LW Sebastian Aho (2015, 35th, CAR)

[Rabid Ranger]

I agree exactly with this. If Matthews was said by many to be 2nd or 3rd in that draft, I see no reason why Aho couldn't go as 3rd. He is in the same league as a talent as Matthews is. Matthews has only his size, strength and wrister over Aho. Aho has better defensive play, better passing, better onetimer and better skating skills over Matthews. I see Matthews at the moment maybe a bit better as a complete player, but Aho has a good chance to become at least as good as he is, as the difference is really not big even at the moment.

....and I thought the Laine thread had gone off the rails.....

 

[Gsus]

I agree exactly with this. If Matthews was said by many to be 2nd or 3rd in that draft, I see no reason why Aho couldn't go as 3rd. He is in the same league as a talent as Matthews is. Matthews has only his size, strength and wrister over Aho. Aho has better defensive play, better passing, better onetimer and better skating skills over Matthews.

Slow down a bit. Bolded things are based on what timeline or games? If you had to choose one, Matthews or Aho, who would it be? Both would be centers. Or Matthews as a C and Aho as a winger, who you choose?

To be honest I don't think Aho is ready to be 1st line center or winger on his team yet, but I think Matthews will be that guy next season and do well. We all know Aho is good but I think your overhyping him just a littlebit.

 

[Ippenator]

The bolded sections here just proved you know jack **** when it comes to analyzing player talent.

Usually I wouldn't even comment on something like this, because everyone and their mother knows it's almost impossible to rate how good these kind of guys will be in 2 or 3 years. BUT to say Rantanen is one tier below Teuvo as a prospect?? c'mon man...the kid was LIT in the AHL, and whenever he was on the ice in WC he made things happen.

And what about Ristolainen? A guy who at the ripe old age of 21 is a legit #1 Dman in the NHL? He's right up there with Barky when it comes to skill level if you ask me. And this talk about Barky being a choker. Have you seen him play? I'll admit he wasn't playing at his level in the last 2 games at at the WC, but he wasn't 100% healthy at the time.

I'm a big fan of Aho (and Rantanen as well), and I believe he can be a star in the NHL, but please just stop talking out of your arses...

What a low class post. So full of rage and denying facts, that I don't really know if I should laugh or cry.

First of all, I tend to believe that Rantanen is in the same tier with Teräväinen as a prospect, although the small doubts came from Rantanen's 9 game 0+0 stint in the NHL. I know that he had small minutes and limited role, but even with those facts it is unacceptable for a so called top prospect to not contribute in any way offensively. If he really would be so great prospect as some seem to think, he would not have been completely scoreless in those games. There is just simply no excuse for that. It is pure fanboying to deny this.

I have not denied that Barkov is in the top tier for Finnish prospects. He has many amazing abilities that I don't definitely deny. But I still see also that his biggest problems are definitely lack of intensity and unfortunately clearly choking in bigger games. He has never had a really great game in big and really meaningful games. Please prove me wrong, if you really deny this. It is BS to claim that he was Florida's best player in the playoffs. He was so far from it that it is pure fanboyism to claim something like that. Tavares outplayed and outscored him completely while Barkov and his line was in constant trouble all the way through the shortish series. Luongo even had great save percentage, so no use to blame the goalie for example. Barkov just plain choked. I see no way around this fact. The same way he has choked in WJC, while Teräväinen, Aho and Laine have been true leaders and clutch players. But even despite all this I don't deny that Barkov is an absolute top prospect in Finnish hockey. I just don't like this choke play of his at all.

Same way I see Ristolainen as maybe the top talent for Finnish defencemen, along with Määttä. Just a pity that they don't have each others best abilities. Ristolainen would need Määttä's great positional play and hockey IQ. And Määttä could use the offensive skills and physical presence that Risto has.

Risto unfortunately has still quite serious problems with his positional play and with misreading plays. These are the problems that he has had through his whole career. Just look at his +- stats and you get the proof. They just support what anyone who understands anything about hockey should see when watching him play in several games.

