Guy Flaming
Registered User
sec17 said:
Preliminary work on the WHL version is well underway... and those of us in Western Canada have a tough act to follow. Great job by our eastern Canadian writers!
HF Ranks the Top 40 QMJHL 2005-eligible prospects
- Thread starter ZombieMatt
- Start date
- Status
Preliminary work on the WHL version is well underway... and those of us in Western Canada have a tough act to follow. Great job by our eastern Canadian writers!
Brock said:
It would be difficult to do this more than once per year just because of the size of it, and how long such an article takes. This took our team roughly a month, maybe more, to put together from start to finish. But hopefully this type of article becomes more common in the future.
Onion Boy
Registered User
Guy Flaming said:Preliminary work on the WHL version is well underway... and those of us in Western Canada have a tough act to follow. Great job by our eastern Canadian writers!
That is awesome news. Keep up the good work!
This was great ... thanks. Any idea when the WHL list will be done? Also, is anything being done for the OHL?
Eric Forest said:
I am interested in your comment that "But things are quite difficult to understand in Quebec City." Can you clarify?
I respect your opinion Matt, but I can honestly say I never expected to see the words 'Latendresse' and "skates remarkably well" in the same sentence. He doesn't skate remarkably well for a fella of any size IMO, particularly for a prospect slated by some to be a top-ten NHL pick. It's not like he's a freak of nature and is five inches taller and 40 pounds heavier than every NHLer. He'll be slightly larger than the average NHL defenceman if/when he makes the show.
Perhaps the main criteria for most scouts is a player's skating ability, and I can assure you that there aren't many scouts that are impressed with his quickness or lateral mobility.
That being said, I think he is one of the draft's wildcards because of his size and impressive second half to the season. There may well be a team out there looking for a "Hugh Jessiman type" player, and pick him in the top 12.
Perhaps the main criteria for most scouts is a player's skating ability, and I can assure you that there aren't many scouts that are impressed with his quickness or lateral mobility.
That being said, I think he is one of the draft's wildcards because of his size and impressive second half to the season. There may well be a team out there looking for a "Hugh Jessiman type" player, and pick him in the top 12.
Jeffrey
Registered User
that's overreacting .. most of the people speak only french .. but there's still people that speak english ...Seachd said:
Guy Flaming
Registered User
Camden said:
We haven't set a target for the WHL one but I owuld say a couple weeks would be reasonable. I just spoke with some scouts for it yesterday and I know Aaron Vickers has some interviews lined up for the very near future too, it's a lengthy piece of work to do so... patience.
Jeff Dahlia is also helping out so we've got a pretty good group working on it, we hope you'll think it was worth the wait.No idea about the OHL one, if there will be one. The OHL guys/gals will have to chip in their thoughts on that.
I will agree he is a wildcard, but to me, it is a matter of how high he goes and not how far he will drop. I agree that "powerforward" is tossed arund too much, but I do think Latendresse fits the billing. He's big, he throws his weight around, he drives hard to the net, he will drop the gloves if need be, he plays with that mean side to him.
Skating wise, there aren't many 220 lbers in the Q, especially draft eligible, that skate particularly well. And among that group, I think Latendresse does alright for himself. His lateral movement, I agree, is poor, but his straight ahead skating gets him where he needs to be in time. It's not as if he's fifteen feet behind the rush every time. Heck, he's often the last forward out of the defensive zone and still in the play.
Between Latendresse, Zagrapan, and Bourret, it will come down to who has the best natural package. And I would take inconsistency and average skating for a 17-18 year old 220 lber (who is going to get bigger I would guess) than a very short player and a guy who isn't very happy to play in the rougher stuff. Yes, scouts talk a lot about skating, but they talk equally about size. In the eleventh hour, Latendresse has a pro physique NOW, the right type of effort and mentality, and the ability to perform at a very high level.
That said, there was not complete consensus among who we had second. Latendresse received two second place votes and, I believe, one fourth. Like I've said for the past month, its going to depend on when teams saw Guillame, and which player they believe is the real one.
EDIT: It's important to note that I did see Latendresse during his series against Moncton, and that I am clearly one of the ones who believes he will be a top 10 pick. He is a player I am high on.
Skating wise, there aren't many 220 lbers in the Q, especially draft eligible, that skate particularly well. And among that group, I think Latendresse does alright for himself. His lateral movement, I agree, is poor, but his straight ahead skating gets him where he needs to be in time. It's not as if he's fifteen feet behind the rush every time. Heck, he's often the last forward out of the defensive zone and still in the play.
Between Latendresse, Zagrapan, and Bourret, it will come down to who has the best natural package. And I would take inconsistency and average skating for a 17-18 year old 220 lber (who is going to get bigger I would guess) than a very short player and a guy who isn't very happy to play in the rougher stuff. Yes, scouts talk a lot about skating, but they talk equally about size. In the eleventh hour, Latendresse has a pro physique NOW, the right type of effort and mentality, and the ability to perform at a very high level.
That said, there was not complete consensus among who we had second. Latendresse received two second place votes and, I believe, one fourth. Like I've said for the past month, its going to depend on when teams saw Guillame, and which player they believe is the real one.
EDIT: It's important to note that I did see Latendresse during his series against Moncton, and that I am clearly one of the ones who believes he will be a top 10 pick. He is a player I am high on.
