What makes RNH a step below Couturier and Landeskog?

[arsmaster*]

Well many of us the east get to see RNH for the 1st time in the Top Prospects Game on wednesday night...Lokking forawrd to the viewing to see if thehype is merited --or not...true it is only 1 game--if you saw Pat Kane's Top Prospect Game --he was invisible -yet he tore up the OHLthat year..So any 1 game could be a stinker and ive a distorted view. Nevertheless even though kane did not "shine" in his TP game,he wasn't manhandled /pushed around...IF some guys not on RNH's team in the game decide to get physical with him-thatv could tellus a lot --for if he can't handle it well as a Jr. among his peers,howmuch more so will NHL'ers shove him around? So we must look for his response to any of that kind of treatment...Secondly --how's his checking? True Kane never cheked in jrs.and that did not stop him going #1 overall-but Kane had 145 pts his draft year (62 of that goals)in the reg. season of which he played ONLY 58 games --RNH has only 13 goals and 56pts in 43 GP .whl plays 72 games so Red Deer (46GP) has only 26games remaining in the reg. season...so maybe 21 goals and 69 assists = 90pts for RNH this season ..

SO comparing 2 small skill guys in their draft season (reg. season)


KANE 145 pts in 58GP;RNH projects to 90 pts in 69GP (he missed 3 games so far)

Therefore there is a vast differential in talent level here in favour of Kane -so the risk of another smaller "slight" kid who also is way behind Kane in talent/production-wise for Jrs. is even greater with RNH ...to make up for it he had better be "great" defensively but even at that the centre position is harder defensively than winger-so if he is only average there and the bulk of his talent allegdly goes for his offense ,then that might not be good enough when projecting as a pro centre.
Also --as I stated-IF he cannot shine at the TP game because his opponents push him around-that would be a bad sign that would scream AVOID...


True -it is only 1 game and we could get a false read on him-but IF we see him get pushed around,if we see no grater impact from him offensively ttan a dozen others in the game,if we see innefective defense from him---all these could be constued as flaws and red flags..SO he has a lot to "show" us ..Willhe pass or fail? That is the beauty of the Top Prospects Game .. A bad game is not supposed to hurt a prospect butit could created doubts; a good game can convince and turn heads.

This is why seeing RNH for my fist time willbe fascinating. A top talent or mere hype? Let's view him and comment then. The kid has a lot of prssure on him.Let's also see how he handles it and his skeptical doubters. SHOW ME KID!

Comparing players from different leagues and time periods is not a way to judge talent.

OHL is generally an offensive league. IN 2006-2007 Sergei Kostitsyn had 130+ points in the OHL, big whoop. Heck Tyler Donati had 129.

Again you are basing your entire argument not having seen the player play, and then strictly basing it off stats from 5 years ago?????

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Comparing players from different leagues and time periods is not a way to judge talent.

OHL is generally an offensive league. IN 2006-2007 Sergei Kostitsyn had 130+ points in the OHL, big whoop. Heck Tyler Donati had 129.

Again you are basing your entire argument not having seen the player play, and then strictly basing it off stats from 5 years ago?????

you forgot to mention Kane played for the London Knights....where every one has their stats inflated

 

[SDig14]

The title of this thread seems a little outdated at the moment

 

[Columbus Jack]

The title of this thread seems a little outdated at the moment

Should I change it massa!?

 

[nexttothemoon]

To me it's about projecting his play at the NHL level. Gagner is a good comparison to RNH imo. Gagner is a solid 2nd line type centre who still struggles with the physical game. Gagner has good hockey IQ and is a decent passer with an average scoring touch but I doubt he'll ever be physical enough to be a dominant 1st line centre. He's also only average defensively and I think you can attribute that at least partially to his lack of physicality/size.

I'm not saying RNH may not be better than Gagner... but I do think he may have similar issues when it comes to the physical and defensive demands at the NHL level.

Now look at a player like Couturier. He is a big 2 way centre... good offensively and defensively. That's pretty golden. Sure he has his knocks as well... including not being a high end skater... but there is simply less "doubt" and risk around Couturier than with RNH. RNH could be a consistent 80-90 pt centre or a 40 pt per season "bust". Not that a 40 point per year player would be a bust in today's NHL... but that's not really something you aim for when drafting #2 or #3.

Landeskog is a power winger with grit and a solid scoring touch. Captain written all over him. You can just see this guy bulking up to 225 in a few years and being a perennial 30-40 goal scorer. He may never quite live up to that but that's the potential he has stamped on him right now. Landeskog is probably the only player I could see toppling Larsson off the #1 spot... but I think Larsson's top end potential will be too much to resist for whomever gets the #1 pick.

No one actually knows the actual production that players like RNH, Couturier and Landeskog will have over the next 5-15 years of their careers. Any of them could become superstars and any of them could be busts but I think you look at the projected top end and projected bottom end for each player and then come up with some sort of average of those most optimistic & pessimistic views. For me... whichever player has the highest "average projection" is the safer player to pick. Others will choose whichever player has the highest top end and that's valid as well but it comes down to whether a team is more risk averse or wants to take a chance on a player's highest possible ceiling. If a team has a well stocked cupboard of forwards they may want to take a shot at RNH because if he doesn't pan out it isn't as painful as they have others in the pipeline and if he does work out they are laughing. I think many other teams though will lean towards Landeskog or Couturier as they seem to be safer picks even if their highest potential might be slightly lower than that of RNH if everything goes perfectly for Hopkins and he eventually develops into a player like Henrik Sedin several years down the road.

 

[R S]

You're opinion is flawed because RNH doesn't really have any trouble dealing with physical play.

He has a small frame and is slippery and very good at avoiding checks. Just because a guy is 164 pounds, it doesn\t mean he struggles.

I really like a Patrick Kane comparison for him these days. A light player but is an elite level playmaker.

 

[SDig14]

You're opinion is flawed because RNH doesn't really have any trouble dealing with physical play.

He has a small frame and is slippery and very good at avoiding checks. Just because a guy is 164 pounds, it doesn\t mean he struggles.

I really like a Patrick Kane comparison for him these days. A light player but is an elite level playmaker.

Also, he is a significantly better skater than gagner, which enhances every part of his game, including ability to avoid hits, backchecking, defensive coverage, and dynamic offensive ability

 

[Torts]

if anything after last night in skills comp, he seems a step above sean c

but we will see tonight

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

RNH reminds me of a Turris/Gagner type mix. He should be a very good player but not at the all around level of a Couturier or Landeskog. Even at the WHL level, RNH loses a ton of puck battles. He's got nifty hands and is a pretty good skater, but he's got a long way to go IMO.

 

[arsmaster*]

RNH reminds me of a Turris/Gagner type mix. He should be a very good player but not at the all around level of a Couturier or Landeskog. Even at the WHL level, RNH loses a ton of puck battles. He's got nifty hands and is a pretty good skater, but he's got a long way to go IMO.

And your vantage point from North Carolina really shows your viewership.

He's more Kane than Gagner, and his frame looks to me like it can handle more weight than Turris.

But Im still one of those guys who thinks Turris is going to be a star in the league (just not a the Coyotes).

 

[R S]

And your vantage point from North Carolina really shows your viewership.

He's more Kane than Gagner, and his frame looks to me like it can handle more weight than Turris.

But Im still one of those guys who thinks Turris is going to be a star in the league (just not a the Coyotes).

This.

And I truly have no idea why people keep comparing him to Gagner. It's absurd.

 

[SDig14]

This.

And I truly have no idea why people keep comparing him to Gagner. It's absurd.

Well, if you haven't seen them play, I don't blame them for making bad comparisons...even seeing a kid one time is not enough to make an accurate comparison

Hopefully after tonight people will see him and Gagner are not all that similar. Also, let's hope he plays his best tonight, combined with being #2 on Bob's list and ISS, and shuts some people up.

 

[R S]

Well, if you haven't seen them play, I don't blame them for making bad comparisons...even seeing a kid one time is not enough to make an accurate comparison

Hopefully after tonight people will see him and Gagner are not all that similar. Also, let's hope he plays his best tonight, combined with being #2 on Bob's list and ISS, and shuts some people up.

I agree.

Even as of right this second I am rewatching the Ivan Hlinka final from August and he has looked great in the game. Just seconds ago made a great defensive play coming back hard on the backcheck.

I really hate it when people call out a kid when they have clearly never seen him to judge for themselves.

People in the know like his game (as per Bob Mac's ranks) and think it will translate greatly to the next level.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

And your vantage point from North Carolina really shows your viewership.

