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

DrinkFightFlyers

THE TORTURE NEVER STOPS
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2009
23,502
4,486
NJ
I think people are upset about using the 50th overall on a low upside pick. I think if Ginning was taken later, there wouldn’t be the same negativity...... Or maybe I am wrong and he eats puppies while training.
But that's what I don't understand...this is right where he was supposed to go, and with the exception of a handful of other guys here it looks like his upside is the same. You're not getting a top pair defender at 50 and your not getting a top line forward. Ginning has top 4 upside it would appear. Definitely guys out there that I would have preferred but it isn't like Ginning's top is 6/7. That might be where he winds up, for sure, but that is not his ceiling.
 

FLYguy3911

Sanheim Lover
Oct 19, 2006
53,082
86,408
You're not getting a top pair defender at 50 and your not getting a top line forward.
This very team found one. Look around the league. Gostisbehere, Parayko, Klingberg, Letang, Byfuglien, Manson, Ekholm, Slavvin, Keith, Muzzin all picked after pick 50. Some of those guys were even passed over the first time they were eligible. It's hard but don't tell me you can't find top pair defensemen past the 50th pick.

I haven't seen anyone say he was a reach. Just that they don't like the player and would have preferred that they draft others.
 
Last edited:

Psuhockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
6,373
2,282
But that's what I don't understand...this is right where he was supposed to go, and with the exception of a handful of other guys here it looks like his upside is the same. You're not getting a top pair defender at 50 and your not getting a top line forward. Ginning has top 4 upside it would appear. Definitely guys out there that I would have preferred but it isn't like Ginning's top is 6/7. That might be where he winds up, for sure, but that is not his ceiling.
He’s not a puck mover so it seems most don’t think he will ever be a top 4. I agree it’s easier to teach a puck mover defense then it is to teach puck skills to someone. I would much rather them drafted a forward but the organization wanted defense.
 

DrinkFightFlyers

THE TORTURE NEVER STOPS
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2009
23,502
4,486
NJ
Look around the league. Gostisbehere, Parayko, Klingberg, Letang, Byfuglien, Manson, Ekholm, Slavvin, Keith, Muzzin all picked after pick 50. Some of those guys were even passed over the first time they were eligible. IT's hard but don't tell me you can't find top pair defensemen past the 50th pick.

I haven't seen anyone say he was a reach. Just that they don't like the player and would have preferred that they draft others.
Well perhaps that should have been phrased differently, but you shouldn't EXPECT to get a top liner or top pair defender so drafting a guy that doesn't have that upside isn't something to get upset about. Certainly possible. You can get a HOFer that goes undrafted and yes you CAN get a top liner or top pair guy at 50, but you should not EXPECT to do so. If we are drafting just on potential a guy like Merkley would be high on everyone's list. It isn't just about looking at potential and saying "PLAYER X looks like a top liner/top pair...let's get him!" You have to look at the likelihood of making it, the floor of the player, etc. Again, there were definitely guys I would have preferred so I understand that idea, but to act like this is some garbage pick is just nuts. Not the best pick in the world but I honestly don't understand the negativity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RebusFlyer

DrinkFightFlyers

THE TORTURE NEVER STOPS
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2009
23,502
4,486
NJ
He’s not a puck mover so it seems most don’t think he will ever be a top 4. I agree it’s easier to teach a puck mover defense then it is to teach puck skills to someone. I would much rather them drafted a forward but the organization wanted defense.
And that's fair and that's fine. If he turns into a bottom pair defender that plays the PK, this pick will look like a good pick. Anything more is gravy. Anything worse is a bummer, especially if someone like Thomas or Groulx lights it up. That's the draft though. Educated guessing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hatcher

Larry44

#FireTortsNOW
Mar 1, 2002
11,956
7,288
Independent of Ginning, I would strongly suggest not using Central Scouting rankings as proof of anything, especially as you get beyond the 1st round.

For the record, that’s not a shot at their scouting ability.
Yes, just thought it was interesting that CSB was so high on him. I absolutely understand the teams, and their fans, need to temper expecations based on their rankings.
 

Rebels57

Former Flyers fan
Sponsor
Sep 28, 2014
76,655
123,172
I think people are upset about using the 50th overall on a low upside pick. I think if Ginning was taken later, there wouldn’t be the same negativity...... Or maybe I am wrong and he eats puppies while training.

Yep. This.

