Canucker
Go Hawks!
"Skills" are overrated. What kind of athlete is he?
If he wasn't a very good athlete he probably wouldn't be a top 5 pick.
"Skills" are overrated. What kind of athlete is he?
If he wasn't a very good athlete he probably wouldn't be a top 5 pick.
This is pretty much ass backwards. Athleticism is 90 percent work ethic and careful training.Skills can be taught... athleticism not so much.
This is pretty much ass backwards. Athleticism is 90 percent work ethic and careful training.
If he didn't have very good skills he probably wouldn't be a top 5 pick.
Skills can be taught... athleticism not so much.
If he didn't have very good skills he probably wouldn't be a top 5 pick.
Skills can be taught... athleticism not so much.
If there ever was a bass aackwards comment
If only I had trained harder… I could have been Lebron James!
It's not backwards at all. Most of the time the best athletes end up with the best skills. That's not always the case though, especially in junior hockey. Reinart has been provided with a lot of opportunity, sometimes those guys end up ahead of the curve based on that and not their athletic ability. On the flip side, his dad was a hell of a hockey player, so I'm sure he's a good athlete.
I'll take the guy that runs faster and jumps higher over the guy with the "sick skills" all other things being equal.
It's not backwards at all. Most of the time the best athletes end up with the best skills. That's not always the case though, especially in junior hockey. Reinart has been provided with a lot of opportunity, sometimes those guys end up ahead of the curve based on that and not their athletic ability. On the flip side, his dad was a hell of a hockey player, so I'm sure he's a good athlete.
I'll take the guy that runs faster and jumps higher over the guy with the "sick skills" all other things being equal.
It's not backwards at all. Most of the time the best athletes end up with the best skills. That's not always the case though, especially in junior hockey. Reinart has been provided with a lot of opportunity, sometimes those guys end up ahead of the curve based on that and not their athletic ability. On the flip side, his dad was a hell of a hockey player, so I'm sure he's a good athlete.
I'll take the guy that runs faster and jumps higher over the guy with the "sick skills" all other things being equal.
So, Mike Bibby over Steve Nash.
Obviously it's a combination of both.
Scurr is correct, and look no farther than Steve Nash, who could have also played pro soccer. He was a great athlete, who trained to get the skills he has to become a two time NBA MVP.
Of course there is more that goes into it, I was a good athlete, played three sports in high school, plus hockey, and I know there is no way I could have become good enough to play in the nhl.
For 6th overall I have:
Ritchie
Virtanen/Ehlers
Nylander
Now does Virtanen have anything better than Ritchie? I see Virtanen as someone with a better shot, faster north-south player, but can't help to think it reminds me of David Booth.
Ritchie has that Kassian vibe to him, which I like a lot.
For 6th overall I have:
Ritchie
Virtanen/Ehlers
Nylander
Now does Virtanen have anything better than Ritchie? I see Virtanen as someone with a better shot, faster north-south player, but can't help to think it reminds me of David Booth.
Ritchie has that Kassian vibe to him, which I like a lot.
For 6th overall I have:
Ritchie
Virtanen/Ehlers
Nylander
Now does Virtanen have anything better than Ritchie? I see Virtanen as someone with a better shot, faster north-south player, but can't help to think it reminds me of David Booth.
Ritchie has that Kassian vibe to him, which I like a lot.
Fair enough. But as far as I can tell Vitranen is in better shape, more athletic, faster, more consistent, better shot, better release all while being a lot younger.
When I see Ritchie I see a guy with concussion issues already with constancy concerns. Not to mention he's a "soft" 230lbs. He seems to be out of shape (comparatively). You have to keep in mind Ritchie's body type can carry him through the OHL right now. He is a lot bigger then his peers and can physically "bull" his way around people. This won't fly in the NHL
I also can't help but get the impression people think Ritchie is the next Lucic. Let's get one thing straight, he's not. If you've been watching the playoffs the last few season this year in particular, you realize the need for speed and physical play. This screams Vitranen more then ANYONE in the draft.
Not that I'd be disappointed with Ritchie. But assuming there's no fallers, I'd be upset taking Ritchie over JV. I can't think of a single thing about JV that reminds me of Booth. Saying JV is like Booth is like saying Ritchie is like Lucic, it's just not true. Although they may share some qualities they're not accurate comparisons.
Fair enough. But as far as I can tell Vitranen is in better shape, more athletic, faster, more consistent, better shot, better release all while being a lot younger.
When I see Ritchie I see a guy with concussion issues already with constancy concerns. Not to mention he's a "soft" 230lbs. He seems to be out of shape (comparatively). You have to keep in mind Ritchie's body type can carry him through the OHL right now. He is a lot bigger then his peers and can physically "bull" his way around people. This won't fly in the NHL
I also can't help but get the impression people think Ritchie is the next Lucic. Let's get one thing straight, he's not. If you've been watching the playoffs the last few season this year in particular, you realize the need for speed and physical play. This screams Vitranen more then ANYONE in the draft.
Not that I'd be disappointed with Ritchie. But assuming there's no fallers, I'd be upset taking Ritchie over JV. I can't think of a single thing about JV that reminds me of Booth. Saying JV is like Booth is like saying Ritchie is like Lucic, it's just not true. Although they may share some qualities they're not accurate comparisons.
Fair enough. But as far as I can tell Vitranen is in better shape, more athletic, faster, more consistent, better shot, better release all while being a lot younger.
When I see Ritchie I see a guy with concussion issues already with constancy concerns. Not to mention he's a "soft" 230lbs. He seems to be out of shape (comparatively). You have to keep in mind Ritchie's body type can carry him through the OHL right now. He is a lot bigger then his peers and can physically "bull" his way around people. This won't fly in the NHL
I also can't help but get the impression people think Ritchie is the next Lucic. Let's get one thing straight, he's not. If you've been watching the playoffs the last few season this year in particular, you realize the need for speed and physical play. This screams Vitranen more then ANYONE in the draft.
Not that I'd be disappointed with Ritchie. But assuming there's no fallers, I'd be upset taking Ritchie over JV. I can't think of a single thing about JV that reminds me of Booth. Saying JV is like Booth is like saying Ritchie is like Lucic, it's just not true. Although they may share some qualities they're not accurate comparisons.