Mike Richards v Jeff Carter (Offensive Upside)
- Thread starter WADEugottaBELAKthat
- Start date
- Status
Carter is better than Richards offensively..he has a better shot and better speed. However, Richards is very undervalued offensively and I would take him over Carter in a second.
Blind Gardien
nexus of the crisis
The OHL is full of examples of players who have higher PPG than Carter, but who have little or no NHL futures, so the statistics clearly can't tell the story. You could look at the NHL performances of some other players who scored comparably to these guys in recent years... I dunno, Sean Avery, Steve Ott, Mike Danton, maybe... they are far from the least of the players who put up nicer numbers in the OHL, but nobody would ever compare them to Carter either.
Teammates and hustle can add up to a lot at that level, IMHO... Carter, despite his seemingly non-glamourous stats, has led his team in scoring the last 3 years... he hasn't had much support at all. And from the times I've seen him, I have to say that he did show a bit of a "cruise control" mode in junior. He has skills and size and skating ability to dominate, but he didn't feel like he needed to display them on every shift, every second of every game. I bet if he was on London, with that cast and that coach, he would have been pushed more consistently and put up Perry-like numbers.
Guys like Ott, Avery, Danton/Jefferson (and piles of others) played with reckless buzzsaw abandon every shift, maybe they also had some big talent linemates at times (Spezza, Zigomanis, Keefe for e.g.) and so they put up better numbers... against the slower, weaker OHL competition, where many players won't even become pros, let alone NHL prospects. Mike Richards gets a bit of a nod in this direction, IMO, because he plays with the same reckless tenacity on every shift, and he has generally had a better supporting cast on Kitchener than Carter did, IMHO. Richards may not have great speed or great skill, and he's a bit small, so one could easily have imagined him becoming an agitator like Ott/Avery/Danton. *Except*... he has something that none of them do, and that even Carter doesn't, which is just great hockey intelligence. It's a hard thing to define, but he's got a knack for knowing what to do and when to do it that will allow him to be mentioned alongside the more skilled guys like Carter, rather than the muckers and agitators.
So what does it all mean? Carter is going to be on the same team as Richards, and he's going to have talent on his team and his lines in Philly, and he's going to get a lot of points, finally, and probably be more motivated than he was in SSM. Well, we see that in the AHL playoff scoring numbers already. He'll probably keep that up and look good doing it. Richards... well, he is keeping pace, isn't he? He'll probably always find a way to stay in the picture, but at some point I have to think he'll average out to being a notch below Carter on his career average. But who knows?
Teammates and hustle can add up to a lot at that level, IMHO... Carter, despite his seemingly non-glamourous stats, has led his team in scoring the last 3 years... he hasn't had much support at all. And from the times I've seen him, I have to say that he did show a bit of a "cruise control" mode in junior. He has skills and size and skating ability to dominate, but he didn't feel like he needed to display them on every shift, every second of every game. I bet if he was on London, with that cast and that coach, he would have been pushed more consistently and put up Perry-like numbers.
Guys like Ott, Avery, Danton/Jefferson (and piles of others) played with reckless buzzsaw abandon every shift, maybe they also had some big talent linemates at times (Spezza, Zigomanis, Keefe for e.g.) and so they put up better numbers... against the slower, weaker OHL competition, where many players won't even become pros, let alone NHL prospects. Mike Richards gets a bit of a nod in this direction, IMO, because he plays with the same reckless tenacity on every shift, and he has generally had a better supporting cast on Kitchener than Carter did, IMHO. Richards may not have great speed or great skill, and he's a bit small, so one could easily have imagined him becoming an agitator like Ott/Avery/Danton. *Except*... he has something that none of them do, and that even Carter doesn't, which is just great hockey intelligence. It's a hard thing to define, but he's got a knack for knowing what to do and when to do it that will allow him to be mentioned alongside the more skilled guys like Carter, rather than the muckers and agitators.
So what does it all mean? Carter is going to be on the same team as Richards, and he's going to have talent on his team and his lines in Philly, and he's going to get a lot of points, finally, and probably be more motivated than he was in SSM. Well, we see that in the AHL playoff scoring numbers already. He'll probably keep that up and look good doing it. Richards... well, he is keeping pace, isn't he? He'll probably always find a way to stay in the picture, but at some point I have to think he'll average out to being a notch below Carter on his career average. But who knows?
WADEugottaBELAKthat
Nikishin turning heads.
GagneOwnsYou said:
I would agree with all of that, but would not take Richards over Carter so quickly. I think Carter has a greater potential as a pro, but Richards is a bit safer bet to have a very good carrer.
A real coin toss if you had to choose one of them.
Habsfan 32
Registered User
I think Carter has a bit more offensive upside but I agree that Richards as some really underrated offensive skills.
BuppY
xGoodwillx
Carter is better offensively. He has a potential to be a # 1 center in the NHL for years to come. I'd take Carter over Richards.
MojoJojo
Registered User
Without a doubt Richards has great vision and puck handling skills, but heres my biggest concern with him: There are Big players who skate poorly, and small skaters who are fast, that can score and dominate in the NHL. How many small players are there who cant skate well, but can still score? I suppose there are a few like Robitaille and Comrie, but generally they are pretty rare. Because of his defensive play, Richards seems a sure fire third liner at worst, but I worry about his ability to score in the bigger, faster league.
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
MojoJojo said:
Well, with the AHL this year being as good and competitive as it's ever been, Richards has done pretty well for himself. I guess the question is, how far apart is this year's AHL from next year's NHL? The differance might not be as great as one would think.
