Hockey's Future's Top 50 Prospects: 26-50

[andora]

so pretty much it's a huge assumption and has no merit, i can live with that. i never said big advantage either, i said the way you came up with a huge story/example of two kids made it seem like you thought it was a strong advantage, as you made it out (oh i'm sorry, how i interpreted) your kids/example..

if all we're talking is theoretically then that's fine, i just find assumptions a little lacking

 

[andora]

I said that theoretically, if two players are the same, the one who is bigger has an advantage in the eyes of scouts and GMs. Why would someone take a 50 point who is 6'1'' when a 6'3'' 50 point scorer (with all the other abilities being the same) is available?
.

this is all twisted now, unfortunately, they are both drafted by different clubs, so it doesn't matter what scouts think anymore, they aren't getting drafted again. that's a main difference talking about kids going into the draft and kids playing a couple years after their draft year

 

[leafaholix*]

I think you are confused. I am not saying Kesler is better than Steen because he is bigger.

I said that theoretically, if two players are the same, the one who is bigger has an advantage in the eyes of scouts and GMs. Why would someone take a 50 point who is 6'1'' when a 6'3'' 50 point scorer (with all the other abilities being the same) is available?

I infered that logic and disagreed with your initial post saying that "Kesler has no advantages on Steen", which was clearly wrong since Kesler is bigger.

But Kesler is not as good as Steen, so he DOESN'T have anything on Alexander... be it 2 inches, 20 pounds, or 6 months.

 

[sunb]

But Kesler is not as good as Steen, so he DOESN'T have anything on Alexander... be it 2 inches, 20 pounds, or 6 months.

I know Steen is better than Kesler. Refer to one of my earlier posts, I agreed with you by saying Steen > Kesler. But Kesler has one advantge over Steen and that is his size. I don't see why Steen should be better than Kesler everywhere.

 

[sunb]

so pretty much it's a huge assumption and has no merit, i can live with that. i never said big advantage either, i said the way you came up with a huge story/example of two kids made it seem like you thought it was a strong advantage, as you made it out (oh i'm sorry, how i interpreted) your kids/example..

if all we're talking is theoretically then that's fine, i just find assumptions a little lacking

Everything is theoretical. The bigger player always gets preference just as the younger player gets preference. Infering that logic: size is an advantage, youth is an advantage.

So I hope you can see why believe Kesler has an advantage over Steen even though I clearly admit that Steen is better than Kesler.

 

[leafaholix*]

I know Steen is better than Kesler. Refer to one of my earlier posts, I agreed with you by saying Steen > Kesler. But Kesler has one advantge over Steen and that is his size. I don't see why Steen should be better than Kesler everywhere.

Aki Berg is 10 months younger than Mattias Ohlund... meaning Aki has the advantage in age even though Ohlund is the superior hockey player?

Is that even worth debating?

 

[andora]

Everything is theoretical. The bigger player always gets preference just as the younger player gets preference. Infering that logic: size is an advantage, youth is an advantage.

So I hope you can see why believe Kesler has an advantage over Steen even though I clearly admit that Steen is better than Kesler.

PREFERENCE TO WHOM ?!?!?!?! THEY ARE ALREADY DRAFTED AND DEVELOPING

 

[sunb]

Aki Berg is 10 months younger than Mattias Ohlund... meaning Aki has the advantage in age even though Ohlund is the superior hockey player?

Is that even worth debating?

Ohlund > Berg defensively
Ohlund > Berg offensively
Ohlund > Berg hockey sense
Ohlund > Berg physical play
Ohlund > Berg speed
Ohlund > Berg skating
Ohlund > Berg positioning
Berg > Ohlund size
Berg > Ohlund age

But Ohlund > Berg as a hockey player. I hope you understand now.

 

[sunb]

PREFERENCE TO WHOM ?!?!?!?! THEY ARE ALREADY DRAFTED AND DEVELOPING

Between two theoretical players.

