Player Discussion Jonathan Lekkerimaki
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
- Status
Deeds26
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2006
- 1,381
- 1,968
I really enjoy Chris Faber, he has his finger on the pulse for sure
As far as I'm concerned, Faber and Drance could be co-GMs of the Nucks and I'd be very happy (oh yeah and that would mean punt aqua into the Sun)
Aqua man ain’t going nowhere, I think we hope his ex-wife wins the team in a settlement and we get Ted Lasso
At least they're trying some stuff instead of just continuing to park him in 4th line minutes for the rest of the season.
Defensemen take longer to develop.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
Aw man he's gonna take forever if he has to learn defense now
rypper
21-12-05 it's finally over.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,401
- 20,330
He was drafted a little more then 6 months ago... I think we can pump the brakes on any real judgement.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
rypper
21-12-05 it's finally over.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,401
- 20,330
I’m gonna be honest. I think he’s going to be a bust.
Every prospect that has a bad year like this ends up being a bust, especially one that was selected by us. I don’t trust our scouting and management’s judgement at the draft.
Every prospect that has a bad year like this ends up being a bust, especially one that was selected by us. I don’t trust our scouting and management’s judgement at the draft.
Every prospect who starts out like this isn’t a bust let’s be real . I remember a young Jacob Muzzin who didn’t even get drafted and had to play an overage year in junior just to get drafted , Brandon Hagel didn’t even get signed by Buffalo as a 6th round pick and both players have had outstanding NHL Careers and I can keep going but we get the point .
Point is He is far from a bust . Junior hockey is what he really needs and If he is god awful next year then you have my permission to use the best label .
But I’m going to see how he performs next season before I call him a bust
RobertKron
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2007
- 15,516
- 8,651
Pretty sure Muzzin was drafted in his first year of eligibility.
Without making any judgement on Lekkerimaki, the fact that you're drawing upon players picked in the 5th and 6th rounds as examples for him is really not a good sign. Similarly, that you think that the issue for a player taken 15OA having played half his draft year in the SHL is that he needs to play junior, because the Allsvenskan is too much for him, is also not really a great sign, either. He's obviously not a bust, but this has clearly not been a remotely good year so far, and concern is absolutely warranted. It will still have been warranted even if he turns it around and is lights out from tomorrow onward.
Last edited:
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
How about... The stock of this young asset has gone down quite a bit since being acquired?
The thing is though, those guys were huge longshots. Think of how many players in that position actually make it.
Yea absolutely I agree with this statement. He has not performed up to expectations this season 100%
Like I said with the other poster , he’s not lived up to standard of a 15th overall pick and my point with Muzzin and Hagel is players at 18 don’t always have the seasons we hope they do .
But I agree with everyone here he has not had a great D + 1 season at all he has been terrible and sending him to juniors is a hope of him reaching his ceiling because him playing 4th line minutes in the SHL won’t do him any good and clearly he doesn’t have the trust of the coaching staff this year
RobertKron
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2007
- 15,516
- 8,651
FWIW, Muzzin also didn't play at all in his 16yo pre-draft year due to back surgery, and Hagel actually had a pretty good D+1 for a 6th rounder. Context for both players is so different that they're not really useful comparisons.
Lekkerimaki is obviously a talented player, and has the ability to turn things around, so I just don't really understand the urge to find these examples to "prove" something everyone already knows - especially when those examples usually just make his situation look worse than it already does. Nobody with a serious opinion is declaring the kid done and dusted at this point, so I don't really get the point.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,879
- 9,560
so this is a classic 15th overall "top 10 talent but question-marks" type gamble as opposed to a deep draft still elite talent pick, a sleeper pick, or a second tier talent all rounder mid-first pick. nobody missed lek, they just saw questions that made him drop.
the questions are size/ability/willingness to compete with men, and, to a lesser extent, one dimensional elite talent. the exact same issues that made caufield drop to the same spot.
the gamble is that he fills out/figures it out.
so far he looks as if he might still be doing ok in u20 play but has not figured out men. he had a meh world juniors but that tournament is overrated as a bellwether.
the sample size for figuring out the significance of this trend is small. most drafted players that age are in north america playing chl or ushl and get no chance to play against men, especially guys of his stature. all we can do is compare him to a small peer group in sweden .
but the small group indicators are still poor. compare him to dahlen and it's downright worrying.