Last edited:
[\QUOTE=Matt MacInnis]
Between Latendresse, Zagrapan, and Bourret, it will come down to who has the best natural package. And I would take inconsistency and average skating for a 17-18 year old 220 lber (who is going to get bigger I would guess) than a very short player and a guy who isn't very happy to play in the rougher stuff. Yes, scouts talk a lot about skating, but they talk equally about size. In the eleventh hour, Latendresse has a pro physique NOW, the right type of effort and mentality, and the ability to perform at a very high level.
[/QUOTE]
I would say that is a poor way of putting it. To say to take Latendresse over Bourret because Bourret is short is just rediculas. Bourret is the same weight almost as Latendresse but 4 inches shorter, he is a tank on the ice. Bourret works his tail off every shift and is a way bigger and better hitter than Latendresse, and on the offensive end he is just as good, though Bourret is more defeind at the moment than what Latendresse is, it is a very poor saying to say I would take this project of Bourret because he is short
Between Latendresse, Zagrapan, and Bourret, it will come down to who has the best natural package. And I would take inconsistency and average skating for a 17-18 year old 220 lber (who is going to get bigger I would guess) than a very short player and a guy who isn't very happy to play in the rougher stuff. Yes, scouts talk a lot about skating, but they talk equally about size. In the eleventh hour, Latendresse has a pro physique NOW, the right type of effort and mentality, and the ability to perform at a very high level.
[/QUOTE]
I would say that is a poor way of putting it. To say to take Latendresse over Bourret because Bourret is short is just rediculas. Bourret is the same weight almost as Latendresse but 4 inches shorter, he is a tank on the ice. Bourret works his tail off every shift and is a way bigger and better hitter than Latendresse, and on the offensive end he is just as good, though Bourret is more defeind at the moment than what Latendresse is, it is a very poor saying to say I would take this project of Bourret because he is short
moosefan said:
I would say that is a poor way of putting it. To say to take Latendresse over Bourret because Bourret is short is just rediculas. Bourret is the same weight almost as Latendresse but 4 inches shorter, he is a tank on the ice. Bourret works his tail off every shift and is a way bigger and better hitter than Latendresse, and on the offensive end he is just as good, though Bourret is more defeind at the moment than what Latendresse is, it is a very poor saying to say I would take this project of Bourret because he is short
[/QUOTE]You don't think height effects many prospects?
Teams will have a choice between a 5'10" and 6'2", with pretty similar attributes. You say Bourret is a "way bigger and better hitter than Latendresse" and I disagree that he is better at all, furthermore "way."
The point remains this. Given the choice between the, in my opinion, generously listed 5'10" player and the 6'2" guy, I don't think NHL teams will hesitate to select the player with the professional physique.
A few Q defenders left off the list and basically wondering if these guys deserved to be off the list. Those guys being Ben Chaisson, Riku Korpinen, and Mathieu Labrie.
Korpinen is not coming back to PEI (see the PEI ROCKET site).
Also, I personally think that of all the defensemen Bourdon is the most complete and strong and Gragnani is the most crestive and intelligent. His hockey sense is incredible and no one compares to him in that area. Some are more defensive(like Vlasic), some are stronger physically (Bartulis) but not as intelligent as him. Letang did not impress me at the U-18 except for the game against Danemark which was not that strong. When it comes to games that really need structure and guts he is a bit desappointing.
Now we just have to way and see the NHL final ranking which, for me, does not mean that much. Just look at the prior years...
Also, I personally think that of all the defensemen Bourdon is the most complete and strong and Gragnani is the most crestive and intelligent. His hockey sense is incredible and no one compares to him in that area. Some are more defensive(like Vlasic), some are stronger physically (Bartulis) but not as intelligent as him. Letang did not impress me at the U-18 except for the game against Danemark which was not that strong. When it comes to games that really need structure and guts he is a bit desappointing.
Now we just have to way and see the NHL final ranking which, for me, does not mean that much. Just look at the prior years...
Camden said:
Chaisson was 41st essentially. But he is very improbable in our opinion. We think the smaller players have a better shot than getting lucky and finding an NHL spot than him.
Guy Flaming
Registered User
Just an update on the WHL and OHL versions... they are now well underway. In my head I'm targetting June 15th but that is not a firm line in the sand by any means. Plus, I'm not the only one working on these things so...
Matt MacInnis said:I would say that is a poor way of putting it. To say to take Latendresse over Bourret because Bourret is short is just rediculas. Bourret is the same weight almost as Latendresse but 4 inches shorter, he is a tank on the ice. Bourret works his tail off every shift and is a way bigger and better hitter than Latendresse, and on the offensive end he is just as good, though Bourret is more defeind at the moment than what Latendresse is, it is a very poor saying to say I would take this project of Bourret because he is short
You don't think height effects many prospects?
Teams will have a choice between a 5'10" and 6'2", with pretty similar attributes. You say Bourret is a "way bigger and better hitter than Latendresse" and I disagree that he is better at all, furthermore "way."
The point remains this. Given the choice between the, in my opinion, generously listed 5'10" player and the 6'2" guy, I don't think NHL teams will hesitate to select the player with the professional physique.
5'10 and 6'2 the NHL would look at the 6'2 guy first...but at 220 pounds at 5'10 (though I think they embleshied that size and wieghts) and the way he does not care for his body I think Bourret's size will not have any berring on where he gets picked.
Last edited:
moosefan said:
We shall see, there are other aspects of Bourret's game that I'm not entirely convinced on as well.
But I do agree that I think his size his embellished. I really do not think he is any taller than 5'8" judging from what I saw in the locker room area back in December.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
Game 3 Florida Panthers @ Tampa Bay Lightning - Florida Panthers leads series 2-0Wagers: 1Staked: $100.00Event closes- Updated: