Not sure what you see in Liljegren. I don't think he's anything special. I think he's a bottom six pairing defenseman, and it's been slowly setting in stone the more I watch him. I think he's a good prospect to have in a pinch, but I don't see the top-four status he was purported to have when he was drafted -- let alone the top billing as a first overall pick he was slated to be a year before the draft.
and where is he on your list? top 30? top 40? Say if you had to slot him on a list.
I’m just not seeing it. Who are the comparisons, both good and bad?Check out Liljegren’s draft+3 AHL stats and compare to other recent first round picks. Liljegren is on track to be a top pairing defenceman in his prime.
Brannstrom is a smurf defenceman at 5’9 (175cm), and not fast enough to compensate for his lack of size. His ceiling at the NHL level is really limited as a result.
that's your opinion. You don't need size to be an impact on defense these days. The Senators never needed to rush Brannstrom in the lineup. Him getting lots of minutes in the ahl has benefited his game.
He was also being used as a centre in the 1st 10 or so games I believe. When they moved him back to the wing, where he probably belongs, he took off.Enjoyed reading, thank you.
Not just this list, but can't help but feel Matt Boldy is being slept on a little after his D+1. Ok, he had 10 or so games to adjust in the NCAA, but then was a PPG as a freshman for the remainder of the year. Without a doubt, a creative, two-way, first line wing in my eyes. I think he'll dominate this season when it starts up for BC.
Its tough to judge by AHL stats. I don't think he is a top pairing guy. Middle pairing more likely to me.Check out Liljegren’s draft+3 AHL stats and compare to other recent first round picks. Liljegren is on track to be a top pairing defenceman in his prime.
It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact. 5’9 180 lbs is very small for a defenseman. Brannstrom can’t skate like Hughes to make up for his lack of size either, and has lower hockey IQ as well. Hughes being an an example of an impact smaller defenseman, but even he is 5’10 at least.
Ive seen Merkley plenty of times. He is AWFUL defensively. If he makes the NHL itll be as a bottom pairing, sheltered, PPQB.I think ill stick to my own evaluation rather than someone who probably hasnt watched Merkley ever.
Who has him as the best? I haven't seen any listsyou should watch him play. A LOT of specialists sees him as the #1 Swedish D atm... so please stop with your takes.
Of course im biased, just like you are probably biased towards the wings prospects. However I have read a lot of prospect guys and scouts on this kind of stuff and all seem to agree that Merkley has worked on his flaws and gotten better while remaining one of the most offensively gifted prospects out there. Not saying hes number 1, but he is not miles behind a guy like Broberg.Ive seen Merkley plenty of times. He is AWFUL defensively. If he makes the NHL itll be as a bottom pairing, sheltered, PPQB.
I'm sure him being the Sharks only notable prospect had no effect on your evaluation of him...
I guess we are all just going to ignore the elephant in the room that he has Stutzle over Laf?
I guess he was trying to be edgy there.
I don’t get how Foudy, a 1st rounder who has shown flashes in the NHL, is not top 50.
Anaheim with the #3 and #4 prospects on this list. As a Ducks fan, that makes me happy.
Merkley has twice the talent Broberg has.....Of course im biased, just like you are probably biased towards the wings prospects. However I have read a lot of prospect guys and scouts on this kind of stuff and all seem to agree that Merkley has worked on his flaws and gotten better while remaining one of the most offensively gifted prospects out there. Not saying hes number 1, but he is not miles behind a guy like Broberg.
Merkley has twice the talent Broberg has.....