Am I the only one who sees nothing but glaring red flags about Crouse?
I don't care that he's big. I'm beyond concerned with his point totals.
45GP, 22G, 14A for a paltry total of 36 points.
Thirty six.
For reference, Chris Neil got 55 and 72 points in his final 2 OHL years.
A top 10 pick in what is billed as the best draft in years should not be used on a guy who cannot score at the junior level. Especially when those who are expected to be drafted around him are all racking up points like it's going out of style.
I can't help but think that Lawson Crouse is the next Hugh Jessiman. For those who have no damn clue who Hugh Jessiman is, look up the 1st round of the 2003 draft.
I'd recommend staying away from statistics as a method of prospect evaluation, especially when it comes to junior hockey. However, if you have to use statistics, context is very important. He may only have 36 points, but he's one point away from leading his team. Kingston is one of the lowest scoring teams in the CHL and with Bennett/Watson out with injury he's had to play with mediocre players all year.
Benji had a great post in the Crouse thread where he compared Crouse's production to Landeskog's in his draft year, and basically showed that if you consider the quality of teams, Crouse would have over a PPG, close to what Landeskog put up in 2011.
His lack of production isn't a concern if you understand that's he's a triggerman, not a playmaker. Crouse is a huge, fast powerforward with a great shot. He's never going to be a player that is going to be setting up linemates with perfect passes and dangling through defenders, that's just not his game. Put him beside a strong playmaker and he'll put up huge goal totals, just like other forwards with a comparable skills package (Pacioretty, Neal, Nash).
I remember there were similar concerns on this forum about Landeskog back in 2011. Some were scared away from him because he didn't produce close to Huberdeau and Strome, but scouts looked beyond production and saw a player who's skills would translate well to the NHL level. Crouse is in the same boat. I suspect scouts don't see much of a gap between Crouse and Landeskog in terms of potential.
I'm of a similar mind. I like Crouse, see him as a future Lucic or Bickell but have a very hard time justifying his selection in the top 10 of this draft when our needs are for top line, high skill players.
I've been watching him lately and I just don't see high end skill to be a top line player. Haven't seen a ton but what I've seen isn't inspiring. The red flags are up.
Crouse doesn't need high end skill to become a top line player. He's huge (6'4, 215lbs), can skate like the wind, and has a fantastic shot. Those skills alone have made players into top line scorers at the NHL level. Look at the production of guys like Pacioretty, Wheeler, Ladd, Lucic, Neal in their respective junior leagues. All of them put up mediocre point totals in junior/college but are putting up top line forward numbers at the NHL level because they are built for the NHL game. Crouse has the same, if not superior skills package to all of these players, and thus has the same kind of scoring potential at the NHL level.
Put Crouse beside a top line playmaker and he'll score 30 goals while being a huge asset off the scoresheet with his great two-way game, physical play and leadership. That's a top line player.
