Players that you thought would make it but never did for some reason.

Scouter

Registered User
Oct 21, 2007
4,764
192
I hope you dont mean Andrew Ladd

Of course I do, he was supposed to be a high end offensive skill guy, ends up as a 3rd line grinder, #4 pick, although it seems this past season he had been given a more offensive role and did it well finally.
 
Jul 4, 2010
275
1
Johannes Salmonsson, came over had a decent year in Spokane then went back over to Europe and never came back. How can a guy have this cool a name and not atleast attempt professional hockey in NA :(
 

Ishdul

Registered User
Jan 20, 2007
3,989
144
1. Yes he was.

2. 6th in a weak draft, 6th in any draft is not weak, Gagner was still looked upon as a high end guy weak draft or not, van Riemsdyk sees not nearly as much icetime as Gagner does.

5. It does matter what he did in junior, you are basically excusing him from being a top prospect, when this is not the case, his NHL team wasn't that bad this year, Hall and Eberle and Paajarvi, are slouches, really.
1. The Hemsky line is Edmonton's top line. Horcoff would be Edmonton's #1 centre. Gagner was 5th among Oiler forwards in ice time.
2. 6th is high in the draft, yes, but it means that Gagner's comparables are Alzner, Hickey, Voracek and Hamill. The draft was seen as pretty bad and there have been many drafts where not all that much is expected from guys picked #6. Gagner was seen as a potential first liner, and I don't think it's impossible for him to reach that yet, but a guy drafted 6th overall in a bad draft becoming a 2nd liner when he was projected to maybe be a first liner is not all that bad of a result.
5. Junior is junior, and the exact numbers are things that no GM cares about. Corey Locke had OHL numbers that put just about everyone else's to shame, and yet scouts (rightfully) did not think too highly of him. Gagner played on an absolutely loaded OHL line with Pat Kane and Sergei Kostitsyn and he finished 3rd in scoring on that line. While people saw Gagner's individual talents, they knew that having a highly regarded prospect like Kostitsyn and the ebst draft eligible player in Kane might just have influenced Gagner's numbers a tad. Hall and Eberle had good rookie campaigns, but they were still rookies, and they produced at a 2nd line pace and didn't play all their games. Parjaavi was not all that good this year. Hall and Eberle are great prospects for the future but for 2010-2011, Gagner might have been better off playing with Blake Wheeler and Curtis Glencross. The Oilers were the worst team in hockey by a decent margin this year, after being the worst team in hockey by a decent margin last year, and this year they were the lowest scoring team in the league. If the Oilers weren't that bad this year, then we are operating under some new definition of bad that confuses me.
 

cheerupmurray

Registered User
May 26, 2010
1,465
2
Stockholm
Johannes Salmonsson, came over had a decent year in Spokane then went back over to Europe and never came back. How can a guy have this cool a name and not atleast attempt professional hockey in NA :(

He looked like a complete bust there for a while, playing season after season without any signs of development as a marginal SEL-player/SEL-2-player . Now he is at least a decent SEL-player.
 

Scouter

Registered User
Oct 21, 2007
4,764
192
1. The Hemsky line is Edmonton's top line. Horcoff would be Edmonton's #1 centre. Gagner was 5th among Oiler forwards in ice time.
2. 6th is high in the draft, yes, but it means that Gagner's comparables are Alzner, Hickey, Voracek and Hamill. The draft was seen as pretty bad and there have been many drafts where not all that much is expected from guys picked #6. Gagner was seen as a potential first liner, and I don't think it's impossible for him to reach that yet, but a guy drafted 6th overall in a bad draft becoming a 2nd liner when he was projected to maybe be a first liner is not all that bad of a result.
5. Junior is junior, and the exact numbers are things that no GM cares about. Corey Locke had OHL numbers that put just about everyone else's to shame, and yet scouts (rightfully) did not think too highly of him. Gagner played on an absolutely loaded OHL line with Pat Kane and Sergei Kostitsyn and he finished 3rd in scoring on that line. While people saw Gagner's individual talents, they knew that having a highly regarded prospect like Kostitsyn and the ebst draft eligible player in Kane might just have influenced Gagner's numbers a tad. Hall and Eberle had good rookie campaigns, but they were still rookies, and they produced at a 2nd line pace and didn't play all their games. Parjaavi was not all that good this year. Hall and Eberle are great prospects for the future but for 2010-2011, Gagner might have been better off playing with Blake Wheeler and Curtis Glencross. The Oilers were the worst team in hockey by a decent margin this year, after being the worst team in hockey by a decent margin last year, and this year they were the lowest scoring team in the league. If the Oilers weren't that bad this year, then we are operating under some new definition of bad that confuses me.

A 2nd liner on a bad team is a 3rd liner on a good team, Gagner doesn't produce enough points bottom line to be a reliable top 6 guy.

Noone cares about numbers do they, yeah right, of course they care a bit. And I don't know if you have noticed, but Kostitsyn isn't exactly highly regarded.

Glencross and Wheeler, where do they come from.
 

shello

Registered User
Mar 5, 2011
2,274
725
Dana Point, CA
Has anyone said Alex Daige yet? I know he could gave been better if he wanted to and he kinda made it but still...
 
Last edited:

Ishdul

Registered User
Jan 20, 2007
3,989
144
A 2nd liner on a bad team is a 3rd liner on a good team, Gagner doesn't produce enough points bottom line to be a reliable top 6 guy.
He's also hurt by being on the Oilers. They're the worst scoring team in the league, that's going to hurt his production. If he were putting up his 50 point pace on the Oilers, you'd imagine he'd do better on a team that doesn't blow.

Noone cares about numbers do they, yeah right, of course they care a bit. And I don't know if you have noticed, but Kostitsyn isn't exactly highly regarded.
They care about how well you skate, how big you are, your hockey sense, your work ethic, your fitness level, etc. Assuming you have a good package of those, the assumption is you will produce well, but if you put up gaudy numbers while being a small, poor skating guy with a bad shot and bad passing who's out of shape with no hockey sense who has a ton of character issues, they're not going to think much of you. They might do some inquiry to find out how you put up those numbers, but putting up numbers in the CHL will get you scouted but not necessarily scouted positively. On the flipside, there are plenty of European prospects who got very little playing time on their home teams yet were good prospects who turned out well.

Kostitsyn was seen as a high level prospect back then, a likely top liner. That's why people cared when he was struggling in the NHL. The Montreal boards were big believers in Sergei. He did well for himself this year in Nashville (minus the playoffs) so it's not like it was baseless.

Glencross and Wheeler, where do they come from.
They're examples of average 2nd line guys.
 

Seph

Registered User
Sep 5, 2002
18,949
1,666
Oregon
Visit site
He's also hurt by being on the Oilers. They're the worst scoring team in the league, that's going to hurt his production. If he were putting up his 50 point pace on the Oilers, you'd imagine he'd do better on a team that doesn't blow.

He likely wouldn't be playing on the first line or top PP of a better team, so it's also pretty possible he'd score less.
 

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
25,152
10,128
I'll admit that i thought Patty O'Sullivan would become a solid NHLer. Ended up wrong on that one i guess, but there's still hope!!! lol.

Crazy slide into failure he took. :(
 

Scouter

Registered User
Oct 21, 2007
4,764
192
He's also hurt by being on the Oilers. They're the worst scoring team in the league, that's going to hurt his production. If he were putting up his 50 point pace on the Oilers, you'd imagine he'd do better on a team that doesn't blow.


They care about how well you skate, how big you are, your hockey sense, your work ethic, your fitness level, etc. Assuming you have a good package of those, the assumption is you will produce well, but if you put up gaudy numbers while being a small, poor skating guy with a bad shot and bad passing who's out of shape with no hockey sense who has a ton of character issues, they're not going to think much of you. They might do some inquiry to find out how you put up those numbers, but putting up numbers in the CHL will get you scouted but not necessarily scouted positively. On the flipside, there are plenty of European prospects who got very little playing time on their home teams yet were good prospects who turned out well.

Kostitsyn was seen as a high level prospect back then, a likely top liner. That's why people cared when he was struggling in the NHL. The Montreal boards were big believers in Sergei. He did well for himself this year in Nashville (minus the playoffs) so it's not like it was baseless.


They're examples of average 2nd line guys.

1. Gagner is now one of the leaders and goto guys on the team, if he can't put up at least 60 PTS, which good players on even bad teams can do (his projected pace was 50, not his actual pace, I say he ends up with 45 or 46), then he should move on.

2. Scouts see that you can produce at that level, so that's always a positive sign that the future potential might be there, and I'm more concerned about what players do in junior points wise in their draft year or when they are 16 year olds than after that.

3. A high level prospect eh, is that why he was taken in the 7th round #200, I think not.

4. Glencross has never been considered the talent that Gagner has, and Wheeler too is a bit of a bust.
 

Cousin Eddie

You Serious Clark?
Nov 3, 2006
40,142
37,285
as a newfoundlander i will use some locals as examples.

