Prospect Info: Part 3: Oskar Lindblom -- round 5 #138 overall 2014 NHL Draft

[deadhead]

Is this why we are better in pts%, pk% AND pp% league-wise than we have been (comparing Gordon games to Hakstol games this season)? It's just Hart?

Per nhl.com data,

Before the 18th of December we were 28th in the league in pts%.
From Dec 18th on we are 6th

Before the 18th of December we were 29th in the league in pp%.
From Dec 18th on we are 11th

Before the 18th of December we were 30th in the league in pk%.
From Dec 18th on we are 17th

That makes as much sense as saying "Just Hakstol"...

The PK was always in the top 10 in metrics, the goalies were dead last in S%. Better goalies, better PK.
The PP, as Appleyard showed, had historically bad luck, lately a lot of good luck.
Neither turnaround is due to Gordon.

The goalies were awful, under Hakstol, and not due to defense, Flyers are giving up the same scoring chances a game under Gordon.

Gordon -
Hart/Stolarz 10-5-1 .930
Other goalies 1-3-1 .877
Hakstol goalies 12-15-4 .880

Gordon: SCA 19.8 per game, HDCA 7.5
Hakstol: SCA 19.1 per game, HDCA 7.8

It's the same team more or less, just went from the worst goalies in the league to the best goalies in the league.

 

[kudymen]

The PK was always in the top 10 in metrics, the goalies were dead last in S%. Better goalies, better PK.
The PP, as Appleyard showed, had historically bad luck, lately a lot of good luck.
Neither turnaround is due to Gordon.

The goalies were awful, under Hakstol, and not due to defense, Flyers are giving up the same scoring chances a game under Gordon.

Gordon -
Hart/Stolarz 10-5-1 .930
Other goalies 1-3-1 .877
Hakstol goalies 12-15-4 .880

Gordon: SCA 19.8 per game, HDCA 7.5
Hakstol: SCA 19.1 per game, HDCA 7.8

It's the same team more or less, just went from the worst goalies in the league to the best goalies in the league.

I appreciate the response. "Luck and Hart" is a bit too little for me to go up such decisively in said situations, but your figures show these factors were major contributors. Wouldn't say sole, but major, definitely.

 

[Appleyard]

 

[captainpaxil]

I like lindblom but i think he's a bit overhyped on here.o kust dont see in him the same offensive upside of tk or farabee. Hes a very complete player and low end 2nd liner who would ideally be on the 3rd. Like raffl he has the tools to be effective on the fourth line if you have quality talent ahead of him which is exceptional.

 

[Appleyard]

I like lindblom but i think he's a bit overhyped on here.o kust dont see in him the same offensive upside of tk or farabee. Hes a very complete player and low end 2nd liner who would ideally be on the 3rd. Like raffl he has the tools to be effective on the fourth line if you have quality talent ahead of him which is exceptional.

He does not have their upside for sure... they are guys with 70+ potential.

While even as a big Lindblom fan I have always said that his skill-set probably means his upside is a ~50 point winger, which is - given his already very mature defensive game - objectively a 2nd liner, or 1st line 3rd wheel.

Though as you say, with the forward talent in the org he may be pushed down the line-up... which is no means bad.

I mean, in games this year where he played in the top 9 he has scored at 50 point pace... not a perfect stat by any means though!

 

[FlyerFaithful17]

He is currently playing as one of the most physical forwards on the team, filling a void that was apparent to me. Players like that, who can also chip in points, are vital to be a contender.

 

[Protest]

He is currently playing as one of the most physical forwards on the team, filling a void that was apparent to me. Players like that, who can also chip in points, are vital to be a contender.

Yep, he's what you want your depth forwards to look like. He's good defensively, physical, can handle the puck a little, and chips in points. He's a middle 6 guy that can play on the top line for a few games in a pinch, or be put on a checking line and be effective.

 

[Tripod]

Almost every one of Lindblom supporters, like myself, see him as a 3rd line winger and have him "pegged" there for next year. Almost every stat that I have seen shows that when he plays top 9 minutes, he produces as a 2nd line player. What is wrong with that???

Hell, you even have Gordon ADMITTING he should not have left Lindblom on the 4th line as long as he did and that suppressed Lindblom longer than it needed to.

He will be cheap for his duration with us and at some point, will get pressure from below by guys like Farabee and Ratcliffe. So just enjoy having someone that plays above his cap hit and icetime levels at ES.

 

[deadhead]

Notice two of the five were drafted by Fletcher.

 

[Larry44]

High praise from Couts for Oskar, and kudos to Gordon for going with his gut, plus Couts with Oskar helps mitigate against Jake being a defensive liability:

Gordon was talking about the entire team and not just Couturier when he said after the team's seventh straight win that consistency is what breeds confidence. However, he may as well have used the 26-year-old Couturier along with Giroux as the leaders-by-example for the rest of the team. Gordon said that the decision to move Lindblom up in the lineup was partially based on a feeling that Lindblom's own two-way game would be a solid complement to Couturier's game.

Couturier has had considerable previous experience playing with Voracek on his line, especially in the first half of last season. His recent stretch with Lindblom on his left wing is their first extended time together. Asked about what Lindblom has brought to the line chemistry, Couturier characteristically gave a more in-depth response than to queries about his own game. It boiled down to the same primary quality that stands out with Couturier himself: consistency.

"He's a really smart player," Couturier said. "He does a lot of little things, that people don't really see, that can help you win a lot of games. You know what you will get him as a linemate, and you appreciate that. He helps make it that much easier."​

Meltzer: A Rock of Consistency

 

[Johnk0728]

Lindblom is a better hockey player than Michael Raffl skills-wise. The kid has some finish and vision. The pass to Konecny last game showed that. He just needs to go to the net more and get stronger. Teams always need forward depth. He provides an option for lines. And 3rd lines a lot of times are the key in playoff series'. Having a player like Lindblom in the top 9 is a very good thing. Raffl is a 4th line player mostly due to his puck skills and lack of finish. Lindblom might be what Raffl fans think Michael Raffl is. A forward that can legitimately move up and down all 3 lines.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I can deal with Lindblom as a 3rd line winger, particularly because he’s still young & there’s hope of improvement.

But he’s not going to be the type of offensive player I was hoping for. He’s a 22 year old with 24 points in 74 games & who lacks quickness in a super-fast league. Doesn’t have a great shot, either. So his ceiling seems limited.

 

[Tripod]

I can deal with Lindblom as a 3rd line winger, particularly because he’s still young & there’s hope of improvement.

But he’s not going to be the type of offensive player I was hoping for. He’s a 22 year old with 24 points in 74 games & who lacks quickness in a super-fast league. Doesn’t have a great shot, either. So his ceiling seems limited.

And what are his stats when coaches don't misplay him on the 4th line in favour of Dale Weise?

It's so weird that you can't acknowledge that when he plays as a top 9 winger, he produces. It's only when used on the 4th line, that he doesn't.

Jtown 2.0

 

[Rebels57]

And what are his stats when coaches don't misplay him on the 4th line in favour of Dale Weise?

It's so weird that you can't acknowledge that when he plays as a top 9 winger, he produces. It's only when used on the 4th line, that he doesn't.

Jtown 2.0

Sounds like you're getting trolled, my friend.

 

[flyers0909]

But he’s not going to be the type of offensive player I was hoping for. He’s a 22 year old with 24 points in 74 games

Lindblom is pacing for 26 points at ES this season. Giroux had 24 in his age 22 season.

Locking his ceiling in as a 3rd liner before he's even played a full season is ridiculous.

 

[Curufinwe]

Too slow, can't shoot, slow start to his career in terms of total points scoring... just another over-hyped 3CLW to add to the collection.

 

[Here4ThaLids]

 

[Larry44]

Now, if we could just get everyone to start pronouncing it correctly: Lind-bloom. There, not that hard....

How to say or pronounce Lindblom - PronounceNames.com

 

[Ghosts Beer]

And what are his stats when coaches don't misplay him on the 4th line in favour of Dale Weise?

It's so weird that you can't acknowledge that when he plays as a top 9 winger, he produces. It's only when used on the 4th line, that he doesn't.

Jtown 2.0

See my post in the other thread. You are taking two small samples — a 7 game & a 6 game hot streak, where he has accrued 14 of his 24 career points, & ignoring a lot else.

Lindblom averaged 14:35 last season & scored 2 goals & 4 assists in 23 games. So it’s not only when he’s used as a 4th liner that he doesn’t produce. He also had 2 points in 11 games to start this season as the 2nd line LW.

I’m not going to declare him an automatic point producer yet when he has 14 points in a 13 game sample, & 10 points in his other 61 NHL games.

 

[baudib1]

Lindblom will absolutely score 70 points for the first-year Seattle franchise.

 

[deadhead]

Couts isn't fast, Mark Stone isn't fast, how they do when it comes to scoring.
Speed matters, but you don't need 12 speed guys, in fact, you don't want 12 speed guys.
You want some guys who'll go to the net, fight for pucks in the corner, etc.

If you have players strong enough and willing to do so, and in addition, they're fast, god bless you.

 

[baudib1]

There are definitely moments where I notice Lindblom’s skating being a detriment, more often than I see it with Couts. But he makes up for it with subtle smart play that someone like Grabner doesn’t make. If he were fast he’d be Bredan Shanahan or soomething.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Now, if we could just get everyone to start pronouncing it correctly: Lind-bloom. There, not that hard....

How to say or pronounce Lindblom - PronounceNames.com

That's not it lol - the "o" in "Oskar" and in "Lindblom" is the same sound. If there were an umlaut over the "o," it would be an "uh" sound. If it were an a with a circle over it, it would be a long "o" sound, like in "toe." Everyone is saying it correctly as is.

 

[Larry44]

That's not it lol - the "o" in "Oskar" and in "Lindblom" is the same sound. If there were an umlaut over the "o," it would be an "uh" sound. If it were an a with a circle over it, it would be a long "o" sound, like in "toe." Everyone is saying it correctly as is.

Thanks, Captain.

 

[Appleyard]

That's not it lol - the "o" in "Oskar" and in "Lindblom" is the same sound. If there were an umlaut over the "o," it would be an "uh" sound. If it were an a with a circle over it, it would be a long "o" sound, like in "toe." Everyone is saying it correctly as is.

I do think some people kind of mess it up ever so slightly, as some people say it "Lind-blohhm", hear it on commentary every now and again.

whereas I would say phonetically it is more like:

"Lind-blum"

It is kind of the same... but a difference in upward intonation vs downwards on the "o". Swedes kind of rush through the o and hardly pronounce it, whereas a lot of native English speakers naturally elongate and upwardly intonate the o while stressing it.

But it is not like "Hägg vs Hegg" for example, it is only a tiny difference that I think comes down to accent quite heavily.

Högberg and Lycksell are going to be fun.