I think he possesses an somewhat elite shot. I'm surprised people don't talk bout it more.
C/LW Anton Lundell - IFK Helsinki, Liiga (2020 Draft)
- Thread starter ChicagoBullsFan
- Start date
- Status
abo9
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2017
- 9,087
- 7,179
That's exactly the kind of players that make Habs management's heart skip a beat.
I have not seen Lundell play, but how are lots of people on this thread labelling him as a future 3C, yet is he pegged as a top 10-15 pick? Is it because his floor is really high so the risk is really low on him?
Also, obviously this is stat-watching but what's the big difference between Laine who put 33 points in 46 games in SM-Liiga vs Lundell's 28 in 44?
Laine had probably top10 one timer + top10 wrister in the world starting from the early months of year 2016.
His playoffs were also absolutely ridiculous for a first time draft eligible player and his never ending confidence was truly showing. His upside appeared to be through the roof.
Lundell is much more vanilla which probably hurts his stock. I am a huge Lundell fan btw but Laine simply was a special type of prospect regardless of points.
Somewhat elite is like saying you’re sort of pregnant: you either are, or not. Laine’s shot is elite. Lundell’s shot is not even a poor man’s version of Laine.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,854
- 40,364
I think Lundell will be a 3C the same way Malkin is a 2C
Also worth some consideration is that Lundell got very little ice time this season. Under 16 minutes on average. His corsi% also was 61.9% which lead his entire HIFK team.
This is a terrible comparison because being "elite" is not binary. It's a description of an abstract concept that cannot accurately be measured in the first place.
Have to say he shoots too many times from long distance but versality of his shot is great. fast release and doesn't just try to pick corners. He can shoot from unexpected angles and is five-hole specialist. Though before this spring his linemates in HIFK were at the level where best option with puck is to shoot from everywhere.
If C starved MN has a choice between Lundell and Perfetti, they might have to pick the former. Chances are good that Lundell could be playing C for them in a year or so. Perfetti might, but it's far less likely.
The big difference is a year of development. Lundell, as a late-birthday, is in his 18YR old year, while Laine put up those numbers in his 17YR old year.
At the same age Lundell had 19P in 38GP. Good production but not nearly as good as Laine, which is why Laine went top 2 and Lundell probably goes somewhere in the 8-12 range.
Laine is a completely different player than Lundell, though. don't see why we are comparing them. Only thing they have in common is nationality. Laine is a great goal scorer, mediocre at best defensively, and a wing. Lundell's ability to put up points is open to question, is a vg or better defensive player, and a C.
Comparing him to Mikko Koivu makes a lot more sense to me. If Lundell is the next Mikko, then teams would be crazy not to pick him in the 5-8 range.
Comparing him to Mikko Koivu makes a lot more sense to me. If Lundell is the next Mikko, then teams would be crazy not to pick him in the 5-8 range.
Kaners Bald Spot
Registered User
I think he's a good bet to be similar to Koivu. More goals, fewer assissts though.
Another good comparison is the Kings version of Jeff Carter. Defensively responsible, 30+ goals, not a lot of assists. I don't think he's going to put up 84 points like Carter did for his career high though.
Well, Mikko is a big man. He is every bit of 6'3", and isn't slim. Is also an outstanding defensive player, with some very underrated hands. Like Lundell, his skating has never been much, but it's always been enough, if you know what I mean. Unless Lundell grows more, he won't be as big.
Like i said earlier, if Lundell is as good as Koivu, teams should be running up to the podium to pick him. Mikko in his prime was a terrific player, albeit one surrounded by mediocrity, and playing in a system that stressed D. I have my doubts that Lundell will be that good, but he might. Certainly hard to evaluate a guy like him playing with men in the past two years compared to smaller offensive forwards racking up point totals in the CHL.
Like i said earlier, if Lundell is as good as Koivu, teams should be running up to the podium to pick him. Mikko in his prime was a terrific player, albeit one surrounded by mediocrity, and playing in a system that stressed D. I have my doubts that Lundell will be that good, but he might. Certainly hard to evaluate a guy like him playing with men in the past two years compared to smaller offensive forwards racking up point totals in the CHL.
jc17
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2013
- 11,031
- 7,760
Prospects' ages are so overrated.
Being older in a draft class is certainly an advantage and should be considered. But not so much that you compare one guy in his d-1 year to a guy in his draft year.
Being older in a draft class is certainly an advantage and should be considered. But not so much that you compare one guy in his d-1 year to a guy in his draft year.
100%. It's like people noticed the differences in relative age in the last few years and suddenly started massively over-correcting for it. And this is despite the fact that there seems to be a positive correlation between a player's "lateness of birth" and his NHL success.
Imagine treating the top of the 2014 draft that way:
"Well, Reinhart, Draisaitl, Bennett and Dal Colle all had a great year in the CHL, but Reinhart and Draisaitl are almost a year older than the others, so I guess Bennett and Dal Colle have more potential and are the top forward prospects in the draft."
It's just baffling to me how many people treat relative age as a huge deal but handwave size problems away like it doesn't matter.
Puh-leaze
10 goals with half of them on the PP and a PDO of 99.2 suggests that at 100 PDO he should’ve scored 12 goals? Laine has a lethal shot, Lundell is nowhere near that level.
I wonder why every single prospect has to get his tires pumped to within an 1/1000 mb.
He’s a nice player in a league that has gone backwards in quality.
Where the hell did i compare his shot to Laine? He has a lethal shot, he just hasn't used it as often as one would like but it is there.
Your concept of lethal is wildly divergent than mine then.
So Lundell is doing a Milton Berle, just showing enough to get those...ten of goals?
You do realise that Lundell played on the 3rd line and not even a full season right? He played defensive game and the Liiga is like 40 something games a season? What you use as justifiction for him being bad is just hilarious. I will enjoy seeing you eat your words on this thread nomore when Lundell breaks out in the NHL, not that it is any guarantee, but what your'e saying is kinda premature judgement on a little kid who you seem to know so little about in the first place, idk if you've ever actually watched him play, it doesn't seem like it.
I don't think Lundell's shot is great. It's like a "plop" where he doesn't get a great deal of power behind it. He also hasn't shown a great ability to get the puck off quickly or to one time well, in fact the opposite has been true. Still, focusing on goal totals is pretty ridiculous, for example Laine's shot was much much better than Kakko's even though Kakko scored 22 goals and Laine 17.
What are you talking about? Have you even seen his goals? Are you sure your'e talking about the right player?
Yes, I have seen all his goals. Why do you assume when someone doesn't agree with you that they've not watched him play? His hardest shot as listed on Liiga website is 132.7km/h, that's a muffin. Even Leevi Aaltonen registered a harder shot and his shot's a notorious muffin.
- Status
