Prospect Info: Round 2, Pick 52, Wade Allison, RW, Tri-City (USHL)

[Ghosts Beer]

It's amazing to me that anyone is down on this pick when everyone who knows what they're talking about loves it and us fans have no reason to think otherwise.

Pronman thought Allison went "a little high for me." So not all experts love it.

 

[Random Forest]

That's all good to read. And it is reason for hope. But he also was 18 in the USHL until he was able to do those things. So I'm tempering some enthusiasm. A lot of guys show offense out of nowhere in junior leagues when they get older. That type generally tends to not have a lot of offensive NHL upside. There are exceptions, and I hope Allison is one.

Yeah, and Travis Sanheim didn't have a monster year until he was 19 in the WHL. It's called being a riser. Guys like Sanheim and Allison were on nobody's radar until they burst onto the scene late in their draft years. And even considering that, Allison still put up 63 points in 67 games (61 in his final 52) which IS solid output for a second round pick out of the USHL. And let's not pretend he was an overager putting up numbers... he was a draft eligible player putting up strong output. You seem to have a very warped standard that you're using to measure his performance this season.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Yeah, and Travis Sanheim didn't have a monster year until he was 19 in the WHL. It's called being a riser. Guys like Sanheim and Allison were on nobody's radar until they burst onto the scene late in their draft years. And even considering that, Allison still put up 63 points in 67 games (61 in his final 52) which IS solid output for a second round pick out of the USHL. And let's not pretend he was an overager putting up numbers... he was a draft eligible player putting up strong output. You seem to have a very warped standard that you're using to measure his performance this season.

Not true. Sanheim scored 65 points in 67 games as a defenseman in the WHL when he was 18. He didn't turn 19 until March 29 of that season, when I believe the regular season had already finished.

And he still notched 29 points in 67 games a d-man when he was 17.

 

[Striiker]

Pronman thought Allison went "a little high for me." So not all experts love it.

Pronman... expert?

No.

If anything that makes me even more confident. Pronman has no clue what he's talking about, proven by the way he ranked our prospects against each other a while ago. He has a strange obsession with small players and seemingly ranks them mainly on the WJC. His opinion means nothing to me.

 

[Random Forest]

Not true. Sanheim scored 65 points in 67 games as a defenseman in the WHL when he was 18. He didn't turn 19 until March 29 of that season, when I believe the regular season had already finished.

And he still notched 29 points in 67 games a d-man when he was 17.

I'm not going to engage in a debate over five months difference in birthdays. Sanheim did not break out until the season after his draft, and that's all that really matters.

29 points in 67 games as a D in the WHL wasn't exactly a shining stat line. Allison's 63 points in 67 games isn't very different.

 

[Striiker]

I'm not going to engage in a debate over five months difference in birthdays. Sanheim did not break out until the season after his draft, and that's all that really matters.

So if anything that means Allison is half a season ahead of schedule.

 

[CutOnDime97]

Allison is about 4 inches too tall for Pronman to like the pick.

 

[FLYguy3911]

That's all good to read. And it is reason for hope. But he also was 18 in the USHL until he was able to do those things. So I'm tempering some enthusiasm. A lot of guys show offense out of nowhere in junior leagues when they get older. That type generally tends to not have a lot of offensive NHL upside. There are exceptions, and I hope Allison is one.

Yeah, and Travis Sanheim didn't have a monster year until he was 19 in the WHL. It's called being a riser. Guys like Sanheim and Allison were on nobody's radar until they burst onto the scene late in their draft years. And even considering that, Allison still put up 63 points in 67 games (61 in his final 52) which IS solid output for a second round pick out of the USHL. And let's not pretend he was an overager putting up numbers... he was a draft eligible player putting up strong output. You seem to have a very warped standard that you're using to measure his performance this season.

Exactly. GB you talk like he was some overager putting up league average numbers. He was still 5 months younger than the league average (that's including the u18 USA team which brings down the average age of the league). He was a draft eligible player that put up good draft eligible numbers in a low scoring league after a miserable start.

I know you're disappointed we didn't take Abramov, but consider his production in the most heavily scouted amateur league in the world. That's top half of the first round production and he fell to the 3rd round. Why? If he was that good, in a league starved for scoring, he would have went in the early 2nd round at the latest. The Flyers had 4 chances to select him and chose not to and you can make a case they have a better feel for the Q than any team in the league.