Risto is extremely talented otherwise, but this is that huge problem for a defenceman that I can't see him in the best Finnish prospect tier because of that. Especially as I am not too confident that he will develop very much in this area. He has had these problems so severely through his whole career.

So me pointing out some real and well based flaws on two of Finnish top prospects seems to be a horrible crime to do? To me closing eyes from these kinds of facts is in fact the wrong thing to do.

And still about Aho and Laine. I claimed already after WJC that Laine and Aho (and maybe Pulju, but with him I was wrong) would have a good chance to be chosen to WHC and even World Cup. I was laughed at for overhyping both guys way too much. And I was especially told that Aho is such a kid that it is useless to fantasize of these kind of things. Well, the kid(s) proved all of you doubters wrong. 3+4=7 and 7+5=12 proves that as well as getting chosen to the highest level men's tournament. So in your face doubters! Just keep on doubting and being wrong...

 

[Ainec]

As far as Aho goes, I am really curious to see how he performs this season. Really want the Canes to have a star forward that they've been lacking for so long.

 

[Stavros]

Made me laugh out loud. Auston Matthews is a grown man. Pretty sure Aho would break in half if he was hit.

And Aho still managed to put every bit as impressive numbers as Matthews, I would assume that a grown man would have a lot more impressive numbers than some kid.

 

[Lempo]

....and I thought the Laine thread had gone off the rails.....

Let me play you song of my people:

 

[Ippenator]

Let me play you song of my people:

Lempo soikoon!

 

[Periwinkle]

Oh wow, I haven't heard that song in 20 years, since I was a kid

I certainly hope Aho makes it in the NHL, but with no actual data on small ice performance it is hard to say how he will adjust. He is a great neutral ice player, but on small ice the neutral zone is much smaller, he hasn't proven he has elite offensive skills and is physically small. So it seems like overhyping to compare him to Matthews given that Matthews has many great small ice qualities to his game.

If I had to predict, I would say Aho ends up a second line winger.

 

[Ippenator]

I think Barkov had a great playoffs personally, and by possession metrics was unlucky and definitely held his own against Tavares. Luongo's save % doesn't matter as he was outplayed by Greiss clearly.

As far as Aho goes, I am really curious to see how he performs this season. Really want the Canes to have a star forward that they've been lacking for so long.

Well, well. I have to say that these possession statistics are really quite irrelevant when you have stats like goal and point production and wins that clearly prove how Barkov and Tavares really played.

They played each others almost constantly in the series and their production was the following:

Barkov 2+1=3, 2 wins and 4 losses, series lost

Tavares 5+4=9, 4 wins and 2 losses, series won

In the final decisive game Barkov had 0+0=0 and -1. In the same game Tavares had 2+0=2 and +2, and he was the decisive clutch player with scoring both of his teams goals, while Barkov had his usual meltdown game in a very big and meaningful game.

And the same has happened two times at WJC and this year in WHC (he was very clearly the worst player on the ice in the WHC final). For me it clearly means that he has "Ovechkin syndrome" written all over his face. I just hope it is not tattooed though...

 

[Periwinkle]

Well, well. I have to say that these possession statistics are really quite irrelevant when you have stats like goal and point production and wins that clearly prove how Barkov and Tavares really played.

They played each others almost constantly in the series and their production was the following:

Barkov 2+1=3, 2 wins and 4 losses, series lost

Tavares 5+4=9, 4 wins and 2 losses, series won

In the final decisive game Barkov had 0+0=0 and -1. In the same game Tavares had 2+0=2 and +2, and he was the decisive clutch player with scoring both of his teams goals, while Barkov had his usual meltdown game in a very big and meaningful game.

And the same has happened two times at WJC and this year in WHC (he was very clearly the worst player on the ice in the WHC final). For me it clearly means that he has "Ovechkin syndrome" written all over his face. I just hope it is not tattooed though...

I don't know why people are talking about Barkov but this post is utterly ridiculous. If so many other players get leeway because of their age, why does not Barkov? He's 20 and in his first NHL playoffs, and you're comparing a him to a 7 NHL season veteran with three playoffs behind him to prove something "profound" in his character?

