Prospect Info: Joël Teasdale (QMJHL Rouyn-Noranda)

Status
Not open for further replies.

jfm133

Registered User
Nov 6, 2015
2,570
1,702
Teasdale was on a pace of 99 points in 68 games in Rouyn. Then 34 points in 20 games in the playoffs. Brett Leason was on 110 points in 68 games in Prince-Albert with 25 points in 22 games in the playoffs. Both on very good teams, both are at the Memorial Cup. So it's very similar and Teasdale was good at 18 and 17, should have been drafted before.

So Leason is ranked by many in the last third of the first round. If it's true, Teasdale belongs there too, but he is no longer available because Marc signed him...

Oh! I forgot. The Q is so weak...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stive Morgan

jiboy

la game dans la game
May 2, 2007
1,847
1,080
Teasdale has a great lower body strenght and he is good on the cycle. Many times you will see him do a quick change of pace lower the shoulder and drive to the net. Maybe he could become a Lekhonen with a better scoring touch.

Hes a smart player who is tough to play against. He will play in the NHL at some point.

If I had to guess he would be picked late second round in this draft.
 

Intangir

Registered User
Aug 14, 2008
1,704
1,921
Montreal, QC
I like Teasdale's game. That said, tonight he's been pretty meh even though he's got two goals. I want him to try to create more offensively instead of simply taking what's there. Against junior players there are many mistakes to exploit and you can get by playing a more passive game, but it's much harder to do so in the NHL unless you have elite tools/toolbox, which Teasdale doesn't have, and you need to create your own chances if you want to have success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Wallach

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,516
28,035
Ottawa
One thing that I noticed about Teasdale at camp and again throughout the Mem cup is he's got tremendous short area speed/quickness and a nose for the net.

I don't think he's got huge upside but i'd be surprised if he's not a solid bottom 6 NHL'er one day.
 

LaP

Registered User
Jun 27, 2012
24,814
18,248
Quebec City, Canada
I like Teasdale's game. That said, tonight he's been pretty meh even though he's got two goals. I want him to try to create more offensively instead of simply taking what's there. Against junior players there are many mistakes to exploit and you can get by playing a more passive game, but it's much harder to do so in the NHL unless you have elite tools/toolbox, which Teasdale doesn't have, and you need to create your own chances if you want to have success.

Often the best players are the players who can create something out of nothing. If he can score two goals at the NHL while being meh (while not being meh too often) then he'll be a very good player. I think we focus way too much on the "in your face all night" type of players right now. Those can be useful but you also need the guys who can score when things are not working well for the team a particular night.
 

Intangir

Registered User
Aug 14, 2008
1,704
1,921
Montreal, QC
Often the best players are the players who can create something out of nothing. If he can score two goals at the NHL while being meh (while not being meh too often) then he'll be a very good player. I think we focus way too much on the "in your face all night" type of players right now. Those can be useful but you also need the guys who can score when things are not working well for the team a particular night.

I agree in part to what you're saying, as far as our philosophy of how we evaluate players goes, but to produce offense fairly consistently at the NHL level, if you don't have great tools (elite shot, speed, smarts, stickhandling, etc.) which allow you to play a more cerebral type of game, you need to be able to create chances for yourself (be it by crashing the net, shielding the puck well to make plays, making good use of your teammates, etc.) and to do so effectively you must be more proactive than Teasdale has been thus far in the Memorial Cup playoffs.

Gallagher has some nice tools, but if he had even half as much talent as a guy like Drouin is naturally gifted with, he'd be a perennial PPG forward or close to it. The only reason he manages to create as much offense as he does is because of his balls-to-the-wall mindset, heart and how active he is all-over the ice trying to make plays. Without those defining traits Gallagher would probably be an NHL journeyman playing a stint here or there on teams' fourth lines.
 

Estimated_Prophet

Registered User
Mar 28, 2003
10,415
10,649
I
if he was in the draft and picked him in the 1st or 2nd round even if we traded down to a late 1st, there's no way I would want us to use that high of a pick on him. That would be insane as he doesn't have the upside to justify picking him that high if we didn't sign him and he was in next months draft.

Agreed, there are very real concerns with his skating and overall skill level. I like the kid but he is really going to have to work his butt off and improve if he wants to be more than an NHL 4th liner. I certainly am not counting him out but we have seen this story many times in the past. Now queue the mindless stats sheep to jump all over me lol.

I agree in part to what you're saying, as far as our philosophy of how we evaluate players goes, but to produce offense fairly consistently at the NHL level, if you don't have great tools (elite shot, speed, smarts, stickhandling, etc.) which allow you to play a more cerebral type of game, you need to be able to create chances for yourself (be it by crashing the net, shielding the puck well to make plays, making good use of your teammates, etc.) and to do so effectively you must be more proactive than Teasdale has been thus far in the Memorial Cup playoffs.

Gallagher has some nice tools, but if he had even half as much talent as a guy like Drouin is naturally gifted with, he'd be a perennial PPG forward or close to it. The only reason he manages to create as much offense as he does is because of his balls-to-the-wall mindset, heart and how active he is all-over the ice trying to make plays. Without those defining traits Gallagher would probably be an NHL journeyman playing a stint here or there on teams' fourth lines.

Gallagher's skills are very underrated on these boards. There are many 4th line grinders who play with similar exuberance but just don't have the skill to be a multiple 30 goal scorer. His hands are actually quite impressive and he can be a real handful in tight with his quick hands and lower body strength. We are even seeing him snipe from distance a lot more over the past two seasons.
 

Intangir

Registered User
Aug 14, 2008
1,704
1,921
Montreal, QC
Gallagher's skills are very underrated on these boards. There are many 4th line grinders who play with similar exuberance but just don't have the skill to be a multiple 30 goal scorer. His hands are actually quite impressive and he can be a real handful in tight with his quick hands and lower body strength. We are even seeing him snipe from distance a lot more over the past two seasons.

Gallagher's skills are indeed underrated and he's worked extremely hard to improve them over the years despite major surgeries to his hands. I'll also admit that I might have been a bit harsh on him (to better illustrate my point) in my post. But, that said, he simply doesn't have the elite tools offensively compared to the high-end skill guys.

Even if he has some good, nifty mitts as far as stickhandling goes, he's never gonna easily deke two guys to register a goal as guys like Kovalev or Datsyuk used to do. His one-timer and shot are good, but not nearly on par with the top-end guys, and he's not a threat to score at will from anywhere on the ice like Ovechkin is. His awareness is high, especially when it comes to tracking the puck, and Gallagher usually positions himself really well to get to those nice, juicy rebounds, but he is only a bit above-average at anticipating the play and again comes short of the best thinkers of the game. As far as passing goes, Gallagher is once again fine, but he doesn't thread the needle as well nor lift the puck over checking sticks as well as the Backstroms and Thorntons of the league. His puck possession skills are really strong, which allow him to cycle well and generally produce offensive chances at even-strength at a high-rate, but he again falls short of the true elite in the league, guys like Crosby who manage to keep the puck even against heavy opposition and multiple defenders.

If you looked at Gallagher by evaluating him purely on a skills basis at practice while knowing nothing of his heart and the energy he brings, you would think he was a decent NHLer, certainly not the absolute 5-on-5 beast, relentless net-crashing-while-grinning machine and 30-goal scorer that he is.

I'll stop talking about Gally now and leave while wishing that Teasdale inherits that same fire that Gallagher has, that same passion for the Game.

Cheers and good evening to all of you fine people.
 

Paddyjack

Registered User
Dec 10, 2007
3,085
3,505
Sherbrooke
Gallagher's skills are indeed underrated and he's worked extremely hard to improve them over the years despite major surgeries to his hands. I'll also admit that I might have been a bit harsh on him (to better illustrate my point) in my post. But, that said, he simply doesn't have the elite tools offensively compared to the high-end skill guys.

Even if he has some good, nifty mitts as far as stickhandling goes, he's never gonna easily deke two guys to register a goal as guys like Kovalev or Datsyuk used to do. His one-timer and shot are good, but not nearly on par with the top-end guys, and he's not a threat to score at will from anywhere on the ice like Ovechkin is. His awareness is high, especially when it comes to tracking the puck, and Gallagher usually positions himself really well to get to those nice, juicy rebounds, but he is only a bit above-average at anticipating the play and again comes short of the best thinkers of the game. As far as passing goes, Gallagher is once again fine, but he doesn't thread the needle as well nor lift the puck over checking sticks as well as the Backstroms and Thorntons of the league. His puck possession skills are really strong, which allow him to cycle well and generally produce offensive chances at even-strength at a high-rate, but he again falls short of the true elite in the league, guys like Crosby who manage to keep the puck even against heavy opposition and multiple defenders.

If you looked at Gallagher by evaluating him purely on a skills basis at practice while knowing nothing of his heart and the energy he brings, you would think he was a decent NHLer, certainly not the absolute 5-on-5 beast, relentless net-crashing-while-grinning machine and 30-goal scorer that he is.

I'll stop talking about Gally now and leave while wishing that Teasdale inherits that same fire that Gallagher has, that same passion for the Game.

Cheers and good evening to all of you fine people.

Don't get me wrong I'm not bashing your analysis my friend but the problem I have with it is with the names you used to compare his skills. I think that when someone said on the board that his skills are underrated, it means than he is seen as a super 3rd line player, and so I think a better analysis would be to compare him with regular second line players rather than these elite players you mention.
 

1909

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
20,743
11,350
I would want Timmins fired on the spot if he picked Teasdale in the 1st or even 2nd round.

You're right. Better when TT draft Fischer, Leblanc, Tinordi, Mcarron, Scherbak Urquhart, DLR, Fucale.......
 