He's more Kane than Gagner, and his frame looks to me like it can handle more weight than Turris.

But Im still one of those guys who thinks Turris is going to be a star in the league (just not a the Coyotes).

I have seen him play 5 full games (but nice try). I don't see him as more Kane because his skating is not as quick or elusive, and his puck handling is not as good. He handles the puck very well in tight spaces like Gagner, but he also has a great release like Turris. Like I said, he's got a long way to go but has a very high ceiling. He's got great hockey sense (like a gagner) which will be key until/if he beefs up.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

I don't see the Kane comparison. Kane was the best player in the OHL his draft year, and once again, the best draft eligible at the WJC where he took a back seat to no one, even those older. I've heard no one suggest RNH is the best player in the WHL right now.

RNH simply hasn't shown he can post dominant numbers are dominate a league like Kane did. I still love the kid and would love the Sens to land him, but he does not have close to Kanes goal scoring ability (he averaged better than a goal per game), and offensively overall, is a step below (just like everyone else in this draft is).

 

[arsmaster*]

I don't see the Kane comparison. Kane was the best player in the OHL his draft year, and once again, the best draft eligible at the WJC where he took a back seat to no one, even those older. I've heard no one suggest RNH is the best player in the WHL right now.

RNH simply hasn't shown he can post dominant numbers are dominate a league like Kane did. I still love the kid and would love the Sens to land him, but he does not have close to Kanes goal scoring ability (he averaged better than a goal per game), and offensively overall, is a step below (just like everyone else in this draft is).

see post #101.

And with reference to WJHC...it sure looked like Canada could have used a player of Nugent-Hopkins' talent. I believe the lack or "talent" on Team Canada was the reason that team didnt win gold.

What if they did bring him?

Who is the best player in the WHL? Is it Linden Vey??? He didnt make the WJ Team either and leads the league in points.

Players get the blame for WJ collapses, even if they dont make the team....I for one would have loved to have seen RNH on that team, and I said that pre-tourney when more than a few people were calling out the talent levels of team Canada. Say what you want about the players that were there, but I dont think any of them possess the talent the RNH does?

 

[prongertheman9]

I don't see the Kane comparison. Kane was the best player in the OHL his draft year, and once again, the best draft eligible at the WJC where he took a back seat to no one, even those older. I've heard no one suggest RNH is the best player in the WHL right now.

RNH simply hasn't shown he can post dominant numbers are dominate a league like Kane did. I still love the kid and would love the Sens to land him, but he does not have close to Kanes goal scoring ability (he averaged better than a goal per game), and offensively overall, is a step below (just like everyone else in this draft is).

Kane was also a late birthday so it was technically his 18 year old season. He played with 2 future NHLer's on a team that generally likes to inflate their top players stats, while RNH plays with 2 guys that haven't even been drafted by the NHL on a team that has the lowest team GAA in the CHL and will play him very sparingly if they get up by a couple goals in the 3rd.

 

[SDig14]

I have seen him play 5 full games (but nice try). I don't see him as more Kane because his skating is not as quick or elusive, and his puck handling is not as good. He handles the puck very well in tight spaces like Gagner, but he also has a great release like Turris. Like I said, he's got a long way to go but has a very high ceiling. He's got great hockey sense (like a gagner) which will be key until/if he beefs up.

Well, I have seen him 5 times live now in Edmonton and have seen Kane live as well multiple times, and RNH is definitely as good of a skater, is taller, and has better playmaking abilities IMO.

The playmaking ability is a pretty subjective thing and since viewings are limited you or I could have seen him on a day where he was off or on fire.

However, the only real thing that Kane has proven is the goal scoring ability. Although, no one is really comparing RNH to Kane bsed purely on their success, production, or how much they dominated any given league. We are simply saying that they play a very similar style of hockey with the only real difference being that RNH is a centre.

The Gagner comparison is flawed because RNH is such a superior skater to him that basically every aspect of RNH's game is enhanced because he already has elite level NHL speed.

 

[R S]

Well, I have seen him 5 times live now in Edmonton and have seen Kane live as well multiple times, and RNH is definitely as good of a skater, is taller, and has better playmaking abilities IMO.

The playmaking ability is a pretty subjective thing and since viewings are limited you or I could have seen him on a day where he was off or on fire.