Barkov was not the worst player by any means in the Worlds final. He clearly picked up that his wingers were unable to get the puck to the offensive zone and had to take that task, carrying the puck in which of course led to some puck losses and seemed desperate because of the very effective zone entry blocking by the Canadians. But he was at least sometimes succesful whereas Laine was effectively neutralized already at the neutral zone. There also seemed to be some sort of injury as well.

 

[Ippenator]

I don't know why people are talking about Barkov but this post is utterly ridiculous. If so many other players get leeway because of their age, why does not Barkov? He's 20 and in his first NHL playoffs, and you're comparing a him to a 7 NHL season veteran with three playoffs behind him to prove something "profound" in his character?

Barkov was not the worst player by any means in the Worlds final. He clearly picked up that his wingers were unable to get the puck to the offensive zone and had to take that task, carrying the puck in which of course led to some puck losses and seemed desperate because of the very effective zone entry blocking by the Canadians. But he was at least sometimes succesful whereas Laine was effectively neutralized already at the neutral zone. There also seemed to be some sort of injury as well.

Excuses after excuses, when it is about Barkov and Rantanen. If Barkov is such already great and mature player that some have praised here already, there would be no way he would be so totally outclassed by Tavares, even though Tavares is a very good player of course. But it just means that Barkov is not at all so mature and great as some people try to push through here. But then when his serious meltdown against Tavares is brought up, he suddenly is so young and helpless and it should be obvious that he can't match up with a great player like Tavares. Well newsflash, if a player is very talented, 20 years of age is not going to affect in this way so seriously anymore. The fact is just that Barkov is not near as good as Tavares and I'm not sure if he will ever be.

Barkov has played top level hockey already quite long for his age and this was already his third NHL season, so I think it's time to quit with the excuses. He sure can develop a lot and I sure hope he will.

Maybe his bad showing in the WHC final can be explained with sickness or injury, but on the other hand, if he was not fully fit, would the doctor and the coach even want him to play? I guess we will never no the right answer to this.

But what are the excuses for his no shows in the most meaningful games in two consecutive WJC tournaments? To me the fact that there are already so many clutch situations where he has not performed well at all, is quite a sign of a choking problem. At least the excuses can't really keep on going on and on, if his play continues like this.

 

[FinlandPanther]

Excuses after excuses, when it is about Barkov and Rantanen. If Barkov is such already great and mature player that some have praised here already, there would be no way he would be so totally outclassed by Tavares, even though Tavares is a very good player of course. But it just means that Barkov is not at all so mature and great as some people try to push through here. But then when his serious meltdown against Tavares is brought up, he suddenly is so young and helpless and it should be obvious that he can't match up with a great player like Tavares. Well newsflash, if a player is very talented, 20 years of age is not going to affect in this way so seriously anymore. The fact is just that Barkov is not near as good as Tavares and I'm not sure if he will ever be.

Barkov has played top level hockey already quite long for his age and this was already his third NHL season, so I think it's time to quit with the excuses. He sure can develop a lot and I sure hope he will.

Maybe his bad showing in the WHC final can be explained with sickness or injury, but on the other hand, if he was not fully fit, would the doctor and the coach even want him to play? I guess we will never no the right answer to this.

But what are the excuses for his no shows in the most meaningful games in two consecutive WJC tournaments? To me the fact that there are already so many clutch situations where he has not performed well at all, is quite a sign of a choking problem. At least the excuses can't really keep on going on and on, if his play continues like this.

Man there is so much fantasy in your posts it's bad. Barkov a choker

 

[Ippenator]

Man there is so much fantasy in your posts it's bad. Barkov a choker

So please tell me at least more than one situation when he has really played well in a big and very meaningful game? Can you do that instead of just belittleing some comments that someone makes and at least bothers to go through real facts and explanations why Barkov seems to be a choker.

 

[SaekkiPaelli]

Laine thread had already cracked me up this spring but now even this Aho thread is just too funny.

What a low class post. So full of rage and denying facts, that I don't really know if I should laugh or cry.

