Prospect Info: Round 2, Pick #50: Adam Ginning, D, Linkoping HC (SHL)

[FLYguy3911]

So not hating Ginning means I’m not upset that Pittsburgh of all teams got Hallander, who was my preference? Not following your logic, if that’s your implication.

That fact that you are complaining about people complaining about the pick suggests that you are not too upset about the value they passed up. Bear in mind the people most vocally against the pick have actually watched him play.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

That fact that you are complaining about people complaining about the pick suggests that you are not too upset about the value they passed up. Bear in mind the people most vocally against the pick have actually watched him play.

LOL. You even nitpick whether my levels of complaining are sufficient. You must be a fun supervisor for some poor soul.

 

[Hockeypete49]

Love the pick!

 

[FLYguy3911]

LOL. You even nitpick whether my levels of complaining are sufficient. You must be a fun supervisor for some poor soul.

It's not that difficult. You set the complaining bar quite high back in 2016.

 

[Mike1167]

Maybe Haggs are like goalies; you want to make sure your next one is always in the pipeline.

Oddly, that makes sense...I think

 

[Ghosts Beer]

It's not that difficult. You set the complaining bar quite high back in 2016.

Closing in on 3 years, now.

 

[Psuhockey]

Looking at the return for ROR, and Ginning could be very valuable in trade at some point. He will likely be in the world juniors. If he performs decently there, he would be the perfect prospect to headline a trade package.

 

[SanBlom]

I'm not in love with the pick, but I dont hate it either. Were there other guys that I liked here, yes.....but I do I trust that our scouts saw something in him that pushed him higher on the board than many of us had. He seems like a solid non flashy player that can be very useful.

 

[deadhead]

If he's a competent 3rd pair defenseman who's above average on the PK and puts up 17-18 minutes a night he's well worth the pick.
We're talking #50, not exactly a slam dunk to garner a NHL starter.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

If he's a competent 3rd pair defenseman who's above average on the PK and puts up 17-18 minutes a night he's well worth the pick.
We're talking #50, not exactly a slam dunk to garner a NHL starter.

Yeah this is my sentiment. I really don't understand why people are so upset with this pick. All the guys that were ranked higher or perceived as better and still on the board (since Ginning was taken right around where he was ranked), may or may not have higher upside, but I don't think anyone really needs a reminder that not every player reaches their upside and some players have more likelihood of reaching their potential. If the scouts are looking at Ginning and saying, "This kid is a definite NHLer who may some day be a top four guy but we can tell he will definitely be a bottom pair guy" while looking at another player and saying, "Well, this kid might make the NHL one day but that will take a lot and if he does he'll be a top four guy, but I am not confident he can get to the NHL," why would you take the second guy?

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Or is this another one of those situations where the Flyers are so stupid that they thought there were better choices but decided to take the worse player?

 

[dats81]

Or is this another one of those situations where the Flyers are so stupid that they thought there were better choices but decided to take the worse player?

Maybe they just realized that they have a single prototypical shutdown D in the prospect pool who is hurt a lot (Morin) and it would be wise to draft a similar player?
And then you go and pick the best player out of a smaller group of promising kids that fit that shoe. That whole term of BPA is bullshit most of the time when talking outside the top-10.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Maybe they just realized that they have a single prototypical shutdown D in the prospect pool who is hurt a lot (Morin) and it would be wise to draft a similar player?
And then you go and pick the best player out of a smaller group of promising kids that fit that shoe. That whole term of BPA is bull**** most of the time when talking outside the top-10.

Oh yeah I like the pick, don't get me wrong. I was being facetious because there have been times when the suggestion has been that the Flyers knew there were better players available but decided to take the objectively worse player, presumably because they are stupid, so I was just trying to see if that was this situation, where they knew Ginning wasn't as good as the other options but they decided to take the worse player just because.

 

[Striiker]

Silly me, to think that a 23 year old player entering his second season might improve, or that an 18 year old in the SHL might have some upside.

"Must resist hive mind . . . refuse to be assimilated"

I’m just a stupid 12 year old, so I don’t know anything. But could you let me know how often a player is deficient in certain vital skills, through multiple years in the AHL where they showed no improvement, and then was suddenly able to fix that problem in the NHL against far more difficult opposition?

I await a thoughtful reply.

 

[Rebels57]

I’m just a stupid 12 year old, so I don’t know anything. But could you let me know how often a player is deficient in certain vital skills, through multiple years in the AHL where they showed no improvement, and then was suddenly able to fix that problem in the NHL against far more difficult opposition?

I await a thoughtful reply.

