New Red Line Report (Top Forwards)

[________]

First time i've heard Nico Sacchetti's name mentioned in the same breath as the others,i have a cousin in Duluth who told me this kid is the next Theo Fleury (hopefully without the problems) at least. I think he's going to college for the next 4 years so it'll probably drop him down. hey,maybe the Flames can get him at 19

I'm not certain on this, but Sacchetti will play 07-08 in the USHL(Indiana Ice), not sure if its going to be the entire year or not, but hopefully it is the entire year.

I don't know about the Fleury comparison, I'm not that good at all comparing prospects to current/former NHLers, but if he can keep progressing and that I see him as possibly a second liner.

 

[Duff88]

I personally don't see Tanguay as a sleeper. I constantly see him ranked in the second-third round in most draft rankings, but I personally wouldn't draft him and I think he'd be overrated if he went above the fifth round.

I wonder how much being the brother of Alex improves his draft stock because he's very unimpressive to me.

 

[Johnnybegood13]

I personally don't see Tanguay as a sleeper. I constantly see him ranked in the second-third round in most draft rankings, but I personally wouldn't draft him and I think he'd be overrated if he went above the fifth round.

I wonder how much being the brother of Alex improves his draft stock because he's very unimpressive to me.

Dispite having an injured knee for 16 games he still finished 17 points from the teams lead and 4th overall on a low scoring defense first Rimouski team,he has sniper like skills and is a great skater. Up until his injury he had fliped-floped over the #1 centre position with Michael Frolik (last years #10 pick)

If he lasts past the 3rd round i would be shocked!

 

[hawksfan50]

I'm not sure you can call Kane one-dimensional given the multiple dimensions to his offsenive game (playmaker and goalscorer). As to his defensive abilities, that is probably #10 on the list of things are looking for in Kane. Defence you can teach and when you're talking about a bluechip offensive prospect, that is not a major concern at this point.

Just as an example, Hossa and Bonk were regarded as one dimensional offensive players and each ended up being one of the best two way forwards in their respective draft classes).

I'm not saying Kane will become great defensively, but I don't think his downside (Kyle Wellwood) is that bad, especially when you have a Brad Richards-Daniel Briere type upside.

Kyle Wellwood is a Franke Selke candidate compared to Kane on the backcheck...Kane couldn't backcheck his grandmother from what I have observed...perhaps he can be taught ...but there is also a physical aspect to checking--Kane simply is not strong enough to knock guys off the puck--if he can get his stick on the puck with those quick hands he can steal it from you-BUT that seems predominantly on the forecheck--on the back-check he gives up very quickly if he cannot tip it off your stick rigt away--PLUS he really is not that FAST in straight line recovery speed to catch upto you again once you have got by him--I do not think you can be taught to rectify those things;I doubt he willbe even average as a back-checke and thus will be a definite liability defensively --especially against bigger,stronger faster NHL'ers than the weaker jr. competition he faced so far...

This is opposed to my criticism of Phil Kessel as not being good defensively--in PHIL's case it was more the WILL to do it that was lacking--he certainly has the catch-up speed to back-check once a guy got past him -IF he applied himself to the task;

I am saying KANE is NOT AS FAST AS KESSEL in straight line speed without the puck;he is aso much smaller and physically weaker than Kessel --so given these 2 facts--EVEN IF KANE applied himself to defense with more effort in that aspect,I still doubt how effective he willbe trying to stop the opposition..

Look --it is similar to Pavel Bure---the guy was pure offense;you know he will put up points (though Kane is a totally different style) ,BUT you also know he will always STINK defensively--you either live with this problem due to the magnificent scoring he gives you,or you try to mitigate the damages by hoping others on your team bail you out when the guy Kane or Bure is supposed to check is "let go" by them to freely attack your net...


My point is that when someone says something foolish like: "What's not to like about Kane" ( given how dominant a scorer he was inthe OHl in his rookie year)--the answer SHOULD BE: 1.His defense 2. His size+ concern for how he will withstand injury risk at the NHl level.
If you can live comfortably with these 2 concerns,then take him at #1 -he will put up lots of points with those great hands--maybe the quickest in any hockey league on the planet.
BUT be prepared to try to win 8-6 --however you may be losing 6-8 if you can't "cover" well enough for his dfensive weaknesses.

 

[Erika]

Kyle Wellwood is a Franke Selke candidate compared to Kane on the backcheck...Kane couldn't backcheck his grandmother from what I have observed...perhaps he can be taught ...but there is also a physical aspect to checking--Kane simply is not strong enough to knock guys off the puck--if he can get his stick on the puck with those quick hands he can steal it from you-BUT that seems predominantly on the forecheck--on the back-check he gives up very quickly if he cannot tip it off your stick rigt away--PLUS he really is not that FAST in straight line recovery speed to catch upto you again once you have got by him--I do not think you can be taught to rectify those things;I doubt he willbe even average as a back-checke and thus will be a definite liability defensively --especially against bigger,stronger faster NHL'ers than the weaker jr. competition he faced so far...

This is opposed to my criticism of Phil Kessel as not being good defensively--in PHIL's case it was more the WILL to do it that was lacking--he certainly has the catch-up speed to back-check once a guy got past him -IF he applied himself to the task;

I am saying KANE is NOT AS FAST AS KESSEL in straight line speed without the puck;he is aso much smaller and physically weaker than Kessel --so given these 2 facts--EVEN IF KANE applied himself to defense with more effort in that aspect,I still doubt how effective he willbe trying to stop the opposition..