First of all, I tend to believe that Rantanen is in the same tier with Teräväinen as a prospect, although the small doubts came from Rantanen's 9 game 0+0 stint in the NHL. I know that he had small minutes and limited role, but even with those facts it is unacceptable for a so called top prospect to not contribute in any way offensively. If he really would be so great prospect as some seem to think, he would not have been completely scoreless in those games. There is just simply no excuse for that. It is pure fanboying to deny this.

I have not denied that Barkov is in the top tier for Finnish prospects. He has many amazing abilities that I don't definitely deny. But I still see also that his biggest problems are definitely lack of intensity and unfortunately clearly choking in bigger games. He has never had a really great game in big and really meaningful games. Please prove me wrong, if you really deny this. It is BS to claim that he was Florida's best player in the playoffs. He was so far from it that it is pure fanboyism to claim something like that. Tavares outplayed and outscored him completely while Barkov and his line was in constant trouble all the way through the shortish series. Luongo even had great save percentage, so no use to blame the goalie for example. Barkov just plain choked. I see no way around this fact. The same way he has choked in WJC, while Teräväinen, Aho and Laine have been true leaders and clutch players. But even despite all this I don't deny that Barkov is an absolute top prospect in Finnish hockey. I just don't like this choke play of his at all.

Same way I see Ristolainen as maybe the top talent for Finnish defencemen, along with Määttä. Just a pity that they don't have each others best abilities. Ristolainen would need Määttä's great positional play and hockey IQ. And Määttä could use the offensive skills and physical presence that Risto has.

Risto unfortunately has still quite serious problems with his positional play and with misreading plays. These are the problems that he has had through his whole career. Just look at his +- stats and you get the proof. They just support what anyone who understands anything about hockey should see when watching him play in several games.

Risto is extremely talented otherwise, but this is that huge problem for a defenceman that I can't see him in the best Finnish prospect tier because of that. Especially as I am not too confident that he will develop very much in this area. He has had these problems so severely through his whole career.

So me pointing out some real and well based flaws on two of Finnish top prospects seems to be a horrible crime to do? To me closing eyes from these kinds of facts is in fact the wrong thing to do.

And still about Aho and Laine. I claimed already after WJC that Laine and Aho (and maybe Pulju, but with him I was wrong) would have a good chance to be chosen to WHC and even World Cup. I was laughed at for overhyping both guys way too much. And I was especially told that Aho is such a kid that it is useless to fantasize of these kind of things. Well, the kid(s) proved all of you doubters wrong. 3+4=7 and 7+5=12 proves that as well as getting chosen to the highest level men's tournament. So in your face doubters! Just keep on doubting and being wrong...

Aho is a PPG player but against Tappara he only had 1+3 in 7 games, isn't he a choker too? In the gold medal game against Canada Aho was on the ice when Canada scored 1-0, doesn't this make him a choker in big games? Laine also choked vs Canada?

Barkov had 0+5 in 5 games in Liiga play-offs with a +3, is that not showing up? You compared him earlier to Tavares? A veteran, while Barkov playing first play-offs in NHL? Even still he had 2+1 in 6 games, which I don't consider choking in your first play-off games. He is 20 years old, he can't even be a choker yet, since he hasn't played enough important games. In the WC he was clearly not 100% in the playoffs as he even sat out the quarterfinal.

You commented on Ristolainen's +/- earlier, while you have most likely watched 0 games, most Buffalo fans have been really impressed with him and say he is/will become a legit #1 dman. And would the organization keep him playing big minutes if he was bad? Maybe his +/- is bad because buffalo is a bad team and he plays highest minutes?

I guarantee 100% that every GM in the league would say that Barkov and Ristolainen are better talents than Aho. And every GM would take Barkov or Ristolainen ahead of Aho or Laine for that matter.

And don't get me wrong, I love Aho, I think he will be a 55+ point winger or C (if that what he will play), even with potential to become a 65+ point player. But he is not as good a NHL prospect as Rantanen is right now. AHL is basically comparable to Liiga and success in AHL is a better indicator to success in the NHL, than Liiga. Just look at Keränen for example, PPG in Liiga but 0,5PPG in AHL. Aho is better in europe, but I pick Rantanen 100% before Aho in NA as of right now. I've stated the reasons in an earlier post if anybody is interested.

