bleedgreen
Registered User
andrew ladd - 4 goals in 7 games. drops to ten (i know - no order, but its possible people are saying that)? i know im a canes fan but you guys are killing me. it really doesnt matter how well he plays, does it?
he would have been in the late teens before the season. atleast for me.bleedgreen said:andrew ladd - 4 goals in 7 games. drops to ten (i know - no order, but its possible people are saying that)? i know im a canes fan but you guys are killing me. it really doesnt matter how well he plays, does it?
Umm Tukonen wasn't a main factor for Finns this year did you watch or read a single thing? There is a reason he was on the Allstar team and Nokelainen wasn't. Please come up with a better argument // There is a reason he was projected higher and taken higher and just ask on the Finns board who they'd takeLe Golie said:Yeah and Nokelainen was in the NHL.
Last year when Nokelainen WAS in the tournament, he was Finland's best player. Neither Tukonen or Korpikoski were among the top three Finns. Most Finnish and NHL observers agree that Nokelainen is the best Finn from the '04 draft class and it's hard to argue since he looks very good with the Islanders prior to his knee injury.
AnThGrt said:Umm Tukonen wasn't a main factor for Finns this year did you watch or read a single thing? There is a reason he was on the Allstar team and Nokelainen wasn't. Please come up with a better argument // There is a reason he was projected higher and taken higher and just ask on the Finns board who they'd take
underscore_boy said:who would you take in the top 30 picks? i would go with:
1-5 (no order)
ovechkin
malkin
radulov
meszaros
olesz
and now? does actual nhl experience count for anything? he has been awesome when playing for the canes. aside from the top two, i wouldnt take anyone over him right now. meszrazos(sp?) certainly looks awesome, but i guess its your preference for offense or defense. i wouldnt take any of the other forwards available. definitely not olesz, tukonen, or radulov at this point.underscore_boy said:he would have been in the late teens before the season. atleast for me.
Kafka said:Campoli may be an overager... but only by a year or two years (July'84). Since the best defensmen taken in 2002 were all from '83 and '82, I would compare Campoli to players taken in 2003. From the 2003 draft, which was an excellent draft, you had Coburn, Suter, Phaneuf, Seabrook, Stuart... at the same age, Campoli is putting numbers in the NHL... which is not the case of all firstrounders taken in 2003. He might not be very tall, but so his Rafalski. The 2004 being according to what I read less good than 2001, 2003 and 2005, I think Campoli could fit well at the end of the first round if the draft was repeated. At 21, he is already a top 4 in Longisland. Most of the Dmen taken in 2004 will only be top-4 d-men... not no.1 or no.2.
Kafka said:Ballard - Nov '82
The the 2003 draft class was better than the 2004 one.... maybe not for goaltenders, but surely for Dmen. Therefore, I wasn't stating that Campoli would have been draft in the first round of 2003, but I would have selected him over other guys at the end of the 1st round of 2004.
bleedgreen said:and now? does actual nhl experience count for anything? he has been awesome when playing for the canes. aside from the top two, i wouldnt take anyone over him right now. meszrazos(sp?) certainly looks awesome, but i guess its your preference for offense or defense. i wouldnt take any of the other forwards available. definitely not olesz, tukonen, or radulov at this point.
Instead of taking personal shots you should once again read what you origonally wrote. I'll just leave it at look at this board who everyone has going first. I also have the person the post above this agreeing with me. I have seen both play and i follow other prospects too apparently you dont. Being in the NHL doesn't mean you are better then everyone in the AHL.... 1. Rushing players to the NHL is not always good even if they are capable 2. Tukonen could be on the team but its better for development 3. We have enough players and quality ones to not force him onto the team right awayLe Golie said:Maybe if you spent a little more time learning about propects who do not belong to the Kings, you will realize that there are other good ones out there. And I invite you to go to the Finn board and see how many rate Nokelainen the bets of the three.
ive watched olesz already - and i dont agree. at this point i judge nhl players and then i judge prospects. ladd is a legit nhler - the others are prospects. i guess its a conversation for a few years from now - but i would be shocked if more than one or two of those ended up better than ladd.J17ster said:Ladd is alright, but there is no way IMO he is a top 5 talent in the draft. Olesz you should watch more, i dont know why he dropped to #7 but he will end up being a great player, better than Ladd pretty easily. Radulov has huge upsides and offensively he dwarfs Ladd. Tukonen id take over Ladd too. Infact id take Olesz, Barker, Schwarz, Schremp, Tukonen, Radulov, Wolski to name a few over him.
Ladd will be a solid 2nd line player,
bleedgreen said:ive watched olesz already - and i dont agree. at this point i judge nhl players and then i judge prospects. ladd is a legit nhler - the others are prospects. i guess its a conversation for a few years from now - but i would be shocked if more than one or two of those ended up better than ladd.
Pal, you do realize Nokelainen is almost 9 months older than Tukonen ? Don't be surprised to see Tukonen in the NHL next year as well.Le Golie said:Maybe you should spruce up on the reading skills. All of this was said in my first post, but to clarify it for you I'll say it all over again.
* Nokelainen was not on the World Junior Championship All Star team this year because he is in the NHL.
** I never said Tukonen was not a factor this year, he played very well.
*** I said LAST year, when Tukonen and Nokelainen BOTH played, NOKELAINEN was better by a large margin and was the only player of the three first round Finns who got a Tissot award for being one of Finland's top three players. That is why he is now in the NHL and Tukonen is not.
Maybe if you spent a little more time learning about propects who do not belong to the Kings, you will realize that there are other good ones out there. And I invite you to go to the Finn board and see how many rate Nokelainen the bets of the three.
ladd, 8 nhl games. 12.13 minutes a game.bleedgreen said:ive watched olesz already - and i dont agree. at this point i judge nhl players and then i judge prospects. ladd is a legit nhler - the others are prospects. i guess its a conversation for a few years from now - but i would be shocked if more than one or two of those ended up better than ladd.
reread post - i said others...as in not olesz. i still dont think olesz is ahead of ladd. i dont think ladd is a vet, but he he is legitimately on a roster of a team that is deep enough for him to have to play himself on.underscore_boy said:ladd, 8 nhl games. 12.13 minutes a game.
olesz, 30 nhl games, 15.30 minutes a game.
bleedgreen said:reread post - i said others...as in not olesz. i still dont think olesz is ahead of ladd. i dont think ladd is a vet, but he he is legitimately on a roster of a team that is deep enough for him to have to play himself on.
that ladd is an nhler, and the others (except olesz)werent - and were still unknowns at the nhl level. whats your point? i like ladd better, i havent thought much of olesz from watching him - and ladds been awesome.J17ster said:Olesz is also legit, a 2nd line player every game. Whats your point?