CBJ Board Summer '18 Prospect Rankings: #3

[thebus88]

I'm not sure what you are asking. I don't think advanced stats are very useful for amateur scouting, at least not right now.

This all stems from me asking 'Jackets16', HOW do you determine a players supposed "potential" or "upside" without using their CURRENT abilities as the main variable ()? Then you just had to imply that my idea of prospect evaluation or hypothetical drafting was wrong (and that I would skip the North American/majority of prospects) as "no one drafts (thinks) that way".

I just find it interesting that in regards to "prospects", you say: "raw physical/mental ability counts for a lot". Then you talk about the evaluation of physique, learning ability, and hockey IQ. As if, all of this goes out the window when guys become "established" NHLers. Because your "evaluations" of NHL players and your "models" do not and can not account for "raw physical/mental ability", "learning ability", or "hockey IQ".

So what I am asking is 2 separate questions. To you, 'major', I simply ask how much "raw mental ability" (learning ability/hockey "IQ") and "raw physical ability" affect your evaluations of NHL players? And can I be pointed to where this can be found on perxxx60.com?

And to 'jacket16', how exactly DO YOU determine WHAT a prospects "potential" IS?​

 

[major major]

This all stems from me asking 'Jackets16', HOW do you determine a players supposed "potential" or "upside" without using their CURRENT abilities as the main variable ()? Then you just had to imply that my idea of prospect evaluation or hypothetical drafting was wrong (and that I would skip the North American/majority of prospects) as "no one drafts (thinks) that way".
​

Yeah I don't think you're that foolish, I'm just saying that's the logical conclusion of drafting the best current player.

And sometimes current abilities tells the story, sometimes it doesn't. That's why I used Mark Scheifele as an example. He wouldn't have been a top ten draft pick if his current ability at that point was the main variable.

So what I am asking is 2 separate questions. To you, 'major', I simply ask how much "raw mental ability" (learning ability/hockey "IQ") and "raw physical ability" affect your evaluations of NHL players? And can I be pointed to where this can be found on perxxx60.com?

It seems that you think you've found some kind of hypocrisy.

It's not very complicated. Advanced stats are like a better version of basic stats. They tell you a lot (though not all) about how good a player is right now. Advanced stats can also help discern who has been getting unlucky and might bounce back next year.

It doesn't add much though in answering how good an 18 year old will be when he is 24. He will be a very different player at that point.

 

[thebus88]

To give an example of the difference between 1) raw physical and mental attributes, and 2) current skillset, look at Mark Scheifele. He wasn't expected to be drafted at #7. He didn't have the skills put together, and he wasn't exceptionally productive in the OHL. But the Jets saw his potential. Part of that was that they saw a player who could learn quickly, and who was going to have the most perfect physique a hockey player could have. I don't remember what they called it, but I remember scouts saying something about his thoracic curves. No joke. Jarmo is making a similar gambit with Liam Foudy.

I don't want to hate on Foudy because I know almost nothing about him. He is a 1st round pick, and I 100% trust the front office, and I didn't complain about the pick. And, I'm all for a guy taking his workout regimen/physique/health seriously, (don't see any summer ER visits in the future) but, talking about his "curves" is making me have flashbacks to the "fanboys" that have given Wennberg a pass for everything because they love his draft photos.

But, WHAT exactly has Abramov or Foudy shown that makes you believe they have any more of these supposed intangibles, than a Elvis, Gavrikov, Davidsson, Texier? And what have they shown, that in your opinion, makes them have more potential?

I don't think this comparison is going to help your argument. Puljujarvi had the better skillset two years ago, and Dubois has leapfrogged him. For me it's purely hindsight bias, but someone could have expected (and Jarmo did expect) that outcome based on their mental and physical potential.

Did he HAVE the better skillset, or was that just the perception here on HF and to many hockey fans? Tell me when exactly the "leapfrog" happened. Remember we had to hear how Dubois had regressed also...when in fact he was GETTING BETTER. Of course the "statistics" don't show that. So what exactly should be trusted or believed?

 

[major major]

talking about his "curves" is making me have flashbacks to the "fanboys" that have given Wennberg a pass for everything because they love his draft photos.

Defending Wennberg is not about how pretty he is, come on. You attribute the worst things to your fellow posters and it wastes a lot of time in arguments.

The physique comments (with respect to Scheifele) was about parts of the lower back that are one of the physical constraints that provide a ceiling on how quickly a player can skate, pivot, and how much they can reach. I don't know that much about it, but I can see why it's something you'd want to assess in every player you want to draft.

But, WHAT exactly has Abramov or Foudy shown that makes you believe they have any more of these supposed intangibles, than a Elvis, Gavrikov, Davidsson, Texier? And what have they shown, that in your opinion, makes them have more potential?

To me Texier is closer to Foudy in attributes and value. But to answer your question, Foudy is raw skating ability - very much not put together. Abramov is valuable for a different reason. He might never be that fast, I don't know. But Abramov has great agility, anticipation, and puck control, better than most NHLers even. If he can figure out how not to get squished then I'm optimistic for him.

 

[Maylo]

Has anyone read Scott Wheeler article about Abramov in 2017?

Having accumulated more live viewings of Abramov than any other junior prospect I’ve scouted in the past five-plus years — after watching him once or twice a week for two years in Gatineau — I can say without reservation that he is one of, if not the most gifted handler I’ve watched in the league. (Jonathan Drouin, Nikolaj Ehlers and Nico Hischier included.)

The Gifted: Blue Jackets' Vitaly Abramov is one of hockey's...