Dan cleary: took years to turn into a decent nhl'er while in his junior days absolutely dominated. he was predicted to be a future star but never made any type of impact until 13 years later turned into a hard working role player.

Dan ryder: A bit of a different situation i know. looked like he had a great future but obviously things with wrong.

Travis randell: when he was a kid (i mean before junior) he looked like a future NHL player. While it's hard to know how somebody will work out when they are 14, he was hyped by numerous scouting services. Tsn had their predicted top 10 of 2009 back in 2006 and he was in it. Hockey night in canada even did a story on him while he was in bantam. He serves as a great leader with halifax in the Q but i think thats as far as he ever goes.

Also when you look at team canada in the world junior over the years you notice players who you would have thought would have made it before they did. Jeff glass, justin pogge, nigel dawes, anthony stewart.

I remember seeing brad marchand in the world juniors and assumed he would be in the NHL the following year. I know he is playing terrific hockey right now, but where has he been the last few years?
 

Scouter

Registered User
Oct 21, 2007
4,764
192
as a newfoundlander i will use some locals as examples.

Dan cleary: took years to turn into a decent nhl'er while in his junior days absolutely dominated. he was predicted to be a future star but never made any type of impact until 13 years later turned into a hard working role player.

Dan ryder: A bit of a different situation i know. looked like he had a great future but obviously things with wrong.

Travis randell: when he was a kid (i mean before junior) he looked like a future NHL player. While it's hard to know how somebody will work out when they are 14, he was hyped by numerous scouting services. Tsn had their predicted top 10 of 2009 back in 2006 and he was in it. Hockey night in canada even did a story on him while he was in bantam. He serves as a great leader with halifax in the Q but i think thats as far as he ever goes.

Also when you look at team canada in the world junior over the years you notice players who you would have thought would have made it before they did. Jeff glass, justin pogge, nigel dawes, anthony stewart.

I remember seeing brad marchand in the world juniors and assumed he would be in the NHL the following year. I know he is playing terrific hockey right now, but where has he been the last few years?

As for Cleary concussions kind of changed his career path a lot.
 

Someone

Registered User
Jul 11, 2007
869
183
1. Gagner is now one of the leaders and goto guys on the team, if he can't put up at least 60 PTS, which good players on even bad teams can do (his projected pace was 50, not his actual pace, I say he ends up with 45 or 46), then he should move on.

2. Scouts see that you can produce at that level, so that's always a positive sign that the future potential might be there, and I'm more concerned about what players do in junior points wise in their draft year or when they are 16 year olds than after that.

3. A high level prospect eh, is that why he was taken in the 7th round #200, I think not.

4. Glencross has never been considered the talent that Gagner has, and Wheeler too is a bit of a bust.

Gagner is not a go to player. He's been forced into that position because of Edmonton's lack of a better option but that shouldn't be a knock against him. Have a look at the 07 draft class and tell me how many players are being relied on to come up big by their teams. It's unfair to expect a 21 year old to be a team leader simply because nobody else is there to do it.
 

Scouter

Registered User
Oct 21, 2007
4,764
192
Gagner is not a go to player. He's been forced into that position because of Edmonton's lack of a better option but that shouldn't be a knock against him. Have a look at the 07 draft class and tell me how many players are being relied on to come up big by their teams. It's unfair to expect a 21 year old to be a team leader simply because nobody else is there to do it.

I don't know if he was forced into it, I think when they drafted him that's what they expected him to be, a top line guy.

He's been in the NHL for 4 seasons now, 21 or not he has 4 years under his belt, whereas most guys that age don't compared with the rest of the team he is one of the leaders.
 

Someone

Registered User
Jul 11, 2007
869
183
I don't know if he was forced into it, I think when they drafted him that's what they expected him to be, a top line guy.

He's been in the NHL for 4 seasons now, 21 or not he has 4 years under his belt, whereas most guys that age don't compared with the rest of the team he is one of the leaders.

Isn't that exactly what I'm saying? Gagner is forced into being a team leader because the Oilers have very few quality vets, and the ones we do have are injury prone. Guys like Couture, JVR, Sutter etc. have star players to play with or behind, to take the tough minutes, finish the passes, and dish the puck in prime scoring areas. Gagner has his flaws, and can be considered a bit of a disappointment so far, but to expect him to lead the team anywhere at this point is ridiculous.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->