You also mentioned that you think Teräväinen is a better prospect than Rantanen...I don't even know how to comment on this.

Oh, and there is no chance Aho is as good a prospect as Matthews, just no. And in a redraft he would not be top3(again I've mentioned who are ahead in a previous post, not long ago). He'd go around 10-15 range I think.

EDIT: Barkov made C-juniors passing record in playoffs, jeez what a choker he is.

 

[Gsus]

So please tell me at least more than one situation when he has really played well in a big and very meaningful game? Can you do that instead of just belittleing some comments that someone makes and at least bothers to go through real facts and explanations why Barkov seems to be a choker.

Can you stop trolling already?

 

[SaekkiPaelli]

Excuses after excuses, when it is about Barkov and Rantanen. If Barkov is such already great and mature player that some have praised here already, there would be no way he would be so totally outclassed by Tavares, even though Tavares is a very good player of course. But it just means that Barkov is not at all so mature and great as some people try to push through here. But then when his serious meltdown against Tavares is brought up, he suddenly is so young and helpless and it should be obvious that he can't match up with a great player like Tavares. Well newsflash, if a player is very talented, 20 years of age is not going to affect in this way so seriously anymore. The fact is just that Barkov is not near as good as Tavares and I'm not sure if he will ever be.

Barkov has played top level hockey already quite long for his age and this was already his third NHL season, so I think it's time to quit with the excuses. He sure can develop a lot and I sure hope he will.

Maybe his bad showing in the WHC final can be explained with sickness or injury, but on the other hand, if he was not fully fit, would the doctor and the coach even want him to play? I guess we will never no the right answer to this.

But what are the excuses for his no shows in the most meaningful games in two consecutive WJC tournaments? To me the fact that there are already so many clutch situations where he has not performed well at all, is quite a sign of a choking problem. At least the excuses can't really keep on going on and on, if his play continues like this.

Joe Thornton was considered a playoff choker, look at him now, is he a choker?

And getting outclassed by Tavares just means that Tavares right now is a better player than Barkov. And nobody has said that his offensive potential is fully developed yet, he only started to be a consistent offensive threat this season. When people say how mature he is they mean his defensive play.

Also, Barkov isn't the only player on that line, Jagr for example was an absolute no-show in the playoffs. The line had one bad round in the playoffs, with 2/3 having their first playoffs. Please stop exaggerating 6 games.

 

[Periwinkle]

I think other people addressed your points but this I'll just add at to me this doesn't take account of the realities of professional sports or an athlete's mentality:

Maybe his bad showing in the WHC final can be explained with sickness or injury, but on the other hand, if he was not fully fit, would the doctor and the coach even want him to play? I guess we will never no the right answer to this.

After every playoffs series or final it comes out that player X was playing injured, some head off to surgery soon after. When the stakes are high, most players/their coaches do what needs to be done to get that player back on the ice.
Ex. Artturi Lehkonen played the WJC 2014 final with his both ankles in a bad shape, had to be have local anaesthetic to be able to play, which worsened the condition but said he had no regrets:
http://www.savonsanomat.fi/urheilu/jaakiekko/Artturi-Lehkonen-siirtyy-Ruotsiin/486952

It doesn't seem like whatever Barkov had was serious but your rationale doesn't work even for more serious injuries.

 

[Lempo]

I think other people addressed your points but this I'll just add at to me this doesn't take account of the realities of professional sports or an athlete's mentality:



After every playoffs series or final it comes out that player X was playing injured, some head off to surgery soon after. When the stakes are high, most players/their coaches do what needs to be done to get that player back on the ice.
Ex. Artturi Lehkonen played the WJC 2014 final with his both ankles in a bad shape, had to be have local anaesthetic to be able to play, which worsened the condition but said he had no regrets:
http://www.savonsanomat.fi/urheilu/jaakiekko/Artturi-Lehkonen-siirtyy-Ruotsiin/486952

It doesn't seem like whatever Barkov had was serious but your rationale doesn't work even for more serious injuries.