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,720
41,029
www.youtube.com
You're right. Better when TT draft Fischer, Leblanc, Tinordi, Mcarron, Scherbak Urquhart, DLR, Fucale.......

Or better when he drafts Subban, Price, Pac, McDonagh, Gallagher, Sergachev, etc... Scouts make mistakes but just because of that you don't just throw away a pick on a 19 year old that's doing well in the Q. And who says he'll be better then what Leblanc, Tinordi, McCarron, Scherbak, or DLR did in the NHL? There's nothing that he's shown that says he should be picked in the 1st round as you are comparing a 19 to 17 year olds. Of course some kids just peak at 17 and it's very hard to know which ones will and which ones won't, some times injuries impact them, other times they don't hard enough. Fischer was 6'5 and a very good skater but just didn't work hard enough to improve. They made a mistake going for size in '13 and have since admitted it. Urquhart was clearly a Savard pick as he was the one gushing about him after the draft talking about how impressed he was with him in the Q playoffs.
 

jfm133

Registered User
Nov 6, 2015
2,570
1,702
Watching so many games on internet and letting prejudices blind you. If Leason is taken in the first two rounds in June, it means Teasdale would have earned it too because Teasdale is better. Teadale has a very translatable game to the pro level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Monsieur Patate

1909

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
20,743
11,350
Or better when he drafts Subban, Price, Pac, McDonagh, Gallagher, Sergachev, etc... Scouts make mistakes but just because of that you don't just throw away a pick on a 19 year old that's doing well in the Q. And who says he'll be better then what Leblanc, Tinordi, McCarron, Scherbak, or DLR did in the NHL? There's nothing that he's shown that says he should be picked in the 1st round as you are comparing a 19 to 17 year olds. Of course some kids just peak at 17 and it's very hard to know which ones will and which ones won't, some times injuries impact them, other times they don't hard enough. Fischer was 6'5 and a very good skater but just didn't work hard enough to improve. They made a mistake going for size in '13 and have since admitted it. Urquhart was clearly a Savard pick as he was the one gushing about him after the draft talking about how impressed he was with him in the Q playoffs.

Fischer was 6'3. get at least this fact right.
 

Estimated_Prophet

Registered User
Mar 28, 2003
10,415
10,649
Watching so many games on internet and letting prejudices blind you. If Leason is taken in the first two rounds in June, it means Teasdale would have earned it too because Teasdale is better. Teadale has a very translatable game to the pro level.
Leason is much bigger than Teasdale which makes him more enticing as a prospect. Teasdale may end up being the better player but Leason has more upside right now. For the record, I don't want Leason in the second round and certainly wouldn't use a 2nd rounder on Teasdale either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Stive Morgan

Fatso forgot to shake my hand
Jul 25, 2011
21,036
26,892
British Columbia
Teasdale has a great lower body strenght and he is good on the cycle. Many times you will see him do a quick change of pace lower the shoulder and drive to the net. Maybe he could become a Lekhonen with a better scoring touch.

Hes a smart player who is tough to play against. He will play in the NHL at some point.

If I had to guess he would be picked late second round in this draft.

Agreed. Late second rounder.
 

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,720
41,029
www.youtube.com
Fischer was 6'3. get at least this fact right.


sorry I misremembered something from 13 years ago, but those 2 inches less height doesn't change that at 20th OA you can at least see why he was picked as he had NHL height, skating, mobility.

If you think picking Teasdale had he not been signed would be a good idea in the 1st or 2nd round because Timmins has made some mistakes that clearly weren't helped by development and management then I would consider that very shortsighted. At least with the 17 year olds you have some hope that they will progress each year, with Teasdale you pretty much are hoping he turns into a 4th liner as it's not like he has some great skill set. He had a very good year playing against younger players on one of the best teams in the Q.

I wonder if how many scouts that have picked 16 players in the first round have had only 1 that never appeared in an NHL game.
 

ahmedou

DOU
Oct 7, 2017
19,245
18,632
“We don't think about that. We just want to play our game. If we're playing the Huskies game we gonna be good. Thinking about the little details. At the end, we just wanna win games. After that we gonna see where'll that lead. We've to play faster and more on their faces to be efficient. Play more with the puck. We know it's gonna be tough. We wanted to stay calm. Play simple...”

“My best quality is my work ethic. I've to get back to it, to my things... Do all the details and work harder.”
 

Kotkaniemi15

Registered User
Sep 18, 2018
2,563
2,664
Montreal
We don't think about that. We just want to play our game. If we're playing the Huskies game we gonna be good. Thinking about the little details. At the end, we just wanna win games. After that we gonna see where'll that lead. We've to play faster and more on their faces to be efficient. Play more with the puck. We know it's gonna be tough. We wanted to stay calm. Play simple...”

“My best quality is my work ethic. I've to get back to it, to my things... Do all the details and work harder.”

What was he referencing?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad