Prospect Thread XXVIII

[CanaFan]

I do believe he said he didn't look down at the puck. Go watch video of Bure. He looked at the puck while skating with it, especially going to the net. Then watch Molgilny video. Notice the difference in the frequency which each player looked at the puck. Bure a lot more than Molgilny. Which of those two great players was known for seeing the ice better? I ask you Canafan. When you're receiving a pass, do you look down? Top players, who are known for seeing the ice, rarely do. Their heads are up, and they are processing information outside of the area around their skates. This gives them, what we call, vision.

Generally no, I don't look at my stick as I know "where" it is relative to my body. I try to keep my eye on the puck as it's coming towards me and adjust my stick position relative to where the puck seems to be heading. I'm certainly no Bure (though I know that was tongue firmly in cheek) and am light years below even the most marginal NHLer. That is why I can't see that the difference in a player's vision is related to them looking down or not. There are other things that would explain vision differences better, such as focussing on the defender in front of you because you are determined to go through him or de-focussing to allow your peripheral vision to pick up the position of your teammates around you. I honestly think vision is a mindset more than anything else. Some players focus on attacking and thus don't take that extra glance around to get their bearings while others have the mindset to slow things up and pay attention to their peripheral vision more.

 

[PM]

This Kevin Hayes things makes me quite concerned with Hutton...

If he pulled a Schultz we would be so screwed. Our defensive pipeline is already pretty barren.

 

[ihaveyuidonttouchme]

If he pulled a Schultz we would be so screwed. Our defensive pipeline is already pretty barren.

eh no one in this board is really high on him anyways..so it's a no loss

also it's two yrs from now so it's too early to be worried at this time
and by then, most of our corp will be at the end of their contracts (Hamhuis and Bieksa); though who knows what our D would looks like.

 

[The Rainman]

I'm sure others will define it differently but I don't think Virtanen has nearly the offensive creativity, playmaking ability or "vision" of the ice as Ehlers.

I'm saying that you are blowing smoke when you telling people on here
about Ehlers play making and vision of the ice when you have never seen him play and yes where you live does play a big part in it. Not sure how many times The Halifax Mooseheads or the Calgary Hitmen for that matter have come through your part of town.

 

[biturbo19]

One aspect of hockey IQ, vision, is clearly enhanced by the ability to handle the puck with the head up, at top speed, and in traffic. The better a player does this, the better his vision of the ice (while in possession of the puck) will be. That is not silly; it's common sense.

I think you're taking the term "vision" very literally there.

So much of on ice "vision" to me at least, is in a player being able to "see" or more accurately "sense" and/or "anticipate" the play and players around him without necessarily staring it down. Hence the term "hockey sense" not "hockey looking at stuff ability". It's about an awareness of what is developing on the ice around them. One of the things that makes some of the very best "playmakers" with "vision" so dangerous, is their ability to make those tape to tape feeds to someone that nobody even realized they were looking to or staring down. Just think of the number of mindblowing "no look" passes the Sedins have pulled off over the years.

Sure, being able to keep ones head up on the ice is beneficial to that process...but i hardly see many NHL players skating around with their head buried in the ice because they're having trouble managing a rudimentary level of puckhandling ability. It's just not really an issue. What is an issue is the sort of "tunnel vision" you see from some players barreling along with their head up staring right at where they're going, or the puckhandling wizards who manage to stickhandle themselves into trouble in a corner or the middle of nowhere.

I just don't buy into this idea that stickhandling ability is somehow an accurate measure of "hockey IQ". They're two completely different "skillsets".

 

[Hansen]

The fact that Hutton came to the summer dev camp is reassuring

Less assuring is the fact that an On-Campus Journalist (hardly a journalist, called the report "Campus Hotties" IIRC) did an interview with Hutton a year or two back and he said his favourite sports team was the Colorado Avalanche

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

I'm saying that you are blowing smoke when you telling people on here
about Ehlers play making and vision of the ice when you have never seen him play and yes where you live does play a big part in it. Not sure how many times The Halifax Mooseheads or the Calgary Hitmen for that matter have come through your part of town.

And I'd say that you're incorrect in your assumption that he has to see these kids live at the rink to get a gauge on what there skill levels are.

There are enough televised and streamed games to develop a valid opinion, not to mention replayed footage and a plethora of stats that can also form part of the basis.

 

[Canucker]

I'm saying that you are blowing smoke when you telling people on here
about Ehlers play making and vision of the ice when you have never seen him play and yes where you live does play a big part in it. Not sure how many times The Halifax Mooseheads or the Calgary Hitmen for that matter have come through your part of town.