It was a headlines news in the radio on that Friday that Barkov was going to play in the semis which I think emphasizes how tough call it would have been to not play him even with a minor known problem.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

What a low class post. So full of rage and denying facts, that I don't really know if I should laugh or cry.

First of all, I tend to believe that Rantanen is in the same tier with Teräväinen as a prospect, although the small doubts came from Rantanen's 9 game 0+0 stint in the NHL. I know that he had small minutes and limited role, but even with those facts it is unacceptable for a so called top prospect to not contribute in any way offensively. If he really would be so great prospect as some seem to think, he would not have been completely scoreless in those games. There is just simply no excuse for that. It is pure fanboying to deny this.

I have not denied that Barkov is in the top tier for Finnish prospects. He has many amazing abilities that I don't definitely deny. But I still see also that his biggest problems are definitely lack of intensity and unfortunately clearly choking in bigger games. He has never had a really great game in big and really meaningful games. Please prove me wrong, if you really deny this. It is BS to claim that he was Florida's best player in the playoffs. He was so far from it that it is pure fanboyism to claim something like that. Tavares outplayed and outscored him completely while Barkov and his line was in constant trouble all the way through the shortish series. Luongo even had great save percentage, so no use to blame the goalie for example. Barkov just plain choked. I see no way around this fact. The same way he has choked in WJC, while Teräväinen, Aho and Laine have been true leaders and clutch players. But even despite all this I don't deny that Barkov is an absolute top prospect in Finnish hockey. I just don't like this choke play of his at all.

Same way I see Ristolainen as maybe the top talent for Finnish defencemen, along with Määttä. Just a pity that they don't have each others best abilities. Ristolainen would need Määttä's great positional play and hockey IQ. And Määttä could use the offensive skills and physical presence that Risto has.

Risto unfortunately has still quite serious problems with his positional play and with misreading plays. These are the problems that he has had through his whole career. Just look at his +- stats and you get the proof. They just support what anyone who understands anything about hockey should see when watching him play in several games.

Risto is extremely talented otherwise, but this is that huge problem for a defenceman that I can't see him in the best Finnish prospect tier because of that. Especially as I am not too confident that he will develop very much in this area. He has had these problems so severely through his whole career.

So me pointing out some real and well based flaws on two of Finnish top prospects seems to be a horrible crime to do? To me closing eyes from these kinds of facts is in fact the wrong thing to do.

And still about Aho and Laine. I claimed already after WJC that Laine and Aho (and maybe Pulju, but with him I was wrong) would have a good chance to be chosen to WHC and even World Cup. I was laughed at for overhyping both guys way too much. And I was especially told that Aho is such a kid that it is useless to fantasize of these kind of things. Well, the kid(s) proved all of you doubters wrong. 3+4=7 and 7+5=12 proves that as well as getting chosen to the highest level men's tournament. So in your face doubters! Just keep on doubting and being wrong...

I love this post. Provides unwarranted criticism for players that have actually met (if not exceeded) the expectations and earned the praise at a very young age in order to hype two promising but unproven prospects up to the extreme levels.

Not to mention the serious flaws in the actual player analysis. I mean c'mon, Ristolainen should take notes from Määttä in regards to positional play?

 

[Ippenator]

I love this post. Provides unwarranted criticism for players that have actually met (if not exceeded) the expectations and earned the praise at a very young age in order to hype two promising but unproven prospects up to the extreme levels.

Not to mention the serious flaws in the actual player analysis. I mean c'mon, Ristolainen should take notes from Määttä in regards to positional play?

Of course he should. Määttä is exceptional with his positional play, and Ristolainen definitely is not. He has really bad lapses from time to time. Also check his +- through his career. Every single team that he has played for at any level, he has been clearly on the minus side. Atrocious +- really through his whole club history. Only in team Finland he has been able to be on the plus side. But hey, no one can really be a minus-player in team Finland.

Sorry Jeepers, but I lost even the last hope of credibility for you with your latest post. Hah! To think that you could even seriously think that Määttä doesn't clearly have better positional play than Ristolainen... That truly is something!

