C Quinton Byfield - Sudbury Wolves, OHL (2020 Draft) II

[tcat84]

As far as I know they are both big bodies. Do they have anything else in common? Why exactly did Jessiman go bust? Work ethic?

I have no clue about him at the time, but was apparently just a poor pick. 47 pts in 34 gp in the weakest NCAA division at the time. He apparently had some injury problems, and 2 years after the draft he only had 2 pts in 12 gp in college. So something wasn't right from early on.

Byfield had the 4th best PPG in the OHL for a U18 yr old in the last 10 yrs... People are acting like he had a down year and he's got "potential". He crushed it and he has potential.

 

[bert]

I can't help but feel like Byfield is a very, very easy #2 selection. I've never seen a high end prospect so routinely nitpicked.

Elite skating, athleticism, shot, skill, size, hands. He has a much better understanding of the game than this thread would make you believe. I'm seeing "question his hockey IQ" and I don't even know what that's supposed to mean considering there are tons of things to account for when measuring a players understanding on how hockey is played. Yet no one can actually explain what he needs to improve on, they just say he's "low IQ" and "his game doesn't translate".

I've also seen people say "big players don't translate because they use their size so much". What? Have these guys watched him? He never uses his size! He only uses his skill to dominate the OHL, imagine if he actually threw these kids around while he did so? NHL teams are probably salivating at the thought of him with physicality out there.

I just don't see how a player with such an elite skillset is so consistently criticised for things that other top prospects in this draft get away with. There's no logic to it.

I agree with all of this 100 percent.

 

[wetcoast]

He was talking about the high end talent. Fleury is an extremely meh first overall. Horton and Zherdev pretty meh. Staal was a great 2nd overall though. I think it was phrased kinda poorly but I dont think anyone is calling that a weak draft. The depth is what makes it great, not the top of the draft. 11-20 overall are better than 1-10

Pretty much this and I clarified it as such yet people want to focus on what they want to focus on instead of addressing the point I made which was initially about Jessman and the top guys in that draft.

 

[bert]

Pretty much this and I clarified it as such yet people want to focus on what they want to focus on instead of addressing the point I made which was initially about Jessman and the top guys in that draft.

First if all Fleury isnt a bad first overall pick. Second of all top to bottom its debatably the best draft of all time. Just because the top 10 wasnt one of the best ever doesnt cancel out the rest. Hell the top 10 is still pretty good comparably. Both are bad takes. Its not about people hearing what they want to hear its simply wrong.

 

[Doanator]

I have no clue about him at the time, but was apparently just a poor pick. 47 pts in 34 gp in the weakest NCAA division at the time. He apparently had some injury problems, and 2 years after the draft he only had 2 pts in 12 gp in college. So something wasn't right from early on.

Byfield had the 4th best PPG in the OHL for a U18 yr old in the last 10 yrs... People are acting like he had a down year and he's got "potential". He crushed it and he has potential.

Thanks!

 

[wetcoast]

First if all Fleury isnt a bad first overall pick. Second of all top to bottom its debatably the best draft of all time. Just because the top 10 wasnt one of the best ever doesnt cancel out the rest. Hell the top 10 is still pretty good comparably. Both are bad takes. Its not about people hearing what they want to hear its simply wrong.

Go back and look to the post I was responding too in Jessman being compared to Byfield.

There just isn't any comparison between the 2 players and at the top end of the draft, ie top 10 the 20 draft guys are much more hyped than the top 10 in 03 plain and simple.

Nathan Horton doesn't compare with Laf, they is no comparison to Byfield in the 03 draft, Staal.

Vanek wasn't on the same level as a prospect as Rossi or Tim Stützle.

I'm no expert on goalie prospects but was MAF really a better goalie prospect than Askarov who probably won't even go top 10?

 

[bert]

Go back and look to the post I was responding too in Jessman being compared to Byfield.

There just isn't any comparison between the 2 players and at the top end of the draft, ie top 10 the 20 draft guys are much more hyped than the top 10 in 03 plain and simple.

Nathan Horton doesn't compare with Laf, they is no comparison to Byfield in the 03 draft, Staal.

Vanek wasn't on the same level as a prospect as Rossi or Tim Stützle.

I'm no expert on goalie prospects but was MAF really a better goalie prospect than Askarov who probably won't even go top 10?

