMO has more upside in the neutral and offensive zones, but Mikkola's upside seems higher in the defensive end.
I think the injuries Sanford suffered last season pretty much wrecked his year, so I'm not reading anything into the disappointing AHL stats last season. He looks to have the offensive skill set of a productive (for the role) 3rd liner to me. The big question is whether the rest of his game develops to the point where he can beat out competition to stick in that role, especially since he plays a fairly soft game for his size.
I think Foley also projects as a 3rd line sort of player. I don't think he's quite as skilled as Sanford, but he plays a more aggressive and direct game, and has more grittiness/sandpaper/edge/whatever it's called now, so that works in his favor. It'll be interesting to see how his offense game and play away from the puck look in the AHL.
Toropchenko could be that sort of player as well, but he had a pretty disappointing D+1 in the OHL, IMO...especially after a hot start. I know there were extenuating circumstances (1st NA year, bad team, father's death), but I think he needs to show something more before I can place him above Sanford or Foley since I don't think his upside is any higher than either of theirs.
To me, Blais just doesn't look dynamic enough to fill a top 6 role here and he doesn't really project as the sort of player that will fill a bottom 6 role. Since there's a lot of talk about having "4 scoring lines" right now, let me put it a different way. I think Blais needs to play with skilled players to get enough out of him to stick in the NHL, and I don't think he brings enough to the table right now to justify a slot with those sorts of players given the competition he's up against. I also don't think his game away from the puck or the style he plays is conducive to winning a spot on lower lines if he's not putting up points. I've been wrong about him before and there's still plenty of time for him to continue to evolve his game, but I don't think he's particularly close, or even particularly likely, to sticking in the NHL within this organization. I have a feeling I'm going to be lower on him than most.
I think that covers most of the guys who might get consideration here. I ended up going with Walman after waffling over it for awhile. Toropchenko and Blais were the two from this group that probably won't crack my top 10.
Schmaltz looks like he has an NHL player's skill set when I watch him, but we haven't actually had much of a chance to see him become established at that level for various reasons. Combine that with his age and being buried a bit on the depth chart and it puts a damper on the enthusiasm surrounding him. I still think he has a middle-pairing ceiling (though obviously he won't be that here) if he defends well at the NHL level and builds enough confidence in his roster position to play a less timid game. Even if he doesn't hit it, he could make for a more well-rounded and skilled bottom pairing guy than most teams would have available.
I think Walman is generally more dynamic than Schmaltz, but less well-rounded (as might be expected given that he's two years behind on the development curve, more even if you count the late position switch). I still think he has a higher ceiling than Schmaltz if he puts it all together. Hard to know how much getting jerked around last year in the AHL affected his season. It certainly wasn't optimal for his development, but that shouldn't be an issue moving forward. The more I think about it, one bad year probably shouldn't drop his stock too much if you liked him before since he was always a longer-term project, anyway.
Mikkola has really come along and is on a nice upward trajectory. My biggest questions will be can he add enough in transition and in the offensive zone to be more than a 1-1.5 zone asset in the NHL, and does he have the puck skills and composure to beat heavy pressure and key zone exits with possession on NA size ice. Like Walman, his ceiling seems to be relatively high if he puts it all together, but they both still seem to have a lot of questions to answer. Walman has the more dynamic offensive tools and IMO has more upside in the neutral and offensive zones, but Mikkola's upside seems higher in the defensive end.
I think the injuries Sanford suffered last season pretty much wrecked his year, so I'm not reading anything into the disappointing AHL stats last season. He looks to have the offensive skill set of a productive (for the role) 3rd liner to me. The big question is whether the rest of his game develops to the point where he can beat out competition to stick in that role, especially since he plays a fairly soft game for his size.
I think Foley also projects as a 3rd line sort of player. I don't think he's quite as skilled as Sanford, but he plays a more aggressive and direct game, and has more grittiness/sandpaper/edge/whatever it's called now, so that works in his favor. It'll be interesting to see how his offense game and play away from the puck look in the AHL.
Toropchenko could be that sort of player as well, but he had a pretty disappointing D+1 in the OHL, IMO...especially after a hot start. I know there were extenuating circumstances (1st NA year, bad team, father's death), but I think he needs to show something more before I can place him above Sanford or Foley since I don't think his upside is any higher than either of theirs.
To me, Blais just doesn't look dynamic enough to fill a top 6 role here and he doesn't really project as the sort of player that will fill a bottom 6 role. Since there's a lot of talk about having "4 scoring lines" right now, let me put it a different way. I think Blais needs to play with skilled players to get enough out of him to stick in the NHL, and I don't think he brings enough to the table right now to justify a slot with those sorts of players given the competition he's up against. I also don't think his game away from the puck or the style he plays is conducive to winning a spot on lower lines if he's not putting up points. I've been wrong about him before and there's still plenty of time for him to continue to evolve his game, but I don't think he's particularly close, or even particularly likely, to sticking in the NHL within this organization. I have a feeling I'm going to be lower on him than most.
I think that covers most of the guys who might get consideration here. I ended up going with Walman after waffling over it for awhile. Toropchenko and Blais were the two from this group that probably won't crack my top 10.
Last edited:
