Super Mega
Registered User
- Jun 29, 2013
- 2,710
- 401
love how he forchecks without pulling himself out of position, he creates opposition turn overs that really help the leafs rush game - maybe something to build on
Morgan Rielly's rookie season, how would you grade it thus far?
- Thread starter leburn98
- Start date
He's exceeded all expectations I gave him at the beginning of the year. He's had some rough patches, no doubt (mainly when he was paired with Franson), but as far as consistency is being debated, I think as the year has gone by he's done better and better in his own zone.
The kid may not have a ridiculous amount of goals and points, but he leads the rush extremely well and has a great first pass out of the zone. The skill oozes from him. The more experience he gets along with the confidence that will come with it is only going to make him better.
Kid just turned 20, and he's going to be a dandy.
The kid may not have a ridiculous amount of goals and points, but he leads the rush extremely well and has a great first pass out of the zone. The skill oozes from him. The more experience he gets along with the confidence that will come with it is only going to make him better.
Kid just turned 20, and he's going to be a dandy.
very much like doughty was his rookie year ....but doughty was a bit better at 19 ...
I think MR is doing quite good in his rookie season.
I don't care for these fictional 82 game comparisons. What if Morgan goes on a 2.0 PPG tear the rest of the season?
Go MO Go!
Raging Bull
Present
His last healthy scratch was three straight games after December 3rd game against San Jose where he was a -3.
Since then he's played 37 consecutive games.
37 GP, 13 points, even +/-
Since then he's played 37 consecutive games.
37 GP, 13 points, even +/-
shakes
Pep City
No idea how anyone could give him less than a B. 19 (now 20) year old kid is playing like 16 minutes a game on a team that is currently 3 in the eastern conference. Not sure what people expect.
ULF_55
Moderator
Well are we grading him as a rookie or a defenseman?
You could argue B for rookie definitely and grading upward.
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
The kid is amazing and getting better with every game.
Wish they would move him up to the top pp unit already, and shift dion back over to the triggerman spot on the rightside. Rielly would be a 40+pt dman with that pp time, and dion would be back scoring again as well.
Wish they would move him up to the top pp unit already, and shift dion back over to the triggerman spot on the rightside. Rielly would be a 40+pt dman with that pp time, and dion would be back scoring again as well.
I don't get how the two are separate? Why can't you judge him as a rookie D-man. It would be like comparing and grading him to a guy like Weber who's like a 6-8 year vet. How fair is that. One guy has a ton of experience and one who is just learning. For a rookie D-man he gets an A from me. He's been amazing.
ULF_55
Moderator
So your evaluation is as a rookie defender.
I'd have no problem giving him a B as a rookie.
So evaluating him within a subset of players.
Mess
Global Moderator
For a youngster in his first season he has done very well for himself.
As a rookie I would give him a B grade.
As a rookie I would give him a B grade.
Whatever you do just don't start a Gleason > Karlsson thread on the main boards. For the sake of our fan base.
Last edited by a moderator:
ToneBone03
Trust the Shanaplan
I don't recall us ever having a prospect of Rielly's ilk. When he reaches his potential he'll be a top-10 D in the NHL. Book it!
Agreed he has really been trending upwards since the start of the season. I just love how some people discredit him by using his +/-. All the minus for him came in his first little bit in the league when he was stuck playing with Cody Franson. Most rookies get to play with a safe defencive veteran in the league to cover for their inevitable rookie mistakes. Since getting paired with Gleason he has been terrific even though he has to play on his off side. And now he's being trusted with heavier minutes, all the while playing on his off side, which I can't stress enough just how difficult that is for any defenceman in the league, let alone a rookie
Using Rielly's +/- this year makes as much sense as using Kessel's +/- in his first 2 seasons on the Leafs, to say he doesn't backcheck this year.
Atomos2
Registered User
Honestly, they`re opinions of us couldn`t get much lower so I doubt it would make much of a difference. And frankly, I wouldn`t care if it did.
TheLeafsBro
Registered User
I would give him a B+. He has been steadily improving as the year progresses. His high hockey IQ seems to make up for his lack of experience in the NHL. As he gets more confident we will start to see him make more of what I would call his signature plays whereby he explodes through the neutral zone, into the offensive zone, and catches defenders off guard. He also seems to be quite comfortable with the physical aspect of the game even though he's not physically mature, which is always good to see. He's not someone who will struggle to find his confidence in the future, which unfortunately is the problem that Jake is having the most trouble with.
Karlsson is not over-rated, he's nothing short of elite talent. Get your head checked, I assume you just blindly hate the Sens without giving any players due credit. That's fine, take your confirmation bias somewhere else though.
Karlsson is not over-rated, he's nothing short of elite talent. Get your head checked, I assume you just blindly hate the Sens without giving any players due credit. That's fine, take your confirmation bias somewhere else though.
Last edited:
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
You take Gleason or Phaneuf over Karlsson? Seriously? That´s like saying you rather have Clarkson over Kessel because he show more grit. The skill level is that wide between them. Have you never seen Karlsson play? He controls the game when he is one the game with his vision, skating and puck handling. That his offensive skills is so elite that in comparison his defensive skill is so far behind is not the same as he is bad defensively that is just a testament over how good offensively he is.
And seeing as he is a player with really high hockey IQ I think he will soon pass Phaneuf when it comes to playing in his own zone if he hasn't all ready.
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
We picked him 5th overall and that was after a season when he only played 20 games or so because he was injured. And it might sound strange but I am glad he was injured so we could pick him 5th because he would have been gone otherwise. I dont think it was the usual Burke bragging, I think he actually thought that Rielly was the #1 overall talent. And lets keep in mind this was after Karlsson just had won a Norris with his play and Rielly have a similar set of skills.
Super Mega
Registered User
- Jun 29, 2013
- 2,710
- 401
You take Gleason or Phaneuf over Karlsson? Seriously? That´s like saying you rather have Clarkson over Kessel because he show more grit. The skill level is that wide between them. Have you never seen Karlsson play? He controls the game when he is one the game with his vision, skating and puck handling. That his offensive skills is so elite that in comparison his defensive skill is so far behind is not the same as he is bad defensively that is just a testament over how good offensively he is.
And seeing as he is a player with really high hockey IQ I think he will soon pass Phaneuf when it comes to playing in his own zone if he hasn't all ready.
I think I might take Phaneuf over Karlsson, its tough though I agree - would trade gleason for karlsson without blinking its not remotely a debate
Leafs dont need Karlsson, we have Mo and Gards, Leafs need a guy like neuf for intimidation and big body, good shot and I honestly feel a good leader
johnny_rudeboy
Registered User
I wouldn't. Players with Karlssons talent dont come around that often. This is not a Mike Green offensive d-man but some one who actually can set the tone when ever he is on the ice. Not only can he shot like the best, he find ways to pass the puck to players in dangerous positions. Offensively he is complete, defensively he is a bit weak even do not as bad as people say he is. He reads the play well, can use his stick really well but is a bit naive perhaps. But he is 23 and have not peaked as a defenceman yet. Look at Phaneuf when he was 23, he dominated physically but was completely lost in his own zone, a lot worse then Karlsson currently is.
HockeyThoughts
Delivering The Truth
I hate when people make this statement. Before Mike Green got hit by the injury bug he was downright dominant. He played about the same calibre defense as Erik Karlsson, yet he actually logged considerable time on the PK, was physical, would block shots and line up against the opposition's best players. He was also a better goal scorer and the best PPQB in the league.
Just because Green has regressed after sustaining injuries to his groin, ankle, shoulder and most notably, head -- doesn't make the player he was between 2007-10 any less of a gamebreaker.
Mike Green had a 30 goal 75 point season did he not? Not really sure how you can't say the very exact same thing about him in his prime (but I'm guessing it's because he didn't get that norris). They are the exact same breed of player, lets see if Karlsson can actually sustain it.