I agree Jessiman and Byfield are nothing alike, alot of Byfield haters for some strange reason or another. Staal and Byfield are very comparable. The top 20 is still the top end of the draft.... There was lots of hype for all of theses players; the fact of the matter is going into the draft everyone knew it was very deep and you are likely getting a very good player in the top 20 and not alot seperated these players. Vanek is very comparable to Rossi actually he almost had 400 goals and 800 points while playing 1000 games..... Yes MAF was a much better prospect than Askarov he started in the WJC and played very well, he actually almost stole the tournament for Canada. Askarov got lit up. Fleury has 3 cups and been to 5 SCF's....

I am excited about this draft as anyone but come on lets not lose our minds about 2003 or forget how good so many of these players were.

 

[MBH]

I can't help but feel like Byfield is a very, very easy #2 selection. I've never seen a high end prospect so routinely nitpicked.

Elite skating, athleticism, shot, skill, size, hands. He has a much better understanding of the game than this thread would make you believe. I'm seeing "question his hockey IQ" and I don't even know what that's supposed to mean considering there are tons of things to account for when measuring a players understanding on how hockey is played. Yet no one can actually explain what he needs to improve on, they just say he's "low IQ" and "his game doesn't translate".

I've also seen people say "big players don't translate because they use their size so much". What? Have these guys watched him? He never uses his size! He only uses his skill to dominate the OHL, imagine if he actually threw these kids around while he did so? NHL teams are probably salivating at the thought of him with physicality out there.

I just don't see how a player with such an elite skillset is so consistently criticised for things that other top prospects in this draft get away with. There's no logic to it.

And he's still younger than most of the draft.
And big kids often take time to "grow into their bodies."

Even though he's not super physical, I do seem him do some things with his size that he's going to have to grow out of.

And I wish his game was more direct to the net.

He does throw the puck away a little bit or skate himself into strange places on the ice.

But if bee-lines his game toward the net, he's going to be nearly impossible to stop.
A bigger, faster Getzlaf.

I don't think he'll ever quite be Malkin. But maybe I'm wrong.

 

[wetcoast]

I agree Jessiman and Byfield are nothing alike, alot of Byfield haters for some strange reason or another. Staal and Byfield are very comparable. The top 20 is still the top end of the draft.... There was lots of hype for all of theses players; the fact of the matter is going into the draft everyone knew it was very deep and you are likely getting a very good player in the top 20 and not alot seperated these players. Vanek is very comparable to Rossi actually he almost had 400 goals and 800 points while playing 1000 games..... Yes MAF was a much better prospect than Askarov he started in the WJC and played very well, he actually almost stole the tournament for Canada. Askarov got lit up. Fleury has 3 cups and been to 5 SCF's....

I am excited about this draft as anyone but come on lets not lose our minds about 2003 or forget how good so many of these players were.

I think there is some convenient hindsight is 20 20 confusion going on here, the top 10 in 03 weren't nearly as acclaimed and anticipated as the top 10 this year, especially the top 3 or 4 guys.

Either way it's time to get the train back on the tracks here.

 

[93LEAFS]

And he's still younger than most of the draft.
And big kids often take time to "grow into their bodies."

Even though he's not super physical, I do seem him do some things with his size that he's going to have to grow out of.

And I wish his game was more direct to the net.

He does throw the puck away a little bit or skate himself into strange places on the ice.

But if bee-lines his game toward the net, he's going to be nearly impossible to stop.
A bigger, faster Getzlaf.

I don't think he'll ever quite be Malkin. But maybe I'm wrong.

Depends on the build. Most big guys take awhile because they are lanky as hell. That isn't really a case with Byfield, Dach last year or someone like Matthews. They lack the core-strength to be strong skaters. That doesn't really apply to Byfield.

 

[MBH]

Depends on the build. Most big guys take awhile because they are lanky as hell. That isn't really a case with Byfield, Dach last year or someone like Matthews. They lack the core-strength to be strong skaters. That doesn't really apply to Byfield.

I'm not so sure. Depends where all that strength is. I've seen him hit guys and bounce off them like he was 6'4, 175 pounds. It's probably because he just hasn't quite figured out how to use his weight yet.
I think he's probably going to be a 235-pound guy like Mantha when he's done.

 

[93LEAFS]

I'm not so sure. Depends where all that strength is. I've seen him hit guys and bounce off them like he was 6'4, 175 pounds. It's probably because he just hasn't quite figured out how to use his weight yet.
I think he's probably going to be a 235-pound guy like Mantha when he's done.

He's already a solid 6'4 220 or so. I wouldn't expect the type of typical big gains people mention when talking about the lanky guys.