It is also important to remember the draft is just one point in time. Think about how much player's stocks change in 6 months during their draft year. Look at the preseason rankings, the midseason rankings, and the final rankings. When we look at this draft 6 months from now we'll see guys outperform their draft position and others underperform their draft position. If you're looking at this kid and seeing how he finished the season, you have to be thinking where this kid is going to be 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years from now. The hope is he's just scratching the surface of his potential. On a much lesser scale I'm sure that thinking went into the selection of Twarynski.

Should also note, even though Allison was a 2nd round pick, he was the Flyers' 4th selection. They don't need him to hit for this to be a successful draft, but if he does we will be sitting pretty. He seems like a high character kid and I'm sure that one some scouts over as well.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Pronman... expert?

No.

If anything that makes me even more confident. Pronman has no clue what he's talking about, proven by the way he ranked our prospects against each other a while ago. He has a strange obsession with small players and seemingly ranks them mainly on the WJC. His opinion means nothing to me.

Well, Pronman is paid to offer his opinions on prospects. You may not like him, which is fine. There are plenty of "experts" who are idiots. Just saying the Allison pick wasn't universally loved by guys who are paid to evaluate prospects.

I know I'm not going to win this argument of skepticism toward Allison. But I've put my reasons for concern out there, and it's good to read the reasons for hope.

 

[Young Sandwich]

I've always been a lurker on here, but had to join this conversation going on. Anyone who is questioning this pick, just go watch the 12 minute highlight video of him on the first page of this thread. If that doesn't get you excited, you need to check your pulse. This kid is a big game player who has a knack for putting the puck in the net. Really excited to get him at 52.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Exactly. GB you talk like he was some overager putting up league average numbers. He was still 5 months younger than the league average (that's including the u18 USA team which brings down the average age of the league). He was a draft eligible player that put up good draft eligible numbers in a low scoring league after a miserable start.

I know you're disappointed we didn't take Abramov, but consider his production in the most heavily scouted amateur league in the world. That's top half of the first round production and he fell to the 3rd round. Why? If he was that good, in a league starved for scoring, he would have went in the early 2nd round at the latest. The Flyers had 4 chances to select him and chose not to and you can make a case they have a better feel for the Q than any team in the league.

It is also important to remember the draft is just one point in time. Think about how much player's stocks change in 6 months during their draft year. When we look at this draft 6 months from now we'll see guys outperform their draft position and others underperform their draft position. If you're looking at this kid and seeing how he finished the season, you have to be thinking where this kid is going to be 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years from now. The hope is he's just scratching the surface of his potential. On a much lesser scale I'm sure that thinking went into the selection of Twarynski.

Should also note, even though Allison was a 2nd round pick, he was the Flyers' 4th selection. They don't need him to hit for this to be a successful draft, but if he does we will be sitting pretty. He seems like a high character kid and I'm sure that one some scouts over as well.

Why did Abramov fall? The bias against small size, which is what causes many steals to fall. I agree that the Flyers clearly didn't want him, as they had plenty of chances to take him and as you say they know the Q.

I've already acknowledged numerous times all picks at 52 are going to have warts. Not denying that whatsoever.

I also agree, and have said numerous times, the hope with Allison is that he's a late bloomer -- and that there are players like that. Nowhere have I said that couldn't happen. Indeed, it's what I'm hoping for and I like reading the arguments in his favor, because they make me feel better about the pick.

I just don't particularly like 13 points in 35 games in the USHL as a 17 year old, and 47 points in 56 games in the USHL as an 18 year old, for the 52nd overall pick.

I don't think there are many guys with a similar stat line for those ages in the USHL who become scoring line wingers in the NHL.

But are there exceptions? Sure. And do I like Allison's 2nd half and playoffs improvement, and his skills competition results? Absolutely.

So I'm skeptical, but have always said I'm at least happy there are some reasons for hope. I don't see why it's taken as an affront to not be completely gung ho on a 52nd overall pick.

 

[Curufinwe]

Grant McCagg of McKeen:

My favourite pick of the top two rounds may well be Allison at 52...the last two months of the season he was sensational. May b top 2 winger

 

[Rebels57]

Pronman thought Allison went "a little high for me." So not all experts love it.

Pronman..IS. NOT. AN. EXPERT.

Why does HFBoards think that he is?!

He's a blogger with an opinion.

 

[Rebels57]

Why did Abramov fall? The bias against small size, which is what causes many steals to fall. I agree that the Flyers clearly didn't want him, as they had plenty of chances to take him and as you say they know the Q.