 

[BigToe]

Maybe they just realized that they have a single prototypical shutdown D in the prospect pool who is hurt a lot (Morin) and it would be wise to draft a similar player?
And then you go and pick the best player out of a smaller group of promising kids that fit that shoe. That whole term of BPA is bull**** most of the time when talking outside the top-10.

Why? It makes a lot more sense to draft that way imo.

 

[Striiker]

View attachment 128219

 

[Flyerfan13]

The Flyers’ 2018 draft class: Adam Ginning

 

[deadhead]

I’m just a stupid 12 year old, so I don’t know anything. But could you let me know how often a player is deficient in certain vital skills, through multiple years in the AHL where they showed no improvement, and then was suddenly able to fix that problem in the NHL against far more difficult opposition?

I await a thoughtful reply.

Gudas?
Raffl (look at him in his early 20s v 25 when he came over).
I'm sure others could give you a long list - not every player enters the league as Venus on the half shell.
Look at Domoulin, didn't even get to the NHL until 24.

 

[BleedOrange]

Don't like the flyers draft picks feel free to jump on the leaf bandwagon they have JT now you know.

 

[Magua]

Gudas?
Raffl (look at him in his early 20s v 25 when he came over).
I'm sure others could give you a long list - not every player enters the league as Venus on the half shell.
Look at Domoulin, didn't even get to the NHL until 24.

You can point to Gudas (or I'll toss in Manson as the gold standard), but those are such atypical cases. What do they have in common? Late bloomers. They were re-entry draftees too. Their games translated to the NHL better than could have been expected. You could argue their physicality or profiles maybe typecasted them at lower levels. But it's undoubtable they are smart and have better puck skill than given credit for. Again, Raffl is a late bloomer who was never drafted and came over in his mid 20s. He is not deficient in skill, and he is absurdly intelligent. I sense a theme in underrated players.

Hagg is a player with 6 years as a professional -- not once underrated or unheralded as a prospect -- who in my opinion, has really lacking hockey sense and skill. If he had a lick of hockey sense his other flaws wouldn't be so bad. Someone like Gudas is also incredibly aggressive; Hagg is incredibly passive. You could tell Hagg to play more aggressive, and I'm sure they do, but does anyone want to see Hagg making fast, aggressive decisions? You'd get blown coverages, bad decisions, turnovers, bad pinches galore. He can't make quick reads. There's a difference between minor improvements with experience and time and a total overhaul of a player with certain fatal flaws.

Dumoulin is a better comparison to Hagg in that he was a 2nd rounder with a longer development path to being a legit top 4 shutdown defender. One of the best. Except the guy was a fantastic scorer in college and the AHL. Again, a whip smart player who isn't without talent; he just had to adapt his role to the NHL. Here's Dumoulin vs. Hagg as rookies fwiw. Dumoulin's passing and individual impact was not as work-in-progress as you make out.

 

[deadhead]

Problem is Dumoulin was a 24 year old rookie, Hagg was a 22 year old rookie, so you're comparing Dumoulin as a rookie to Hagg in 2019-20.

I'm not saying Hagg will develop, I'm just saying a 22 year old rookie is rarely a finished product.
Sometimes there just is no "there there", other times players do improve.
Manning made the NHL at 25 and was really bad, two years later, despite what some here think, Chicago and Nashville (offered a 3 year deal) both tried to sign him, and I think no one is going to suggest their front offices and HCs are , are they?

So players can improve. Just see no need for the rush to judgement.
We're talking a low cost, 23 year old third pair defenseman (he was overused b/c Gudas was snipped and the rest were marshmallows).
Like Folin, he's cheap depth, if Myers and Morin step up and Hogberg continues to improve, in 3 years he'll be a trivia question.

 

[Striiker]

22 year olds who have continually improved up until that point aren't finished products and can still improve. (Morin)

22 year olds who stagnated long ago because of a lack of brains and skill aren't suddenly going to turn it on. (Hagg)

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I think Hagg’s a lot smarter than he gets credit for. In fact, I’d say he tends to overthink things sometimes, which leads to hesitation. He reminds me a bit of Rubtsov, but as a defenseman, in his overly conservative nature.

But I definitely think Hagg can still improve as he gets more comfortable in the NHL. Plenty of conservative Swedish defensemen have improved as they enter their mid 20s & gain confidence. Not that I think he’ll ever be more than a bottom pairing guy, but he still has potential to become a solid, more reliable & consistent #5/6. It’s funny, but not many early 20s rookies are as despised as Hagg. Rare to see.

 

[Curufinwe]

They're both 23 now cause today is Morin's birthday.