 

[Sasso09]

there is just no comparison between Byfield and this guy in a very weak 2003 draft where he was picked 12th BTW

Okay.... log off.. 2003 was one of the strongest drafts in NHL History, top 3.

 

[Sasso09]

He was talking about the high end talent. Fleury is an extremely meh first overall. Horton and Zherdev pretty meh. Staal was a great 2nd overall though. I think it was phrased kinda poorly but I dont think anyone is calling that a weak draft. The depth is what makes it great, not the top of the draft. 11-20 overall are better than 1-10

He was still very wrong.

 

[McGilliScout]

And he's still younger than most of the draft.
And big kids often take time to "grow into their bodies."

Even though he's not super physical, I do seem him do some things with his size that he's going to have to grow out of.

And I wish his game was more direct to the net.

He does throw the puck away a little bit or skate himself into strange places on the ice.

But if bee-lines his game toward the net, he's going to be nearly impossible to stop.
A bigger, faster Getzlaf.

I don't think he'll ever quite be Malkin. But maybe I'm wrong.

I don't disagree with any of your statements here. I just think all of these are small issues and most of them can be worked out. And even if they can't, the rest of his game has such absurd upside that they'd more than make up for his downfalls. A big, monstrous Getzlaf with more athleticism (but a less dynamic playmaker) would still be a tremendously effective NHL player and you could do a lot worse at second overall.

And if he does improve on all those points, as well as fine tune the rest of his game, he will be an absolute monster. I agree that he won't be Malkin but that's fine with me still, not every 2nd overall pick needs to be one of the most dominant players of the 21st century to still be a resounding success.

I just love everything about his game. I can't wait to see what kind of monster he becomes.

 

[MBH]

I don't disagree with any of your statements here. I just think all of these are small issues and most of them can be worked out. And even if they can't, the rest of his game has such absurd upside that they'd more than make up for his downfalls. A big, monstrous Getzlaf with more athleticism (but a less dynamic playmaker) would still be a tremendously effective NHL player and you could do a lot worse at second overall.

And if he does improve on all those points, as well as fine tune the rest of his game, he will be an absolute monster. I agree that he won't be Malkin but that's fine with me still, not every 2nd overall pick needs to be one of the most dominant players of the 21st century to still be a resounding success.

I just love everything about his game. I can't wait to see what kind of monster he becomes.

I'm one of the few Wings fans who has Byfield as a possible #1 overall if we land the pick. So you don't have to sell me

 

[Artorius Horus T]

Just cannot understand the negative stuff Byfield gets,....are people blind????.

 

[Artorius Horus T]

Dude is genuine franchise center to be.

 

[DJB]

Byfield is easily a top 3 talent in this draft

the only reason he falls is if a team picks based on need but who doesn’t need a physically gifted and skilled top line center ?

Hugh Jessimen?

He wrote skilled.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Just cannot understand the negative stuff Byfield gets,....are people blind????.

I truly wonder what people would say about him if Lafreniere weren't in this draft. It's like they're talking themselves out of Byfield since there's not Kakko/Hughes, Seguin/Hall is-he-or-isn't-he-#1 criticism of Laf going on.

 

[uncleben]

A Development Plan for Quinton Byfield by Jack Han (former Hockey Ops Assistant for the Maple Leafs/Assistant Coach of the Marlies)

Whether you fully agree with the article, it's certainly an interesting read!

"Byfield is unbelievable, but he'll underachieve in the NHL unless he gets his upper body more upright so that he can see and react to the play better."

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

A Development Plan for Quinton Byfield by Jack Han (former Hockey Ops Assistant for the Maple Leafs/Assistant Coach of the Marlies)

Whether you fully agree with the article, it's certainly an interesting read!

"Byfield is unbelievable, but he'll underachieve in the NHL unless he gets his upper body more upright so that he can see and react to the play better."

Adam Oates skill coaching opportunity

 

[canuck2010]

He's already a solid 6'4 220 or so. I wouldn't expect the type of typical big gains people mention when talking about the lanky guys.

I saw him warming up in a track suit before a Sudbury playoff game in Ottawa not long ago. He was slim, I can see 15 lbs easily.

 

[Samsquanch]

Despite this being a very disappointing day for Sens fans, the dream of him going to the Ottawa is still alive for me.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Byfield has excellent awareness. He takes the puck into openings right as they are about to become openings. Analysis paralysis IMO. Don’t know why people are taking shots at his IQ and ability to read plays. Byfield makes something out of nothing even when outnumbered