And this was in his recent top 50 prospect rankings article.

31. Vitalii Abramov, RW/LW, 20 (Columbus Blue Jackets — 65th overall, 2016)

I have a love affair with Vitalii Abramov. I still can’t believe he wasn’t a first-rounder. He can play the entire game at full speed with the puck on a string. There’s nothing that any team in the QMJHL could do to stop him from the moment he stepped into the league — and posted seven points in his first two games in his draft year — until the moment he stepped out of it riding a 15-game point streak that saw him register 41 points. It’s amazing to watch and I wouldn’t be surprised if he becomes an NHL all-star someday. He’s the player I have seen play live on this list the most so there’s likely an inherent bias there but I’m confident I’ve got him right. For more on what makes Abramov so dangerous, read my video breakdown of his game here. The only thing that may hold him back is his size. But if you can’t get a piece of him, you can’t hit him.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I know WJC aren't indicative of future success, not a big indicator anyway, but it doesn't concern you at all the Abramov was completely invisible as a 19 year old? He was supposed to be a key contributor for the Russians and did nothing. Not only did he not produce, he wasn't even noticeable. At least when PLD struggled the year before you noticed him on the ice. Abramov wasn't the top dog anymore on team Russia like he's been in juniors and didn't produce.

I haven't closed the book on him, obviously he's just starting his pro career, but the WJC really soured me on him. Not even mentioning the injuries he's had. This is a big telling year, like I said in my rankings if he has a good year I'd put him at our #1 spot.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Its not a "trick" question. It's simply a response to people downplaying the impact that a players current/actual ability either is or should affect what their "potential" supposedly is.

Literally, people are in these threads saying the exact thing you're suggesting is being downplayed. Now I know you prefer a scorched-earth approach, but f***, man.

In your opinion, how much of, "how good a player might become" is based on how good the player is, currently?

It depends.

And for a somewhat "trick" question or 2, when does the "past" become the "current", and the "current" becomes the "future", when it comes to a players "potential" ability? And what (how many?) things (variables), in regards to NHL hockey, could affect this so-called "timeline" of events in a hypothetical players career?

The past becomes the current every day. This is definitely a trick question.

EDIT: Wait a minute. I knew this was a trick. The past never becomes the current. The future becomes the current, and the current becomes the past.

 

[Viqsi]

Let the record reflect I had Nutivaara at #9 in 2016 (board put him at 14, and even that was a fight).

Would be nice if I could claim something similar, but no, I had him at #17. In my partial defense, I was thinking of him as effectively yet another young UFA pickup, and we'd had several of those go nowhere.

(Matches up nicely with my Scorched Earth campaign several years ago for TJ Tynan. )

 

[CBJFan827]

I know WJC aren't indicative of future success, not a big indicator anyway, but it doesn't concern you at all the Abramov was completely invisible as a 19 year old? He was supposed to be a key contributor for the Russians and did nothing. Not only did he not produce, he wasn't even noticeable. At least when PLD struggled the year before you noticed him on the ice. Abramov wasn't the top dog anymore on team Russia like he's been in juniors and didn't produce.

I haven't closed the book on him, obviously he's just starting his pro career, but the WJC really soured me on him. Not even mentioning the injuries he's had. This is a big telling year, like I said in my rankings if he has a good year I'd put him at our #1 spot.

PLD was awful in the WJC two years ago, leading all of us to question the pick even more.

It worked out in the end.

 

[pled]

PLD was awful in the WJC two years ago, leading all of us to question the pick even more.

It worked out in the end.

I think International tournament overshadow a bit players performance overall. it's sometime the only few games people really see of a player and make their mind just based on that.

 

[CBJFan827]

I think International tournament overshadow a bit players performance overall. it's sometime the only few games people really see of a player and make their mind just based on that.

True.

For example, PLD would have looked a lot better if not stuck at LW on a line with Barzal (who was hogging the puck that entire tournament).

 

[Maylo]

True.

For example, PLD would have looked a lot better if not stuck at LW on a line with Barzal (who was hogging the puck that entire tournament).

And this year at Worlds PLD looked way better than Barzal. Funny how it works.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

PLD was awful in the WJC two years ago, leading all of us to question the pick even more.

It worked out in the end.

Dubois had 5 assists, Abramov had 1 goal. While yes PLD didn't play well, he at least somewhat produced.

 

[thebus88]

So I watched pretty much all of Abramov's points from this past year. Safe to say Atkinson is a pretty good comparable. Worse shot than Atkinson, but better passer. He really does seem to be more of a "set up" guy though. Skating while close, I'd give to Atkinson. Top speed/power advantage is clear. Abramov's skating/footwork might be a bit more "shifty", and he's probably a bit better with the puck on his stick.

Quite frankly he probably is deserving of his spot in our ranking. He probably really does just need to get stronger and get USED to playing against bigger guys (AHL) for a longer period of time. Leg strength will improve his top speed/edge work, and help him battle bigger guys. Upper body strength will improve his shooting and passing and again just simply help things be easier for him.

But, guys like Teixer and Davidsson very well have the same quality of skills AND potential. Really, just imagine what they would look like in the OHL or Q. They just all have their own unique styles, like Dubois. Texier looks a LOT to me like a better Milano. I know a lot of it are just highlights, but both Texier and Davidsson don't think twice about crashing the hard areas and playing a "heavy" game for both being essentially "small/skilled wingers". Neither does Abramov, its just hard for me to take the Q's defense and goalies very seriously compared to these other leagues. I think he spends the vast majority of his time in CLE. Maybe a call-up or 2.