I really think he only made this pick because he didnt have a 3rd and they would miss on too many dmen they liked by the time the 4th rolled around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foggy14

baudib1

Registered User
Apr 12, 2016
8,136
11,633
Las Vegas
And that's fair and that's fine. If he turns into a bottom pair defender that plays the PK, this pick will look like a good pick. Anything more is gravy. Anything worse is a bummer, especially if someone like Thomas or Groulx lights it up. That's the draft though. Educated guessing.

Your post is perfectly reasonable but so are the people panning this pick. Part of it is definitely that we’ve become spoiled; we want sexy mid-round picks with names and pedigrees like Strome and guys who are swing for the fences picks like Cates as well as guys who are easily projectable as future middle/bottom sixers like Sushko.

We know Hextall likes to move up and down the draft; for him to stand so pat during this draft makes it feel like they targeted Ginning and wanted him all along, which is disappointing.

I say this as a guy who would have loved Samuelsson: Ginning feels like a “safe” pick who fit a targeted role that we really didn’t need while players with higher upside were available.
 

FLYguy3911

Sanheim Lover
Oct 19, 2006
53,082
86,408
Well perhaps that should have been phrased differently, but you shouldn't EXPECT to get a top liner or top pair defender so drafting a guy that doesn't have that upside isn't something to get upset about. Certainly possible. You can get a HOFer that goes undrafted and yes you CAN get a top liner or top pair guy at 50, but you should not EXPECT to do so. If we are drafting just on potential a guy like Merkley would be high on everyone's list. It isn't just about looking at potential and saying "PLAYER X looks like a top liner/top pair...let's get him!" You have to look at the likelihood of making it, the floor of the player, etc. Again, there were definitely guys I would have preferred so I understand that idea, but to act like this is some garbage pick is just nuts. Not the best pick in the world but I honestly don't understand the negativity.
Expect it? No, but you shouldn't abandon looking for the qualities that those guys [that turned into top pairings guys] possessed- skill and skating. If you miss, you miss. As long as the process is sound you will come out ahead in the long run. Maybe Ginning's development takes some unforeseen turn for the better, but I can't realistically count on that. He's a January birthday. His frame while big, is close to maxed out so I don't see much physical projection that could unlock another level. I'm not going to predict that this guy will never play in the NHL because this organization and particularly the coach prefers players with this guy's skillset, but I believe the phrase "safe is death" applies here.
 

Ghosts Beer

I saw Goody Fletcher with the Devil!
Feb 10, 2014
22,619
16,426
that skating was rough to watch.
Hm. While not Bouwmeester-like perfection, I thought in that video Ginning moved pretty darn well for a freshly turned 18 year old of his size playing on the big ice surface in Sweden’s top pro league.

The video also shows sound positioning (does a good job taking away the middle), alertness, & a very active stick with long reach. And he also flashes a couple nice plays with the puck. A couple small errors, but overall I see a lot more potential than many in this thread do.
 

FLYguy3911

Sanheim Lover
Oct 19, 2006
53,082
86,408
that skating was rough to watch.
He's fine in a straight line (good even?) but yeah short area quickness isn't his forte. He's clumsy. He didn't really touch the puck in the video, but when he tries to skate with it (exists/entries) he slows up considerably. Not sure how that's going to look when he loses 15 feet of real estate in NA. But the skating doesn't bother me much. That can improve. Watch those videos and see where ~65-70% of the game is being played when he is on the ice. Scoring chances were a landslide in the opponents favor (he had one of his own though). Just doesn't strike me as a quick thinker out there. Positionally all over the place. Doesn't work to give his partner an outlet. He just skates straight up the ice looking to join the rush that hasn't started. How many passes did he complete? Any beyond his own red line?

I think that Dahlin kid is going to be pretty good though.
 

Foggy14

Registered User
Sep 13, 2017
1,902
5,735
The interview with Hextall that was in Larry's link was pretty interesting. At the very end he was asked:

"The defensemen that you took, from Ginning on forward, seem like they lean a little bit more toward defensive zone soundness rather than being super offensive. Was that a conscious decision based on fit with the guys you already have in the NHL?"

Hexy's reply was:

"We knew we certainly wanted one, for sure, but in terms of the other guys it was more of where our list was and where they fell. We had some puck movers that we really liked. They went either prior to us, or we liked other guys better than them. So we certainly would have liked to draft a guy with real puck savvy."

That's pretty revealing, at least for Hexy. He's basically agreeing that our draft had a gap when it came to a puck mover.