the other thing is as a 15th overall pick he has two possible "good" outcomes, elite or middling nhler. elite is not the most likely outcome or the reasonable expectation. if you look at recent 15th overall picks their development is predictably unpredictable. if you take a 15 year snapshot, 2003-2017, we see five home runs: karlsson, radulov, jt miller, larkin and pulock. then there are 6 fairly forgettable guys who got into 100+ nhl games of which ceci and branstrom are the most notable. and then there are busts. and before 2003 there were 8 outright busts at 15oa in the preceeding 9 years.
buit, given his weakness and skillset, lek is likely top 6 or bust as a player so at an even higher risk of outright bust than, say, a cody ceci, who can potentially stay in the nhl further down the line up. plus as a swede he has the option of playing swedish hockey as a big fish in a small pond ala dahlen.
so i'd say the day we drafted him he had a 60% plus risk of being an outright bust. unscientifically, i understand that dice roll. 15oa to me is generally at the fringe of high upside elite picks and too early to go with safer second tier talent, so is most likely to yield an elite talent pick with significant questions marks and/or a gamble on further development. karlsson is the classic example of winning the exact gamble we took.
logic dictates that such a gamble is unlikely to resolve itself in 6 months. a failure to thrive in men's hockey is best cured by becoming a man. allowing a little bit for his age, i'd say the gamble starts right about now when he has unquesitonably caught up in age with his peers and now needs to demonstrate he can compete at the level expected of a d+1 elite talent.
bottom line, he's likely a bust against being elite on the odds before you ever look at his performance but the fact weakness has not been settled within 6 months is not a huge surprise. i have an open mind for a little longer.
one issue i do have is whether we really had him at 7oa though. it is a concern if we did and he's definitely busting hard against that draft position., i think it is more likely that these leaked / candid "had him higher" takes are faked every year and we had different notepads photographed at the draft table to have a selection depending on whowe ended up with.
the questions are size/ability/willingness to compete with men, and, to a lesser extent, one dimensional elite talent. the exact same issues that made caufield drop to the same spot.
the gamble is that he fills out/figures it out.
so far he looks as if he might still be doing ok in u20 play but has not figured out men. he had a meh world juniors but that tournament is overrated as a bellwether.
the sample size for figuring out the significance of this trend is small. most drafted players that age are in north america playing chl or ushl and get no chance to play against men, especially guys of his stature. all we can do is compare him to a small peer group in sweden .
but the small group indicators are still poor. compare him to dahlen and it's downright worrying.
the other thing is as a 15th overall pick he has two possible "good" outcomes, elite or middling nhler. elite is not the most likely outcome or the reasonable expectation. if you look at recent 15th overall picks their development is predictably unpredictable. if you take a 15 year snapshot, 2003-2017, we see five home runs: karlsson, radulov, jt miller, larkin and pulock. then there are 6 fairly forgettable guys who got into 100+ nhl games of which ceci and branstrom are the most notable. and then there are busts. and before 2003 there were 8 outright busts at 15oa in the preceeding 9 years.
buit, given his weakness and skillset, lek is likely top 6 or bust as a player so at an even higher risk of outright bust than, say, a cody ceci, who can potentially stay in the nhl further down the line up. plus as a swede he has the option of playing swedish hockey as a big fish in a small pond ala dahlen.
so i'd say the day we drafted him he had a 60% plus risk of being an outright bust. unscientifically, i understand that dice roll. 15oa to me is generally at the fringe of high upside elite picks and too early to go with safer second tier talent, so is most likely to yield an elite talent pick with significant questions marks and/or a gamble on further development. karlsson is the classic example of winning the exact gamble we took.
logic dictates that such a gamble is unlikely to resolve itself in 6 months. a failure to thrive in men's hockey is best cured by becoming a man. allowing a little bit for his age, i'd say the gamble starts right about now when he has unquesitonably caught up in age with his peers and now needs to demonstrate he can compete at the level expected of a d+1 elite talent.
bottom line, he's likely a bust against being elite on the odds before you ever look at his performance but the fact weakness has not been settled within 6 months is not a huge surprise. i have an open mind for a little longer.
one issue i do have is whether we really had him at 7oa though. it is a concern if we did and he's definitely busting hard against that draft position., i think it is more likely that these leaked / candid "had him higher" takes are faked every year and we had different notepads photographed at the draft table to have a selection depending on whowe ended up with.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: WCQF: Game 6 - Vancouver Canucks @ Nashville Predators , 7pm ET
- Latest: Tobias Kahun
-
-
GDT: Around the League 2023-24: The Marathon Becomes A Sprint- Latest: Captain Fantastic