I've already acknowledged numerous times all picks at 52 are going to have warts. Not denying that whatsoever.

I also agree, and have said numerous times, the hope with Allison is that he's a late bloomer -- and that there are players like that. Nowhere have I said that couldn't happen. Indeed, it's what I'm hoping for and I like reading the arguments in his favor, because they make me feel better about the pick.

I just don't particularly like 13 points in 35 games in the USHL as a 17 year old, and 47 points in 56 games in the USHL as an 18 year old, for the 52nd overall pick.

I don't think there are many guys with a similar stat line for those ages in the USHL who become scoring line wingers in the NHL.

But are there exceptions? Sure. And do I like Allison's 2nd half and playoffs improvement, and his skills competition results? Absolutely.

So I'm skeptical, but have always said I'm at least happy there are some reasons for hope. I don't see why it's taken as an affront to not be completely gung ho on a 52nd overall pick.

Why do you keep going back to his overall stat line, while ignoring his 2nd half and playoff performance?

 

[Curufinwe]

http://m.thn.com/blog/prospect-need-to-know-wade-allison-is-burning-up-the-draft-Wade

Allison, RW – Tri-City Storm (USHL):

Tri-City is battling Waterloo in the second round of the playoffs after sweeping away Sioux Falls and Allison has done his part on the balanced Storm with four points through five games. This is following a sizzling second half for the right winger, who has climbed the draft rankings after a quiet start.

“I was battling small injuries, but I got those out of the way,†Allison said. “A lot has to do with confidence.â€

And when Allison is confident, he’s hard to stop. A small-town Manitoba farm boy, Allison grew up around cattle and crops and strength is a big part of his game now.

“I’m a power forward,†he said. “I take the puck to the net and take the body. I try to make the other team’s ‘D’ not want to go back o get the puck.â€

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Why do you keep going back to his overall stat line, while ignoring his 2nd half and playoff performance?

RebelBully -- Right in what you quoted I say I like Allison's 2nd half and playoff performance. So not sure how that constitutes ignoring it.

Yeesh, all I'm saying is I have skepticism as I don't think there are many comparables with his 17 year old and 18 year old stat lines in the USHL who end up becoming NHL top 6 wingers.

I don't know how many times I have to reiterate that I'm not completely bashing the kid and that there are reasons to hope he's a late bloomer and an exception.

 

[Random Forest]

I'm more annoyed with you constantly calling him a possible "late bloomer" as if the year he just had wasn't a good one.

It's the same with Sanheim. Everyone who watched him in his draft year knew this was a guy who had an impressive year even if the end of season stats weren't exactly eye popping. Just ask FLYguy-- no one was less surprised to see Sanheim's numbers explode in his draft+1 year since he had watched him enough the year before to know he had already been playing at that level for some time.

But it's not exactly surprising since you seem to have made a habit of coming to conclusions based on mis/non-information (like prospect camp). Sometimes you need to accept that you don't have enough info to say the things you're saying.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

I mean if you're going place such a high emphasis on stat lines at least use proper context when doing so. You can't just look at a stat line on the surface & reach a conclusion based off of that. You need to dig deeper & find reasons as to why & how it got to that point.

 

[deadhead]

You have to think in terms of balance as well.

Most of the "big" guys Hextall has drafted the last two years are in the 6'0 to 6'2, 200 to 210 lb range, good size for a fast forechecking forward.
They needed a true PF, but one with skills (i.e. we won't mention names of some of the Homer draft picks).

Small isn't underrated, you just can't field a whole team of midgets, if you have Giroux and Konecny and AK, you want some full sized guys skating on the same line, whether it's to crash the net or make some idiot think twice about dirty play when he outweights our winger by 30 lbs. Same way you want to pair Ghost with someone like Morin or Provorov, big enough to discourage bullies.

The game may be cleaner, but there's still a lot of contact, dirty checking, stick work, and wrestling matches in the crease. The balance has moved toward speed, but size still has value (as long as the player isn't a stiff).

 

[jfb392]

Not sure if it's been posted, but Hextall's nephew Blake is the Director of Hockey Operations for WMU.
I believe he graduated this spring, so I'm not sure if he'll be back, but it's another connection and means that Ron surely knows the program.

 

[Rebels57]

I mean if you're going place such a high emphasis on stat lines at least use proper context when doing so. You can't just look at a stat line on the surface & reach a conclusion based off of that. You need to dig deeper & find reasons as to why & how it got to that point.

Thats my point too.

Stat lines without context are meaningless.

 

[Curufinwe]

I recall seeing posts two years ago that 17 was too high too take another defensive Dman.

All they were based on as Sanheim scoring 31 points in 73 games in his draft year.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I'm more annoyed with you constantly calling him a possible "late bloomer" as if the year he just had wasn't a good one.

It's the same with Sanheim. Everyone who watched him in his draft year knew this was a guy who had an impressive year even if the end of season stats weren't exactly eye popping. Just ask FLYguy-- no one was less surprised to see Sanheim's numbers explode in his draft+1 year since he had watched him enough the year before to know he had already been playing at that level for some time.

But it's not exactly surprising since you seem to have made a habit of coming to conclusions based on mis/non-information (like prospect camp). Sometimes you need to accept that you don't have enough info to say the things you're saying.

Whoa there. He sucked at 17 in the USHL. Sucked the first couple months of his 18 year old season in the USHL. Was ranked 192 overall in North America in Central Scouting's mid-term rankings. And blew up in the 2nd half and playoffs.

How is saying the hope he's a late bloomer so annoying and incorrect? He certainly wasn't an early bloomer.

Sanheim could ****ing skate like the wind, shot up several inches in height, and put up almost 30 points in the WHL his 17 year old season. I don't think he's a completely apt comparison.

And as for you bashing me for pointing out that Tomek was clearly outclassed by Sandstrom in prospect camp in every single way, and that Tomek seemed to have a poor attitude, how exactly has that shown incorrect?

And when have I treated my skepticism of Allison (or report on Tomek) as gospel?

 

[FLYguy3911]

Why did Abramov fall? The bias against small size, which is what causes many steals to fall. I agree that the Flyers clearly didn't want him, as they had plenty of chances to take him and as you say they know the Q.

Hard to say he fell solely for a bias against smaller players when these guys go ahead of him:

Keller
Jost
Steel
Asplund
Mascherin
DeBrincat
Dahlen
Krys
Girard
Dube
Lockwood

There's more to it.

I just don't particularly like 13 points in 35 games in the USHL as a 17 year old, and 47 points in 56 games in the USHL as an 18 year old, for the 52nd overall pick.

His 14-15 stats are of little relevance now that their is newer data. In fact, I'd argue its a good thing. He improved exponentially from one year to the next. It's a sign of rapid development just like we've seen with Sanheim (and Morin and Myers).

I don't think there are many guys with a similar stat line for those ages in the USHL who become scoring line wingers in the NHL.

There aren't many established NHLers that played in the USHL during their draft year. The league has come a long way in the last 5 years or so, but look at what Blake Wheeler did in his post draft season:

47 points in 58 games (.81 PPG)

I don't see why it's taken as an affront to not be completely gung ho on a 52nd overall pick.

I just think your expectations and qualifications for a late 2nd round pick are entirely too high. Sounds like you are expecting the perfect prospect no matter how many times you admit these guys have flaws. Again, I'm not seeing many potential All-Stars the Flyers passed up at 52.

I also think you don't quite grasp how the USHL works and how it relates to the CHL which is where most of the debate lies. There are a number of examples of guys increasing their production in "better" leagues shortly after playing in the USHL. If he had played in Brandon this year, there is no shot he would make it to 52. No shot. If he goes to Brandon this year I don't think there will be any debate 52 was too high for him. And if he goes to WMU, a team that won 8 games last year and averaged just over 2 goals a game, I'm sure the debate will be rehashed.

 

[Random Forest]

Whoa there. He sucked at 17 in the USHL. Sucked the first couple months of his 18 year old season in the USHL. Was ranked 192 overall in North America in Central Scouting's mid-term rankings. And blew up in the 2nd half and playoffs.

How is saying the hope he's a late bloomer so annoying and incorrect? He certainly wasn't an early bloomer.

Sanheim could ****ing skate like the wind, shot up several inches in height, and put up almost 30 points in the WHL his 17 year old season. I don't think he's a completely apt comparison.

"sucked"

I guess that means Sanheim sucked the first half of his draft year in Calgary, right? I mean, the stats weren't there! You don't know what you're talking about. If points are all you judge a player by, then, yes, by all means, both Allison and Sanheim sucked until they didn't.

And as for you bashing me for pointing out that Tomek was clearly outclassed by Sandstrom in prospect camp in every single way, and that Tomek seemed to have a poor attitude, how exactly has that shown incorrect?

And when have I treated my skepticism of Allison (or report on Tomek) as gospel?

Prospect camp.