Unfufilled potential ...

[BraveCanadian]

Mats Sundin.

Very good player. Should have been great with all the tools he had available to him.

Always left you wanting more (at least in a Leafs jersey).

 

[Dangler99*]

I couldn't disagree more with you. Gretzky hitting 215 is insane. Not only did Wayne surpass what was before him, he set the bar for excellence. 215 is the bench mark. Where as Fedorov always left you wanting more. He almost won the scoring title, won a Hart and Selke in the same year. I want to say it was his 4th year in the league. He should have, and could have, been a top 10 player in the league year after year. But when Sergei got that 20 million dollar signing bonus, his heart shrunk to half the size of his talent.

Gretzky 212 point season is better than his 215. 92 goals 120 assists>51 goals 163 assists.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Bobby Carpenter

This. He was relatively high picked player, so talent was arguably there and he performed very well in his early years in Sharks and Avalanche. He was the opposite of Nick Lidstrom in Colorado. He became a journeyman after his Colorado's day and he was done after the lockout.
He could be the Gonchar's twin these days.

Bobby Carpenter, 3rd overall, he hit 50+ goals mark and felt off the radar one season after that. He never scored more than 56 points then (during high scoring era) and during his 30's he became a 4th liner

Obvious choices are:
Zhamnov - he should be in elite star category after his brilliant first few seasons and he hardly became a weak 1st line center.
Petr Nedved & Petr Klíma @ Patrik Stefan = one dissapoint from Czechs per decade
Kevin Stevens Drugs killed him.
Martin Gelinas, Vladimir Malakhov....

So many names...

Bobby Carpenter - series of nagging injuries then a 1990 kneecap injury that left him lacking mobility and a depth player.

 

[Bauer Warrior*]

There are alot of players who light it up in jr and are believed to become real stars. Sometimes it is just a case of being physically more mature... It's hilarious to think that Chris Dingman was a first rounder, just because he was an alright jr player with size...

Come on, man. Don't do me like that. You paraphrased and left out the part where I praised the guy and said that he doesn't belong on this list. Don't a drive-by media type.

 

[mattihp]

First knee injury took away some of his lateral movement and quickness.

Agreed. But he still looked like a world class player on the national team after that. A much bigger difference in quality than the difference of ice size would account for.

 

[Canadiens1958]

World Cup

Agreed. But he still looked like a world class player on the national team after that. A much bigger difference in quality than the difference of ice size would account for.

Except for international events played on the smaller NA rinks where the difference was apparent.

 

[Hank Chinaski]

Czerkawski

This was the first name I thought of.

A 200 goal, 400 point career is nothing to scoff at, especially when the bulk of your career was in the dead puck era. But for a guy that had almost Kovalev-esque puck skills, he really should have been so much more. Simple fact is, the guy could not cope with the physical part of the game.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Distinction has to be made between players who were over rated by scouts, management and fans and those who did not reach their potential.

That's an important distinction to make, and I agree with the examples you provided. There are all kids of high draft picks who were drafted high due to being 6'4", but that doesn't mean they had real potential.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Draft Misreads

Unfulfilled potential also masks various draft misreads or poor scouting.

J.J. Daigneault, first round pick by the Canucks. As a 17 year old played for the expansion Longueuil Chevaliers coached by Jacques Lemaire. No one is going to give an expansion team a #1 d-man so Lemaire created one. Focused on the player's strengths while minimizing the exposure of his weaknesses. After Lemaire left, Daigneault had a season with Team Canada before being drafted by the Canucks. Eventually had a career reflecting his talent. low 2nd/high 3rd round pick.

Various long time junior coaches were very good at getting players to generate impressive stats. Brian Kilrea, Orval Tessier, Gaston Drapeau, and other long term junior coacheshad it down to an art form.

 

[Passchendaele]

Jeff Friesen was supposed to be an All-Star IIRC.

 

[Bauer Warrior*]

That's an important distinction to make, and I agree with the examples you provided. There are all kids of high draft picks who were drafted high due to being 6'4", but that doesn't mean they had real potential.

I don't know why scouts can't get over it. For every Eric Lindros, Chris Pronger, and Todd Bertuzzi (He's the only big, quality winger who's hitting me right now), there are more Joe Hulbigs, Mike Rathjes, and Mike Rupps and Jason Bonsignores. Big does not mean good, as you well know. And I'll bet you that if you throw out Zdeno Chara (the league's biggest player) and Nathan Gerbe (who I believe is the league's smallest player), and I'll bet you that the league's average height is 6'1"

I'm a life-long Islander fan, and as fans, we rightfully cringe at the fact that we traded Zdeno Chara 10 years ago. But my fellow fans see guys like Boris Valebik, Tyler Meyers, and any other defenseman who's above 6'6" and expect the Islanders should draft that guy as a means of replacing Chara. Well, Chara's a freak, and he's likely to never be replaced. He can skate, he's got an insane work ethic, he's got sincere emotional strength, and obvious physical strength. Scouts are also guilty of talling tall guys "the next Zdeno Chara" - Well, there has to be something more relative than height. I'm 6'1", but that doesn't make me the next Mark Messier or Denis Potvin.

Mike Komisarek as looked at as sort of Chris Pronger because of his size and above average skating ability. I like Mike Komisarek to a degree as a hockey player, and I know that he's a hell of a guy as a human being, but he's not a Chris Pronger-type hockey player. Pronger is a mean, intense hockey player. Komisarek jumps out of his skates to be a physical presence, where Pronger can literally control a game.

And look at this year's draft, people are scared off by Ryan Murphy's lack of size, but they're going to kick themselves when he's the quickest power play QB in the league. The 6'4" Sean Couturier has yet to impress me.

so I agree completely, the size thing is a ridiculous drafting prerequisite. You hear it every year, "If he was 2 inches taller, he's be right there with (top ranked player)" - This is hockey, not auditions for runway models. Guys who are 5'10" can be built like tanks and maul the 6'4" guys... like Mike Rathje.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Old / Young

I don't know why scouts can't get over it. For every Eric Lindros, Chris Pronger, and Todd Bertuzzi (He's the only big, quality winger who's hitting me right now), there are more Joe Hulbigs, Mike Rathjes, and Mike Rupps and Jason Bonsignores. Big does not mean good, as you well know. And I'll bet you that if you throw out Zdeno Chara (the league's biggest player) and Nathan Gerbe (who I believe is the league's smallest player), and I'll bet you that the league's average height is 6'1"

I'm a life-long Islander fan, and as fans, we rightfully cringe at the fact that we traded Zdeno Chara 10 years ago. But my fellow fans see guys like Boris Valebik, Tyler Meyers, and any other defenseman who's above 6'6" and expect the Islanders should draft that guy as a means of replacing Chara. Well, Chara's a freak, and he's likely to never be replaced. He can skate, he's got an insane work ethic, he's got sincere emotional strength, and obvious physical strength. Scouts are also guilty of talling tall guys "the next Zdeno Chara" - Well, there has to be something more relative than height. I'm 6'1", but that doesn't make me the next Mark Messier or Denis Potvin.

Mike Komisarek as looked at as sort of Chris Pronger because of his size and above average skating ability. I like Mike Komisarek to a degree as a hockey player, and I know that he's a hell of a guy as a human being, but he's not a Chris Pronger-type hockey player. Pronger is a mean, intense hockey player. Komisarek jumps out of his skates to be a physical presence, where Pronger can literally control a game.

And look at this year's draft, people are scared off by Ryan Murphy's lack of size, but they're going to kick themselves when he's the quickest power play QB in the league. The 6'4" Sean Couturier has yet to impress me.

so I agree completely, the size thing is a ridiculous drafting prerequisite. You hear it every year, "If he was 2 inches taller, he's be right there with (top ranked player)" - This is hockey, not auditions for runway models. Guys who are 5'10" can be built like tanks and maul the 6'4" guys... like Mike Rathje.

Thru youth hockey in the vast majority of jurisdiction the calendar year is respected. Quebec finally came on board a few years ago. The NHL draft does not follow the calendar year, rather September 16 to September 15th.Which is why Ovechkin, born September 17th, 1985 was drafted in 2004 and not 2003,

Mike Komisarek is a January baby, "Old" so thru youth hockey he would have an edge over a December baby "Young" born the same year. Very striking edge for young kids that gradually is eliminated by adulthood.So thru youth hockey he looked better than he was.

Chris Pronger is an October baby tending towards "Young" who get an extra year of junior in many cases.

Sean Couturier is a "Young" December born who has three years of major junior during which he has more than held his own against the competition.

Point is that scouts have to factor in these variables.

 

[KristoLeblanc*]

I can't believe I'm the first one to say;

Pierre Larouche.

Okay yeah, he had two 50+ goals seasons and another of 48 goals, but he was way, way better than his resume. Lack of will and personal issues too.

Another one;

Oleg Tverdovsky. Had a decent career and numbers early, but he was lazy and couldn't step up in the playoffs.

Tony Amonte, he was very good with the Blackhawks but I always feel he was a better player than his numbers. He was downright dominant at times.

Jeff O'Neill, he was good in the early 00's but could had accomplish much more based on talent.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I don't know why scouts can't get over it. For every Eric Lindros, Chris Pronger, and Todd Bertuzzi (He's the only big, quality winger who's hitting me right now), there are more Joe Hulbigs, Mike Rathjes, and Mike Rupps and Jason Bonsignores. Big does not mean good, as you well know. And I'll bet you that if you throw out Zdeno Chara (the league's biggest player) and Nathan Gerbe (who I believe is the league's smallest player), and I'll bet you that the league's average height is 6'1"

I'm a life-long Islander fan, and as fans, we rightfully cringe at the fact that we traded Zdeno Chara 10 years ago. But my fellow fans see guys like Boris Valebik, Tyler Meyers, and any other defenseman who's above 6'6" and expect the Islanders should draft that guy as a means of replacing Chara. Well, Chara's a freak, and he's likely to never be replaced. He can skate, he's got an insane work ethic, he's got sincere emotional strength, and obvious physical strength. Scouts are also guilty of talling tall guys "the next Zdeno Chara" - Well, there has to be something more relative than height. I'm 6'1", but that doesn't make me the next Mark Messier or Denis Potvin.

Mike Komisarek as looked at as sort of Chris Pronger because of his size and above average skating ability. I like Mike Komisarek to a degree as a hockey player, and I know that he's a hell of a guy as a human being, but he's not a Chris Pronger-type hockey player. Pronger is a mean, intense hockey player. Komisarek jumps out of his skates to be a physical presence, where Pronger can literally control a game.

And look at this year's draft, people are scared off by Ryan Murphy's lack of size, but they're going to kick themselves when he's the quickest power play QB in the league. The 6'4" Sean Couturier has yet to impress me.

so I agree completely, the size thing is a ridiculous drafting prerequisite. You hear it every year, "If he was 2 inches taller, he's be right there with (top ranked player)" - This is hockey, not auditions for runway models. Guys who are 5'10" can be built like tanks and maul the 6'4" guys... like Mike Rathje.

mike rathje was a serviceable top 4 defenseman in his time, the best defenseman on a pretty good sharks team for a bit, and he had a pretty good length career before the injuries caught up with him (not to say that he would have excelled post-lockout, but he had more mobility than he was given credit for). i wouldn't exactly lump him in with a career fourth liner like rupp or a bust like bonsignore. yeah, he was drafted 3nd overall, but relative to the talent of the rest of that draft, you could have done a lot worse.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

It's interesting. I feel like sometimes certain player styles lend themselves to this type of categorization.

For example, as someone mentioned earlier, players who skate smoothly and appear 'effortless' often seem like they 'should have been better'.
I think Patrick Marleau is a great example. Has had a handful of good seasons, but underachieves fairly regularly.

Then you have players who had the tools, but lacked the hockey-sense. Yet managed to put it together a few times.

I think Geoff Sanderson is a perfect example. I recall he had a couple of 40 goal years for the Whalers in the mid-nineties. Then did nothing and was really a borderline NHLer at times. Only to come back and score again for Columbus.

Ed Jovanovski is another one. Skates like the wind, hits like a truck (when the spirit moves him) and has had some great seasons. However, he has never put it together like his skill-set suggests he should have, for more than a year or two with the Canucks.

But the best example I can think of for 'left something on the table': Viktor Kozlov.
I mean never, other than Bonsignore, has a less worthy player been compared to le magnifique. Yet, in some ways the comparison was justified. Unfortunately, it was only justified on about 6 plays per season.

I always felt that Roman Hamrlik should have been better too. I mean, he's reinvented himself as a good defensive defense man.
But other than 95-96 in Tampa, where he managed 65 points, he never really became the player he was supposed to be when he was drafted 1st in 92.

 

[begbeee]

Manny Malhotra
Dont get me wrong, he put together decent career and became premier 3rd liner and faceoff specialist, but he was supposed to be power forward/skilled grinder - simply: offensive guy. In this extent is his career the big disappointment, especially for Rangers which have drafted him. After five years in Rangers and Dallas he was almost done and then he caught his probably last chance in Colombus, which have used him in right way.

 

[Bauer Warrior*]

It's interesting. I feel like sometimes certain player styles lend themselves to this type of categorization.

For example, as someone mentioned earlier, players who skate smoothly and appear 'effortless' often seem like they 'should have been better'.
I think Patrick Marleau is a great example. Has had a handful of good seasons, but underachieves fairly regularly.

Then you have players who had the tools, but lacked the hockey-sense. Yet managed to put it together a few times.

I think Geoff Sanderson is a perfect example. I recall he had a couple of 40 goal years for the Whalers in the mid-nineties. Then did nothing and was really a borderline NHLer at times. Only to come back and score again for Columbus.

Ed Jovanovski is another one. Skates like the wind, hits like a truck (when the spirit moves him) and has had some great seasons. However, he has never put it together like his skill-set suggests he should have, for more than a year or two with the Canucks.

But the best example I can think of for 'left something on the table': Viktor Kozlov.
I mean never, other than Bonsignore, has a less worthy player been compared to le magnifique. Yet, in some ways the comparison was justified. Unfortunately, it was only justified on about 6 plays per season.

I always felt that Roman Hamrlik should have been better too. I mean, he's reinvented himself as a good defensive defense man.
But other than 95-96 in Tampa, where he managed 65 points, he never really became the player he was supposed to be when he was drafted 1st in 92.

Without a doubt, Viktor Kozlov was a let down.

In general, scouts need to be harder on players, I think. At least to some degree. I remember watching a feature on Mario Lemieux a few years ago, and I forget what scouts, agents, GMs etc. were involved, but after seeing Lemieux, one told the other, "I found the next Wayne Gretzky." - And the person who said that had his feet held to the fire. Mario Lemieux, as much as I don't like him, is too good to have any player who's 6'4" and above with somewhat decent hands to be compared to him. Bonsignore, Viktor Kozlov, even Daigle... come on, you have to be on crack to think that at any point, even in junior or Russia (in Kozlov's case) to think that any of those players could have been anything like Mario Lemieux. None of them were even as good as Jocelyn Lemieux, never mind Mario or Claude.

* Claude and Jocelyn Lemieux are brothers, neither related to Mario.

 

[KingGallagherXI]

Maybe Mogilny?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Factors

It's interesting. I feel like sometimes certain player styles lend themselves to this type of categorization.

For example, as someone mentioned earlier, players who skate smoothly and appear 'effortless' often seem like they 'should have been better'.
I think Patrick Marleau is a great example. Has had a handful of good seasons, but underachieves fairly regularly.

Then you have players who had the tools, but lacked the hockey-sense. Yet managed to put it together a few times.

I think Geoff Sanderson is a perfect example. I recall he had a couple of 40 goal years for the Whalers in the mid-nineties. Then did nothing and was really a borderline NHLer at times. Only to come back and score again for Columbus.

Ed Jovanovski is another one. Skates like the wind, hits like a truck (when the spirit moves him) and has had some great seasons. However, he has never put it together like his skill-set suggests he should have, for more than a year or two with the Canucks.

But the best example I can think of for 'left something on the table': Viktor Kozlov.
I mean never, other than Bonsignore, has a less worthy player been compared to le magnifique. Yet, in some ways the comparison was justified. Unfortunately, it was only justified on about 6 plays per season.

I always felt that Roman Hamrlik should have been better too. I mean, he's reinvented himself as a good defensive defense man.
But other than 95-96 in Tampa, where he managed 65 points, he never really became the player he was supposed to be when he was drafted 1st in 92.

Question of separating a players skills and style from his pre NHL entry draft situation and projecting the result down the road. Given the fluid nature of teams, coaches, team mates, rule changes etc plus human development factors, this is not easy to do

 

[seventieslord]

I would say Viktor Kozlov was better than Jocelyn Lemieux, personally... but that's neither here nor there.

 

[Mad Habber]

Well I'll chip in with the Habs players.

I can't believe no one mentioned Stephane Richer yet. Still has 2-50 goal seasons. In Montreal, that should have ensured he has a longer career in Montreal, but all that talent (stickhandling, skating, shot, size) was not enough for him to want it every night. Was tough enough too. I still remember him pummelling Milbury in the playoffs after Milbury jumped him. Mario Tremblay who was commenting, called it a typical Milbury tactic to jump a defenseless rookie. I always said that the best line he played on was with Skrudland as center and Corson as left winger. Not the Bobby Smiths, and Mats Nalunds type where they control the play. I also always maintain that Richer was traded against his ideal center in Kirk Muller. Muller played a lot like Skrudland, except much more talented, better skater, shooter and passer. I would have loved to see a line of Richer-Muller-Corson. Good size, strength, talent. They could all go in the dirty areas and could beat you on the rush.