 

[Joe MacMillan]

Of course he should. Määttä is exceptional with his positional play, and Ristolainen definitely is not. He has really bad lapses from time to time. Also check his +- through his career. Every single team that he has played for at any level, he has been clearly on the minus side. Atrocious +- really through his whole club history. Only in team Finland he has been able to be on the plus side. But hey, no one can really be a minus-player in team Finland.

Sorry Jeepers, but I lost even the last hope of credibility for you with your latest post. Hah! To think that you could even seriously think that Määttä doesn't clearly have better positional play than Ristolainen... That truly is something!

The plus minus is a team stat and Risto has played for a bottom feeder since he was 16 (save for the National Team where he's been a plus player and his time with Rochester). Shocking that he's been on the minus side for all his pro career!

Määttä is nowhere near Risto regarding positional awareness. It's quite telling you're trying to justify your claim for the opposite by relying on the plus minus stat since the eye ball test suggests otherwise.

 

[Ippenator]

The plus minus is a team stat and Risto has played for a bottom feeder since he was 16 (save for the National Team where he's been a plus player and his time with Rochester). Shocking that he's been on the minus side for all his pro career!

Määttä is nowhere near Risto regarding positional awareness. It's quite telling you're trying to justify your claim for the opposite by relying on the plus minus stat since the eye ball test suggests otherwise.

Sorry dude but this proves me that you really don't understand hockey at all as well as you think you do. I base my comments in fact purely on how I have seen them play. I bet not that many people on these boards have seen as many prospects play, as I have. I have been following every Finnish top prospect very intensively, and all my comments and opinions are based on evaluating them in live games.

But stats are the only way to prove some things to some boneheads over here. And stats are anyway the only really trustworthy and non deniable facts that we have. Obviously the eye test fails with so many people. And whatever even weird reasons can make someone see even Ristolainen as a somehow better positional defender than Määttä. This is just something that truly makes me cringe and understand that there are people with so strong opinions here, and they after all know jackshiiit.

Go and check eliteprospect (or any other player evaluating site) on both of the players. I just went there now to see what they say, to get some clear support for what I have seen with my own eyes while I have seen both of these play in numerous games on every single level they have played, including the NHL of course, and the result is that Eliteprospects experts describe them positionally exactly how I have already described. Go there, read and weep. And please come commenting next time when you really know and understand something...

 

[Joe MacMillan]

Sorry dude but this proves me that you really don't understand hockey at all as well as you think you do. I base my comments in fact purely on how I have seen them play. I bet not that many people on these boards have seen as many prospects play, as I have. I have been following every Finnish top prospect very intensively, and all my comments and opinions are based on evaluating them in live games.

But stats are the only way to prove some things to some boneheads over here. And stats are anyway the only really trustworthy and non deniable facts that we have. Obviously the eye test fails with so many people. And whatever even weird reasons can make someone see even Ristolainen as a somehow better positional defender than Määttä. This is just something that truly makes me cringe and understand that there are people with so strong opinions here, and they after all know jackshiiit.

Go and check eliteprospect on both of the players. I just went there now to see what they say, to get some clear support for what I have seen with my own eyes while I have seen both of these play in numerous games on every single level they have plaid, including the NHL of course, and the result is that Eliteprospects experts describe them positionally exactly how I have already described. Go there, read and weep. And please come commenting next time when you really know and understand something...

Oh ok, now your opinion makes sense then. Though the problem is that the synopsis on Määttä is from 2010 and on Risto from 2013.

Here's their player synopsis on Angelo Esposito:

A skilled center, Esposito owns slick hands and terrific skating ability. Drives the net and shows quality offensive instincts.
On the downside, he has had some major injury problems, having had multible knee surgeries. Needs to improve his defensive play.

What a compelling analysis. To think a skilled center like him with practically no weaknesses has spent most of his career in Europe.

 

[BB88]

What a low class post. So full of rage and denying facts, that I don't really know if I should laugh or cry.

First of all, I tend to believe that Rantanen is in the same tier with Teräväinen as a prospect, although the small doubts came from Rantanen's 9 game 0+0 stint in the NHL. I know that he had small minutes and limited role, but even with those facts it is unacceptable for a so called top prospect to not contribute in any way offensively. If he really would be so great prospect as some seem to think, he would not have been completely scoreless in those games. There is just simply no excuse for that. It is pure fanboying to deny this.