MojoJojo said:
Will someone please tell me where all of this stuff about Richards not being able to skate comes from? I've watched Richards play on several occasions and not once was there anything wrong with his skating ability. Is he a blazer? No, he isn't a blazer. However, sometimes speed is often misconstrued as the ability to skate well. That isn't the case. Richards has a bit of a choppy stride, but he never stops skating. As well, he's one of those players who has hockey intelligence and sense that you just don't see too much from players. He's always involved in a game breaking play.
So, for all this talk of Richards being a poor skater, let's remember he's played extremely well in the OHL, the OHL Playoffs, the Memorial Cup, the WJC, and the AHL playoffs. He hasn't looked out of place and he's always been in the thick of things. You can also add that with the "new" NHL coming into play, there might even be more room for him to succeed.
So, the talk of Richards not being a good skater has to stop. If anything, that statement is the furthest from the truth and it isn't a true representation of his skating ability. He isn't a blazer, but the last time I checked, Gretzky wasn't a blazer either. I'm not comparing Richards to Gretzky, but sometimes being a fast skater is often mistaken for being a good skater.
Blind Gardien
nexus of the crisis
I agree with FlyersFan10 on Richards' skating. Usually I say things like he "may not have great speed" or he's "not fast". But being "not fast" is not the same as being slow. And keeping your feet moving all the time and driving hard all the time is worth more IMHO than what some really excellent, fluid, fast skaters bring to the game.
Anyway, I don't think speed will be an issue for Richards playing in the NHL. The only real worry I have for him is that he'll get himself hurt playing the way he does. He has a bit of a track record for injury even against junior players, and he definitely puts himself into danger zones that might bring him even more hurt from the bigger stronger NHL players. That's the ONLY nagging concern I have for Richards. And even then it's not a huge one, and he's easily in my top-20 prospects overall.
Anyway, I don't think speed will be an issue for Richards playing in the NHL. The only real worry I have for him is that he'll get himself hurt playing the way he does. He has a bit of a track record for injury even against junior players, and he definitely puts himself into danger zones that might bring him even more hurt from the bigger stronger NHL players. That's the ONLY nagging concern I have for Richards. And even then it's not a huge one, and he's easily in my top-20 prospects overall.
BobMarleyNYR
Rangers future on D
Richards's ceiling is unknown... he might be nothing. Good offense, but more character than anything.
For Carter, the sky is the limit.
For Carter, the sky is the limit.
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
Blind Gardien said:
He only really got hurt this past season in junior. Last year, it was a concussion his first game of the playoffs and he did the right thing by sitting out the rest of the playoffs. This past season, it was just minor nags more than anything.
I think Richards is smart enough to realize that his style of play will lead to injuries and I can see him toning down his play a bit. I think he'll remain a bit of a wrecking ball out there (damn, I'm really gonna miss Recchi), but that he'll pick his spots. I also think that there is a more than capable coaching staff in Philadelphia who will be on him consistently and reminding him that his health and play on the ice is more beneficial to the team than him being on the injured list.
I often wonder sometimes if the smaller players feel this need to be more aggressive on the ice so that they don't get the label of being soft.
Blind Gardien
nexus of the crisis
Okay, granted he's smart enough to tone it down. (Say, have you noticed a lot of toning down in the AHL yet? Nope!) But the thing that goes hand in hand with that is that if he does tone down, perhaps he loses part of what makes him special, so then my fear for injury morphs into a fear of toning down. Either way. That's the fear. Not the skating.
Blind Gardien said:
I can agree with what you're saying here. All what I'll say about Richards is that his game is eerily similar to Doug Gilmour's game. I read a 1987 scouting report on Doug Gilmour and it was frightening how much his game at that time is similar to what Richards' game is right now. I've got a funny feeling that Richards is a Gilmour clone and I would have NO problem if he turns out to be half the player Douggie was.
MojoJojo
Registered User
Maybe "he cant skate" is going too far, saying its average at best, or doesnt stand out though seems very fair (and the same can be said about his size, which isnt that bad either). Without speed and agility, he cant use it to overcome his size disadvantage in the same way as a number of smaller players have (the best example being Martin St Louis). He wont be able to outmuscle or outskate almost any opposing defensemen in the NHL, which could be a liability for him. His hands and vision are still top notch however, better even than Carters. Also the guy never quits and works his butt off every shift, so if anyone can do it, I would put my money on Richards. I jst worry about the transition to the next level, where it is quite possible he will hit a wall when it comes to offensive production.
I was thinking of taking Richards in my keeper pool but I'm concerned also about lack of speed. I like his skills though. Just worried that he may just be a 40-50 pt player. Not that many Ron Francis types out there. On the Gilmour comparison, I think he was a little faster than Richards. Otherwise a fair comparison.
ktownhockey
Registered User
The Richards/Gilmour comparisons are fair but I find two glaring differences between the two... I think Dougy was less of a physical threat than Richard in regards to hitting and fistacuffs... However I believe Gilmours vision and passing is superior than Richards will ever be... Richards is more of an up and down winger who can contribute a great deal offensively given the opportunity...
I think he'll develop into a top NHL player in the next 5 years... but achieving Doug Gilmour status a potential Hall of Famer remains to be seen..
I think he'll develop into a top NHL player in the next 5 years... but achieving Doug Gilmour status a potential Hall of Famer remains to be seen..
MojoJojo
Registered User
Ron Francis is a nice comparison, but I dont think Richards will ever win any Lady Bings in his career. He has a real nasty side to his game. Loves to hit and get scrappy, even dirty.
ktownhockey
Registered User
Panasonic Youth said:
Brindamour is a VERY good comparison.. maybe just a little more edge though...
Carter gets my vote, but Richards is not bad. Pretty good playoff run this year. 3rd in OHL playoff scoring and 6th in AHL.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: WCQF (Game 5) Edmonton Oilers vs. Los Angeles Kings, 10pm ET, ESPN- Latest: Senor Catface
-