If that is the criteria for assessing players around here then nobody should be making any comments on players. I think it'll be easier to just dismiss your incorrect notion and carry on as usual around here, thanks for chiming in though.

 

[MS]

This Kevin Hayes things makes me quite concerned with Hutton...

It's still two years away. No point in being worried until/if he doesn't sign next summer.

 

[Alflives*]

I think you're taking the term "vision" very literally there.

So much of on ice "vision" to me at least, is in a player being able to "see" or more accurately "sense" and/or "anticipate" the play and players around him without necessarily staring it down. Hence the term "hockey sense" not "hockey looking at stuff ability". It's about an awareness of what is developing on the ice around them. One of the things that makes some of the very best "playmakers" with "vision" so dangerous, is their ability to make those tape to tape feeds to someone that nobody even realized they were looking to or staring down. Just think of the number of mindblowing "no look" passes the Sedins have pulled off over the years.

Sure, being able to keep ones head up on the ice is beneficial to that process...but i hardly see many NHL players skating around with their head buried in the ice because they're having trouble managing a rudimentary level of puckhandling ability. It's just not really an issue. What is an issue is the sort of "tunnel vision" you see from some players barreling along with their head up staring right at where they're going, or the puckhandling wizards who manage to stickhandle themselves into trouble in a corner or the middle of nowhere.

I just don't buy into this idea that stickhandling ability is somehow an accurate measure of "hockey IQ". They're two completely different "skillsets".

If we take time to look at the players with the best "vision" we can attach their ability to keep their heads up, while at speed, and - or, in traffic with the puck on their stick. While at games, look more closely at just how often a lot of the players take glimpses at the puck. It's revealing.

 

[Canucker]

I think you're taking the term "vision" very literally there.

So much of on ice "vision" to me at least, is in a player being able to "see" or more accurately "sense" and/or "anticipate" the play and players around him without necessarily staring it down. Hence the term "hockey sense" not "hockey looking at stuff ability". It's about an awareness of what is developing on the ice around them. One of the things that makes some of the very best "playmakers" with "vision" so dangerous, is their ability to make those tape to tape feeds to someone that nobody even realized they were looking to or staring down. Just think of the number of mindblowing "no look" passes the Sedins have pulled off over the years.

Sure, being able to keep ones head up on the ice is beneficial to that process...but i hardly see many NHL players skating around with their head buried in the ice because they're having trouble managing a rudimentary level of puckhandling ability. It's just not really an issue. What is an issue is the sort of "tunnel vision" you see from some players barreling along with their head up staring right at where they're going, or the puckhandling wizards who manage to stickhandle themselves into trouble in a corner or the middle of nowhere.

I just don't buy into this idea that stickhandling ability is somehow an accurate measure of "hockey IQ". They're two completely different "skillsets".

This reminds me of Taylor Hall several years ago...he always seemed to skate himself into problems because he wasn't very smart...more balls than brains...he's matured and has smartened up a bit recently.

After thinking about it for a while I believe that "hockey sense" might have a broader scope...if you look at a guy like Brett Hull, there was a guy who didn't have your typical style of "hockey sense", he wasn't a brilliant playmaker, stick handler, skater or very creative player in general...but he had an incredible ability to get into soft areas and get open to make use of his best asset, his shot. That takes a certain amount of smarts/hockey sense.

 

[The Rainman]

And I'd say that you're incorrect in your assumption that he has to see these kids live at the rink to get a gauge on what there skill levels are.

There are enough televised and streamed games to develop a valid opinion, not to mention replayed footage and a plethora of stats that can also form part of the basis.

And I would say that you too sir are living in a fantasy world. If that were the case the majority of scouts wouldn't bother driving through the dead of night on ice covered roads to get to towns to watch certain players play when they could just stay home and watch them on live streaming! To know what a players vision of the ice is like.......yes you have to see him live.

 

[Canucker]

And I would say that you too sir are living in a fantasy world. If that were the case the majority of scouts wouldn't bother driving through the dead of night on ice covered roads to get to towns to watch certain players play when they could just stay home and watch them on live streaming! To know what a players vision of the ice is like.......yes you have to see him live.

You are correct, you need to be his optometrist.

 

[VanJack]

Watching Jordan Subban score that spinorama baseball swing goal at the Biosteel camp, I'm wondering if he has a future as winger?.....undersized defenseman will always be manhandled, particularly in front of the net, no matter how skilled...but lots of wingers his size in the NHL...thoughts?

 

[Wilch]

Watching Jordan Subban score that spinorama baseball swing goal at the Biosteel camp, I'm wondering if he has a future as winger?.....undersized defenseman will always be manhandled, particularly in front of the net, no matter how skilled...but lots of wingers his size in the NHL...thoughts?

Just based on this one move?

 

[Vankiller Whale]

Undersized offensive defensemen are more common than you'd think.

Brian Campbell, Lubomir Visnovsky, Kimmo Timonen, Ryan Ellis, Tory Krug, Tyson Barrie...

 

[Wilch]

Undersized offensive defensemen are more common than you'd think.

Brian Campbell, Lubomir Visnovsky, Kimmo Timonen, Ryan Ellis, Tory Krug, Tyson Barrie...

Yep.

I think Subban will be fine as long as he can grow out to 5'10~5'11.

That's right around Rafalski's neighbourhood.

 

[jigsaw99]

Yep.

I think Subban will be fine as long as he can grow out to 5'10~5'11.

That's right around Rafalski's neighbourhood.

Too bad Subban has not grown in a year since we drafted him. Unless he takes some miracle drug, he's staying at his current height.

 

[Luck 6]

Undersized offensive defensemen are more common than you'd think.

Brian Campbell, Lubomir Visnovsky, Kimmo Timonen, Ryan Ellis, Tory Krug, Tyson Barrie...

He'll likely need to make his way to the NHL as a bottom pairing PP specialist, sort of like how Krug did it. I realize Belleville wasn't exactly a powerhouse this season, but I'd like to see him put up PPG numbers in junior this season. If he can do that I'd feel more confident in his chances.

 

[Shareefruck]

Honestly, I don't have much hope for Subban personally. I'm higher on a guy like McEneny

 

[pahlsson]

at this point people should be more concerned about subban improving his defensive play rather than growing one extra inch

 

[Wilch]

Too bad Subban has not grown in a year since we drafted him. Unless he takes some miracle drug, he's staying at his current height.

Easy. Then he needs to take some of that miracle drug.

 

[Pip]

at this point people should be more concerned about subban improving his defensive play rather than growing one extra inch

While being good defensively is always an asset, his offense is going to be what allows him to get into the league. If his offensive skills translate, then he's an NHLer and his defensive game can be worked on.

 

[jigsaw99]

Honestly, I don't have much hope for Subban personally. I'm higher on a guy like McEneny

Same. McEneny is very underrated in this forum.

 

[biturbo19]

Undersized offensive defensemen are more common than you'd think.

Brian Campbell, Lubomir Visnovsky, Kimmo Timonen, Ryan Ellis, Tory Krug, Tyson Barrie...

Yep.

I think Subban will be fine as long as he can grow out to 5'10~5'11.

That's right around Rafalski's neighbourhood.

Too bad Subban has not grown in a year since we drafted him. Unless he takes some miracle drug, he's staying at his current height.

Yeah. Expecting Jordan Subban to grow taller at this point is probably pretty futile.

And given that...it is an extreme longshot for him to make the NHL.

You can list sub-6ft defencemen, but that's not what Subban is...he's a sub 5'10" defenceman (maybe even a couple inches below that from the looks of him). That's not just below that 6ft threshold of most defencemen in the NHL...that's below the "must be this tall to ride" line. The listed defencemen are almost all 5'10"+ in a lower range of height where every inch matters. Aside from Krug really.

Subban has a huge uphill battle facing him to begin with...he's going to have to have some sort of incredible offensive gifts (PPG+ rate next year at the least) and/or drastically improve his defensive reliability and attention to detail to make it to The Show.

To put things in perspective...Dan Hamhuis (not in any way known as an offensive defenceman) put up a better PPG pace in his draft+1 Jr season...and in Hamhuis' draft year even, he still put up a better PPG rate than Subban ever has.

Not that this is the end all be all of metrics, but it gives you an idea of the sort of offensive production that a quality NHLer is going to put up in the CHL...and when you factor in the enormous (pun intended) obstacles Subban will have to overcome due to his lack of size and you need to see a guy who is a absolute standout offensive talent at this point in his career if you have any real hopes of this kid cracking the NHL in any lasting capacity. That's what is on Jordan Subban's plate right now...that's why he remains unsigned. We need to see him be an absolute offensive dynamo if he's going to have any sort of "next level" aspirations.