 

[andora]

alright, this is just way off the map now, i feel like i'm a five year old boy that just kept chasing that butterfly and i'm finding myself out of the country in the big bad city..

to sum this up, it all started with steen and kesler and ends on two theoretical players. NOW, steen and kesler are not theoretical players, they are real players, who have been drafted and have developed for several years making their way up into two highly respected professional leagues. moving on, someone states that six months is an advantage for kesler, AS WELL as for two theoretical players. that someone didn't explain how kesler being six months younger than steen is an advantage, but rather that when scouts are looking at two players, theoretically of course, the one that is six months younger should have an advantage..

see where i'm going? which is it, are we talking about the two real players, the toronto and the vancouver prospect, or are we talking about theoretical players.. i can't see how this *theoretical player* point of view can be valid anywhere after the nhl draft of said theoretical players..

it's like there is two lines, the steen/kesler line, and the fantasy theoretical line, i'm discussing the real players, you've jumped back and forth from real players to theoretics without names

forgive me for getting frustrated

 

[leafaholix*]

Ohlund > Berg defensively
Ohlund > Berg offensively
Ohlund > Berg hockey sense
Ohlund > Berg physical play
Ohlund > Berg speed
Ohlund > Berg skating
Ohlund > Berg positioning
Berg > Ohlund size
Berg > Ohlund age

But Ohlund > Berg as a hockey player. I hope you understand now.

I still don't understand how Berg > Ohlund in age when one is clearly better than the other. Age should only be a factor (if at all) if the two players are very close and at an early stage in development.

Then you can consider age as a potential advantage. It's certainly not a definite advantage.

 

[andora]

god, what does hockey sense even mean. i remember i used to use that phrase, but now i just can't stand it. isn't positioning and anticipation better ways to describe a player's aspects than hockey sense.. i mean really, when you say hockey sense to yourself, what does it even mean ??? can i guy be good positionally and have crappy anticipation and have decent hockey sense ?

this isn't a shot at J=norris at all, just that phrase.. i just can't stand it anymore

 

[ginner classic]

Malkin is a comparable talent to Ovechkin, Kesler is not a comparable talent to Steen.


So you're saying bigger is better in every case?

Dear god let this thread die!

And I just can't let this go....

Are you suggesting sir, that the difference between your beloved Steen and Kesler is greater (in terms of realistic potential) than the difference between Ovechkin and Malkin? Because I don't agree. I think if you polled 30 GMs before the draft this past year 29 or more would have taken Ovechkin (there is no accounting for what Milbury might do). That is a pretty lopsided valuation in my mind. If you did the same with Kesler and Steen do you think you would get a similar result. I certainly don't. Steen is a pretty darn good prospect, so is kesler. I won't comment on who I think is better, because I am man enough to admit I could never say anything like that with certainty. Neither is an elite prospect. Both should play in the NHL. They have different styles. That is about all that can be said with a high degree of certainty.

OTOH, if you are suggesting that difference in style between Steen and Kesler is greater than difference in style between Ovechkin and Malkin, I again take huge issue with your post. Malkin and Ovechkin are not compareable at all in terms of style of play, other than the fact they are forwards, Russian, and drafted 1-2 in the same year. They are fundamentally different players. So which is it? Hyperbole in your Steen assessment or simply not understanding that not all elite russians play the same game?

On your second point....being smaller is never an advantage (that we know). Being bigger is an advantage (a) if it is exploited as such, and/or (b) in mitigating the use of size by opposing players. Steen in all likelihood will have a tougher time with bigger opposing centres than Kesler will. Will he find a way to overcome being shorter than the NHL average....maybe. But size is certainly an advantage, and I can name 30 NHL GMs that would agree with that.

 

[ginner classic]

I still don't understand how Berg > Ohlund in age when one is clearly better than the other. Age should only be a factor (if at all) if the two players are very close and at an early stage in development.

Then you can consider age as a potential advantage. It's certainly not a definite advantage.

Age an advantage...tough one. Obviously it is easy to throw out straw man comparisons between incomparable talents like Berg and Ohlund to refute it. But I don't think we need to go there to make a point do we?

If I see a player at 21 accomplish what another player took two more years to accomplish, AND they are similar players, I would say that Player A (sorry Andora, I needed a hypothetical here) is better at the same age. That simple really. Is six months an advantage? maybe, maybe not, but I can see how someone would deduce that. We know from scouts that it is a factor at the draft using the same level of analysis I just provided. Is it a factor two years later? I would certainly suggest it would have diminished in importance.

 

[Postman]

forgive me for getting frustrated

No need, I think the rest of us understand. This has turned into one stupid-ass, ridiculous argument. I'd remove myself from it ASAP if I was you.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

But Kesler is not as good as Steen, so he DOESN'T have anything on Alexander... be it 2 inches, 20 pounds, or 6 months.

Steen is superior from an offensive standpoint-THAT'S IT. I guess it's hypocritical to say let's drop this, but please, let's. We'll see who proves to be the more valuable NHL player.

 

[andora]

No need, I think the rest of us understand. This has turned into one stupid-ass, ridiculous argument. I'd remove myself from it ASAP if I was you.

it isn't even an argument on my part, i am simply looking for more information