Seems like Ginning projects as a likely NHL'er who could be a valuable guy with good size, reasonable skills and leadership traits. He's just not the kind of puck mover that Hexy and a number of guys on the board (me, included) would have liked to have seen.

Did they hope Wilde would drop to them at #50? Did they have their eye on
Tychonick, who went at #48?

The Leafs liked Durzi at #52, but I can understand why the Flyers would pass on him at #50 in favor of Ginning. Calen Addison? Kevin Bahl? It's not obvious to me that they were clearly better options than Adam.

He's probably a bit of a "victim" of our big gap between picks #19 and #112 where he was our only pick. It was too bad we didn't have our third round pick when guys with pretty good puck skills (like Demin, Keane and Barton) were on the board.

The comparison to Hägg isn't doing him any favors either. Robert does some things I like, but puck moving isn't among them. The good news is that, if Ginning can learn to treat the puck as something other than a live hand grenade, he'll be way ahead of Robert in terms of puck skills.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hatcher

hatcher

Registered User
Sep 30, 2007
12,377
4,085
Kelowna BC
Great pick and will get better in time. Morin and ginning will be a bitch for teams. Right now it's easy for team to do what they want in our end.
 

BackToTheBrierePatch

Nope not today.
Feb 19, 2003
66,201
24,590
Concord, New Hampshire
I'm really surprised at the amount of negativity surrounding this pick. There are definitely guys that I would have preferred, but what is it that people don't like about this pick?).

you're surprised at the negativity with this fanbase? really? how long have you been a fan of this team :laugh:
 

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
49,215
21,617
What will probably happen is one puck mover taken after Ginning will turn out to be a better player, but four others will turn out to be worse - and this board will harp on the one out of five until the end of time!

Even if Ginning never becomes more than a solid AHL player and 7th D-man he'll have value, because how many seasons do you get through playing just 6 defensemen? Usually you end up going 8 deep or so, and play at least 7. So if these three defensemen shore up the Phantoms for a few years, provide compentent callups and one manages to play 200+ games they've done their job.

Flyers haven't had much luck drafting defensemen outside the 1st rd until Ghost:
Amarosa #132, Drake #192, Larrson #111, Willcox #141, Suellentrop #116, Luuko #179, Bertilsson #87, Lauridsen #196, Bourdon #67, Marshall #41, Ratchuk #42, Bodrov #55, Lehtivouri #101, Bartulis #91, Flatters #174, Anderson #101, Zarb #144,
Alexandre-Pickard #85-2003 played 253 games.
Seidenberg #172-2001 played 859 games
Niinimaa #36-1993 played 741 games
Yushkevich #122-1991 played 786 games
Therrien #47-1990 played 764 games
 

BigToe

Robocop sucks
Jan 6, 2018
13,363
23,479
Philly
What will probably happen is one puck mover taken after Ginning will turn out to be a better player, but four others will turn out to be worse - and this board will harp on the one out of five until the end of time!
It’ll probably end up being one of the forwards that had a lot more potential.

Even if Ginning never becomes more than a solid AHL player and 7th D-man he'll have value, because how many seasons do you get through playing just 6 defensemen? Usually you end up going 8 deep or so, and play at least 7. So if these three defensemen shore up the Phantoms for a few years, provide compentent callups and one manages to play 200+ games they've done their job.

You’d be happy with a solid AHL player and 7th D-man in the second round?
 

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
49,215
21,617
Happy? I expect to win every time I buy a Moneyball ticket!
But realistically, the odds that Ginning (or the proverbial puck moving smurf defenseman) plays 200 games is 1 in 4, 400+ games, 1 in 5.
So if Ginning is a better version of Hagg this was a good choice (i.e. a 3rd pair defenseman who'll probably play 400+ games).

Yes, ideally you'd like him to be a top 4 defenseman down the road, but the odds of that are less than 20%.
What I don't want is Kevin Marshall, who played 10 NHL games, 5 AHL seasons then went to the SHL.
At least provide depth for a few seasons before moving on.
 

Rebels57

Former Flyers fan
Sponsor
Sep 28, 2014
76,655
123,172
It’ll probably end up being one of the forwards that had a lot more potential.



You’d be happy with a solid AHL player and 7th D-man in the second round?

I am fully expecting Nicklas Nordgren to make a lot of teams look stupid for passing on him in the 2nd, including the Flyers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigToe

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad