Preds666
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 7,334
- 378
Leafaholix said:He's still only had 17 games experience. I wasn't questioning his play.
hehe, I did somehow read that as "really played well vs. pro..."
Leafaholix said:He's still only had 17 games experience. I wasn't questioning his play.
Kritty said:Top 10 easily? You guys have got to get off the Stars bandwagon and see the rest of the league.
Chicago
Nashville
Washington
Edmonton
Minnesota
Vancouver
Anaheim
San Jose
Ottawa
Toronto
NY Rangers
Pittsburgh
Atlanta
Tampa
There's 14 teams that I would rather have than the Stars. So the guy that said in the 15-20 range is bang on. That's not even considering players that are on the verge of being full time NHLers.
montreal said:I can add some opinions of what I've seen of Daley and Jancevski. I've been to 4 games, and watched one tv game and listened to the rest on the radio. It's been brutal for the Dogs of late, losing 8 and having scored 3 goals in the last 3 games.
I won't make any Dallas fans happy but I'd take Jancevski over Daley. Daley is way more skilled, but I can not for the life of me figure out where his head is sometimes. He plays so much like Ron Hainsey, it's not even funny. Daley looks great skating the puck up ice, he is an outstanding skater and has impressive wheels. His shot I haven't noticed as being overly powerful, but he can move the puck well, and looks good on the PP. I wouldn't say he's a physical player, but he doesn't seem to back down or avoid the physical play. The problem is his mental and defensive game. Way way too many errors in his own end, and simple ones at that. Icing the puck on the PP, passing without looking to the other team, piniching in when all the forwards are already deep, and simply bad/costly turnovers. This weekend I was at 3 games and Daley helped lose one with Hainsey helping to lose another with piss poor turnovers that resulted in goals. I really like watching him skate, but his play in his own end is very questionable imo.
How often have you seen Nickerson?Leafaholix said:Matt Nickerson and Dan Jancevski are depth players, guys like Wade Belak, Eric Cairns, etc... they're big, can play physical and drop the gloves. But neither are great defensively nor do they have any offensive upside to be rated as safe bets in the #5/6 spot.
J17ster said:Yeah, Chicago have been stocking up big. May backfire on them.
You'd be hard pressed to get anyone to agree with you on that.theBob said:The Hawks have 5 guys who could possibly be #1 or #2 guys in the future IMO in Barker, Seabrook, Babchuk, Barinka, and possibly Vandermeer.
George Bachul said:Chicago and Nashville. The leaders of the pack. And it is pretty clear to me.
Chaos said:Something is just not right with that Hamilton team, as when Daley was up with the Stars last year, I didnt see him making any of the mistakes you mention, such as icing the puck on the PP, pinching, or passing without looking. Maybe you caught him at a bad time, or perhaps he is just trying too hard to create offense by himself, seeing as how they are really struggling to score. But lets also remember he's just 21. A lot of 21 year old defensemen make defensive mistakes.
Haven't seen him play, but I'm thinking a #6/7 defenseman is a lot more realistic than a #4 guy for Matt Nickerson. From scouting reports and personal opinions I've read, he's extremely big and strong, plays on an edge as well as being a good defensive zone player because of that mean streak and size advantage. But there are #6/7 guys in the NHL with those qualities. You won't find many #4's in that mould on a good NHL club, usually those kind of defensemen are #6/7 guys.Postman said:How often have you seen Nickerson?
Belak and Cairns are horrible comparisons. He's far more mobile and a much better skater than both. He may not have high offensive upside, but he does have some if you've ever seen him play, which I doubt based upon your comparisons. I'd say he's got the upside to be a solid #4 guy if he can settle down his temper and pick his spots better.
Postman said:You'd be hard pressed to get anyone to agree with you on that.
Very few D prospects have #1 upside. Barker certainly does, and Babchuk might have top pairing upside, but that's debatable. Seabrook certainly has good upside, but not #1 or #2, possibly #3. As for Barinka, I haven't seen him, but if you honestly think Vandermeer has #1 or #2 upside, I don't know what to tell you.
Leafaholix said:As for the comparisons, I think it's safe to say comparing him to Wade Belak/Eric Cairns isn't that far off. They've all got size, play physical, and drop the gloves... but the only thing Nickerson has over them is time, as of right now it seems like he's going to play a similar role, atleast if he doesn't develop an offensive game... which he hasn't so far, 3 points in 19 QMJHL games.
I talked with a few season tickets holders, and they were disapointed by Nickerson's play yesterday. When the team was down 3-2, the crowd seemed to rely on Nickerson's awakening to tie the game. It didn't happen, as he was apparently on a bad night. He was physical, but not agressive, as I previously hoped to see. On the season, he now has 1 goal, 1 assists, 53 PIM and -6 in 17 games with a bad team. As to why he hasn't been able to put up more points is a mystery to me, because he definitely have more offensive talent than his stats shows.
I'm sure he had offensive skills playing with the Texas Tornado of the NAHL (?). The fact is he's now playing against the highest level of competition of his career and has 3 points in 19 games. He may have some hidden skills, but he's not producing whatsoever.Ott = Snott said:From his most recent scouting report:
He has a lot more offensive skills than you think as Tornado fans were saying the bolded part over and over again last year as well.
Every organization has a player like Dan Jancevski... otherwise he's a nice depth player to have with some potential.Dan Jancevski was an AHL All-Star starter in 2003 when he played for the worst team in the AHL. That's quite an accomplishment, even though his upside is probably that of a hard nosed #5. He's just been very unfortunate that at the time of being NHL ready, the Stars were absolutely stacked on the blueline, and were a small opening, the Stars rather filled it up by a trade, picking up a veteran. He was expected to be a regular if this season would've gone underway.
borro said:Good call George...Chicago has the best young defensive talent in the league in my opinion.
Anton Babchuck. Perhaps the best all around game=potential #1.
Cam Barker-Another Potential #1 Aggressive and offensive skills!
Brent Seabrooke-Solid defender and vastly underrated.
Michael Barinka-Talented guy who will benefit from talent around him.
Duncan Keith-Small but effective
Wisniewski and more. Assuming these guys develop they don't need to add anything to compete for best or very little. In my mind they sraft forwards till they drop! Their defense will make any forward look better.
Yeah, that's not too good.JasonMacIsaac said:Since Martin and Hale graduated NJ's depth looks weak.
DeMarchi
Kadeikin (Back in Russia)
Klimov
Mikhailishin
Eckford
Tarkir
Kesa
JasonMacIsaac said:Since Martin and Hale graduated NJ's depth looks weak.
DeMarchi
Kadeikin (Back in Russia)
Klimov
Mikhailishin
Eckford
Tarkir
Kesa
I wouldn't even bother putting Mikhalishin on your list....he is absolutely terrible. His skating is atrocious, and every time he gets hit (He is 6'4 and 209), he falls down. Undrafted Megalinsky is ten times the player that Mikhalishin is.JasonMacIsaac said:Since Martin and Hale graduated NJ's depth looks weak.
DeMarchi
Kadeikin (Back in Russia)
Klimov
Mikhailishin
Eckford
Tarkir
Kesa
Apparently his reach outweighs all his flaws.George Bachul said:I wouldn't even bother putting Mikhalishin on your list....he is absolutely terrible. His skating is atrocious, and every time he gets hit (He is 6'4 and 209), he falls down. Undrafted Megalinsky is ten times the player that Mikhalishin is.
He has nice reach I am hoping Klimov is better. He has played 6 games in the RSL this year and is amost a half year younger.George Bachul said:I wouldn't even bother putting Mikhalishin on your list....he is absolutely terrible. His skating is atrocious, and every time he gets hit (He is 6'4 and 209), he falls down. Undrafted Megalinsky is ten times the player that Mikhalishin is.
Reach means squat when you can't skate.JasonMacIsaac said:He has nice reach I am hoping Klimov is better. He has played 6 games in the RSL this year and is amost a half year younger.