Look --it is similar to Pavel Bure---the guy was pure offense;you know he will put up points (though Kane is a totally different style) ,BUT you also know he will always STINK defensively--you either live with this problem due to the magnificent scoring he gives you,or you try to mitigate the damages by hoping others on your team bail you out when the guy Kane or Bure is supposed to check is "let go" by them to freely attack your net...


My point is that when someone says something foolish like: "What's not to like about Kane" ( given how dominant a scorer he was inthe OHl in his rookie year)--the answer SHOULD BE: 1.His defense 2. His size+ concern for how he will withstand injury risk at the NHl level.
If you can live comfortably with these 2 concerns,then take him at #1 -he will put up lots of points with those great hands--maybe the quickest in any hockey league on the planet.
BUT be prepared to try to win 8-6 --however you may be losing 6-8 if you can't "cover" well enough for his dfensive weaknesses.

I can't explain more clearer and agreed on everything with you in your post. You just resumed extremely well all the aspects concerning Patrick Kane. The point is He has huge flaws, but his offensive side is attractive. Which means higher bust rate...

 

[Foligno#71]

What Woodlief fails to mention about Kane (even ignoring the size issue) is that of the "big 4" forwards at the top of his rankings list,Kane is by far the absolute worst of the bunch defensively--he couldn't backcheck his grandmother...he is also the least physical of any of the "big 4" --but none of that seems to matter given his dazzling offensive skills...but precisely ecause of this 1-way wonder,I HAVE REAL CONCERNS about Kane,so that of the "big 4",I think he is the RISKIEST pick of this bunch... UNLESS you believe you can teach him to back-check effectively (he will nEVER be physical,so forget that aspect) OR you believe you can hide his defensive weaknesses via other players on your team who are on the ice covering for him when they are on his shifts at even strength,THEN you may be in for huge headaches giving up goals when he is on the ice...OR you need to commit to changing your team's "style" to run and gun 8-5 style games...BUT trying to get Kane to fit into any other "system" will be a problem,IMO--he is at his best in quick
action/reaction WHEN HE HAS THE PUCK --or when others cough it up and he attacks; BUT when THEY HAVE THE PUCK and he is asked to defend,well it looks so futile you want to puke...whoever takes him,if he plays lots of minutes at even strength,you had better pray your goalie bails you out,because there will be lots of good scoring chances against ..the difference is--give Kane 5 even strength great scoring chances in a game and probably 3 are going in;give the opposition the same while he is on even strength on other shifts,and MAYBE your goalie or his other teamates on with him can save the day on 4 of them...so if that provides a +2 for Kane--you can win;HOWEVER if your goalie or team cannot save the day in these high calibre scoring chances against--you will either break even or LOSE ...KANE could mitigate the loss potential by helping your PP to betterscoring efficiency...BUT how much can that mitgation really help...

Take Chicago=30th =dead last in PP efficiency at just 11.8%...they were also 28th
worst in PP opportunities ...PITT for instance had 99 more PP chances than chicgo got and PITT's efficiency was 20.3% ...assuming an "improved" Blackhawks can mustert least 50% of the differential inPP opportunities that pITT had over them (ie. 50 more chances) and that KANE helps them improve from 11.8% to 20% effciency--this means KANE"S PP "value" is at 10 more goals on the differential chances make up PLUS approx an 8% improvement on the other 364 chances Chicago would have retained as per last season=another 29 PP goals =for at total PP value of 39 more PP goals...

THAT alone might be reason to take Kane and ignore the defensive problems by hiding his 5x5 minutes on the 4th line...

Man... You make him sound like the next Craig Janney!

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I can't explain more clearer and agreed on everything with you in your post. You just resumed extremely well all the aspects concerning Patrick Kane. The point is He has huge flaws, but his offensive side is attractive. Which means higher bust rate...

I'm sorry, but a player with "huge flaws" is not going to be considered for the number on overall pick. Kane has some things to work on to be a more well-rounded player, but I think this excessive criticism is off the mark a bit. Kane is a very coachable kid who WILL work on his defense and WILL put in time in the weight room. What more can you ask? He's an offensive dynamo, why get exasperated if he isn't a Selke finalist right off the bat?

 

[Erika]

I'm sorry, but a player with "huge flaws" is not going to be considered for the number on overall pick. Kane has some things to work on to be a more well-rounded player, but I think this excessive criticism is off the mark a bit. Kane is a very coachable kid who WILL work on his defense and WILL put in time in the weight room. What more can you ask? He's an offensive dynamo, why get exasperated if he isn't a Selke finalist right off the bat?

Who says that I said Kane was a 1st overall ? I'm telling you since the beginning that Patrick Kane is not a legit first overall !! He is top 5 no doubt, but not a true 1st overall !! Just because the top end talent is not that high this year, Kane might have some chances to go first, but in a year when there's guys like Makin, Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, Spezza, Nash, Staal, Crosby, Johnson, etc. he is just another top 10 talent in a deeper draft. The first overall this year is between Voracek and Van Riemsdyk, you can count on that !! More complete, less flaws, still good upsides, lower busts rate...

 

[MentalPowerHouse]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/columnist/woodlief/2007-05-28-forwards-draft_N.htm

I agree with every word Woodlief says about Esposito. Really feel his analysis of his game was about as well put as can be.

Good article, a nice summarizing of the top forwards.

Anytime a writer wastes article space ridiculing his peers they are wearing their personal biases on their sleeve and I am reminded to take them into account when reading.

 

[Bluenote13]

Good article, a nice summarizing of the top forwards.

Anytime a writer wastes article space ridiculing his peers they are wearing their personal biases on their sleeve and I am reminded to take them into account when reading.

Where in this article do you find that???