I have not denied that Barkov is in the top tier for Finnish prospects. He has many amazing abilities that I don't definitely deny. But I still see also that his biggest problems are definitely lack of intensity and unfortunately clearly choking in bigger games. He has never had a really great game in big and really meaningful games. Please prove me wrong, if you really deny this. It is BS to claim that he was Florida's best player in the playoffs. He was so far from it that it is pure fanboyism to claim something like that. Tavares outplayed and outscored him completely while Barkov and his line was in constant trouble all the way through the shortish series. Luongo even had great save percentage, so no use to blame the goalie for example. Barkov just plain choked. I see no way around this fact. The same way he has choked in WJC, while Teräväinen, Aho and Laine have been true leaders and clutch players. But even despite all this I don't deny that Barkov is an absolute top prospect in Finnish hockey. I just don't like this choke play of his at all.

Same way I see Ristolainen as maybe the top talent for Finnish defencemen, along with Määttä. Just a pity that they don't have each others best abilities. Ristolainen would need Määttä's great positional play and hockey IQ. And Määttä could use the offensive skills and physical presence that Risto has.

Risto unfortunately has still quite serious problems with his positional play and with misreading plays. These are the problems that he has had through his whole career. Just look at his +- stats and you get the proof. They just support what anyone who understands anything about hockey should see when watching him play in several games.

Risto is extremely talented otherwise, but this is that huge problem for a defenceman that I can't see him in the best Finnish prospect tier because of that. Especially as I am not too confident that he will develop very much in this area. He has had these problems so severely through his whole career.

So me pointing out some real and well based flaws on two of Finnish top prospects seems to be a horrible crime to do? To me closing eyes from these kinds of facts is in fact the wrong thing to do.

And still about Aho and Laine. I claimed already after WJC that Laine and Aho (and maybe Pulju, but with him I was wrong) would have a good chance to be chosen to WHC and even World Cup. I was laughed at for overhyping both guys way too much. And I was especially told that Aho is such a kid that it is useless to fantasize of these kind of things. Well, the kid(s) proved all of you doubters wrong. 3+4=7 and 7+5=12 proves that as well as getting chosen to the highest level men's tournament. So in your face doubters! Just keep on doubting and being wrong...

You honestly need to go to Avs forum and talk with them about their season, these posts are embarrassing to read, McDavid did nothing for his 1st few games and the guy is generational.

It's so crazy to start seeing these Aho= Zetterbeg/Barkov/Matthews/Laine comments, it just brins so so so many negative comments towards us Finns fans and puts up insane expectations on Aho.

Well, well. I have to say that these possession statistics are really quite irrelevant when you have stats like goal and point production and wins that clearly prove how Barkov and Tavares really played.

They played each others almost constantly in the series and their production was the following:

Barkov 2+1=3, 2 wins and 4 losses, series lost

Tavares 5+4=9, 4 wins and 2 losses, series won

In the final decisive game Barkov had 0+0=0 and -1. In the same game Tavares had 2+0=2 and +2, and he was the decisive clutch player with scoring both of his teams goals, while Barkov had his usual meltdown game in a very big and meaningful game.

And the same has happened two times at WJC and this year in WHC (he was very clearly the worst player on the ice in the WHC final). For me it clearly means that he has "Ovechkin syndrome" written all over his face. I just hope it is not tattooed though...

You do understand that Bjugstad and trocheck were injured on that series and 2 goals in which Barkov was involved were called back?
This is honestly so damm ridiculous by you, Barkov is 20y and went against one of the best C's in the game and didn't get destroyed in that series.
If anything these playoffs showed that Jagr wasn't a 1st line guy anymore for playoff games.

I'd love to hear how you blame Barkov for their blueliners turnovers that lead to goals.

 

[Hzzz]

For me it clearly means that he has "Ovechkin syndrome" written all over his face. I just hope it is not tattooed though...

What is "Ovechkin syndrome" ? Ovechkin has 82 points in 84 playoff games