Ryan Walter was briefly mentionned, and I believe he belongs on this list. The 2nd overall pick (77 I believe) behind Bobby Smith. In his early career in Washington, he was a very good tough offensive player. Not that he had a bad career in Montreal, he was a realiable 2nd/3rd liner mostly. But he did run into injury problems also.

Russ Courtnall - He had a few good seasons, but irregardless, he always left you wanting more. No one could skate as fast to get nowhere it seems.

Gary Leeman - Good years in Toronto. A perenial 30 goal man until he hit 50 in a career year, then he gave us the Wayne Babych treatment. At least he got his cup in his short stint in Montreal.

Gilbert Dionne - A lot was expected from him when he came up to Montreal for half a season, scored 20 goals and made the All-Rookie Team. But he gave you the feeling that he was a jealous, selfish player with a sense of accomplishment. The most lasting memory of him is the 93 playoffs, in OT (forget the opponent), apparently the puck deflected off his chest from a shot from rookie Brisebois. Everyone jumped Breezy, but Dionne was there pointing at his own chest, screaming "it's me, it's me". Anyways, he didn't last all that long after he was traded.

Murray Wilson - I don't remember Murray too much, as I was a kid and Murray played the 4th line. But he was fast and could score 20 goals from the 4th line. You'd think a guy like that could give you more, if you would just ask.

Kjell Dahlin - What can I say. Came into the league in 85-86. Part of the 10 rookies that Montreal marched to the Stanley Cup in the spring. Was scoring goals and points for Montreal for about half a season but did not like getting hit. Was afraid of his own shadow. Had a hard time getting in the lineup at the end of the season and playoff due to wide yellow streak down his back. But he still finished atop of the rookie scoring list that year.

Oh I almost forgot to add the name of Lafleur as previously mentionned here. It just could have been more than what it was already, his career. He proved he could come back after 3 years, although not at the same level, it was still respectful. If this guy would have taken better care of himself instead of living the disco lifestyle, he could have done more.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Well I'll chip in with the Habs players.

I can't believe no one mentioned Stephane Richer yet. Still has 2-50 goal seasons. In Montreal, that should have ensured he has a longer career in Montreal, but all that talent (stickhandling, skating, shot, size) was not enough for him to want it every night. Was tough enough too. I still remember him pummelling Milbury in the playoffs after Milbury jumped him. Mario Tremblay who was commenting, called it a typical Milbury tactic to jump a defenseless rookie. I always said that the best line he played on was with Skrudland as center and Corson as left winger. Not the Bobby Smiths, and Mats Nalunds type where they control the play. I also always maintain that Richer was traded against his ideal center in Kirk Muller. Muller played a lot like Skrudland, except much more talented, better skater, shooter and passer. I would have loved to see a line of Richer-Muller-Corson. Good size, strength, talent. They could all go in the dirty areas and could beat you on the rush.

Check the original post, Richer was one of the first names I thought of.

Big, good skater for his size, very good hands and an absolute rocket of a slap shot.

 

[Mad Habber]

Check the original post, Richer was one of the first names I thought of.

Big, good skater for his size, very good hands and an absolute rocket of a slap shot.

Geez, I'm getting senile early in my middle-age. I read the entire thread, and I somehow miss this or forget this.

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

Gilbert Dionne - A lot was expected from him when he came up to Montreal for half a season, scored 20 goals and made the All-Rookie Team. But he gave you the feeling that he was a jealous, selfish player with a sense of accomplishment. The most lasting memory of him is the 93 playoffs, in OT (forget the opponent), apparently the puck deflected off his chest from a shot from rookie Brisebois. Everyone jumped Breezy, but Dionne was there pointing at his own chest, screaming "it's me, it's me". Anyways, he didn't last all that long after he was traded.

Good post on some Habs that intrigued you at first and then disappointed. I thought I was the only one who noticed Dionne doing that in the OT. I really disliked him after that. His older brother was very humble and a damn hard worker. Gilbert seemed to think he should deserve a spot in the NHL because of his older brother.

 

[mco543]

I'm willing to give Tverdovsky a pass due to the incident with his mom being held for ransom. That's a lot for anyone, much less a 19 year old kid to go through.