However, the only real thing that Kane has proven is the goal scoring ability. Although, no one is really comparing RNH to Kane bsed purely on their success, production, or how much they dominated any given league. We are simply saying that they play a very similar style of hockey with the only real difference being that RNH is a centre.

The Gagner comparison is flawed because RNH is such a superior skater to him that basically every aspect of RNH's game is enhanced because he already has elite level NHL speed.

I normally agree with most things you have to say around here, especially regarding RNH, but you are going quite a bit over the top with this post.

I mean, saying he is already a better playmaker then Kane is? That's a pretty big statement.

I think the potential is definitely their for him to be better in the future, but he definitely isn't the better playmaker as of right now.

And he doesn't have "elite NHL speed". He's a solid skater and is nice and quick. But calling it "NHL elite" is once again a big stretch.

The potential is their for him to be there at one point...but he definitely isn't as of this point in time.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Kane was also a late birthday so it was technically his 18 year old season. He played with 2 future NHLer's on a team that generally likes to inflate their top players stats, while RNH plays with 2 guys that haven't even been drafted by the NHL on a team that has the lowest team GAA in the CHL and will play him very sparingly if they get up by a couple goals in the 3rd.

There were definitely two players on Kane's line with inflated stats, but Kane wasn't one of them. Just looking at NHL production will tell you that. it's also why Kane went #1 overall, and Gagner was regarded as 2nd fiddle (and Kostitsyn wasn't even a 1st rounder). Sure, maybe he would have scored 125-130 points with a few lesser linemates, but he still would have won the scoring race. And Gagner probably would have struggled to be an 80 point guy without Kane.

The late birthday has little to do with it. RNH's relative age is only 4 or 5 months younger.

And the fact remains Kane jumped on the U20 stage and was terrific, while RNH jumped into the WJC training camp for Canada and fell short. For all his offensive potential, he wasn't able to show enough of it against an elite U20 crowd like Canada's camp (no shame there, lots of elite 17-18 year olds have had the same thing happen).

The bottom line is Kane dominated the OHL, both in the scoring race and one the ice for anyone who wanted to watch. He also showed against 19 year olds, he was an elite offensive player. Meanwhile, RNH just scored his 13th goal of the season past the midway point, and while regarded as one of many great offensive players in the WHL, no Team Canada coach was thinking of dropping a Luke Schenn or Ryan Johansen from the team in place of RNH.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

I normally agree with most things you have to say around here, especially regarding RNH, but you are going quite a bit over the top with this post.

I mean, saying he is already a better playmaker then Kane is? That's a pretty big statement.

.

Was he comparing him to Gagner or Kane there?

 

[arsmaster*]

There were definitely two players on Kane's line with inflated stats, but Kane wasn't one of them. Just looking at NHL production will tell you that. it's also why Kane went #1 overall, and Gagner was regarded as 2nd fiddle (and Kostitsyn wasn't even a 1st rounder). Sure, maybe he would have scored 125-130 points with a few lesser linemates, but he still would have won the scoring race. And Gagner probably would have struggled to be an 80 point guy without Kane.

The late birthday has little to do with it. RNH's relative age is only 4 or 5 months younger.

And the fact remains Kane jumped on the U20 stage and was terrific, while RNH jumped into the WJC training camp for Canada and fell short. For all his offensive potential, he wasn't able to show enough of it against an elite U20 crowd like Canada's camp (no shame there, lots of elite 17-18 year olds have had the same thing happen).

The bottom line is Kane dominated the OHL, both in the scoring race and one the ice for anyone who wanted to watch. He also showed against 19 year olds, he was an elite offensive player. Meanwhile, RNH just scored his 13th goal of the season past the midway point, and while regarded as one of many great offensive players in the WHL, no Team Canada coach was thinking of dropping a Luke Schenn or Ryan Johansen from the team in place of RNH.

That was my point.

No you wouldnt leave Brayden Schenn or Ryan Johansen off the team.....but Foligno, Kassian, Ashton, Hamilton.....how many similar guys do you need?

It was probably compounded by Jaden Schwartz getting injured, but its exactly that type of skill that RNH could have brought to the table. It also didnt help that Connolly played poorly or that Leblanc was good in some games, and invisible in others.

Its also hard to judge a team of Canadians (usually a pretty deep group of eligible players) as opposed to Americans (historically not as deep a group).

IM not saying RNH is going to emulate Kane to a tee, but he has elusive skating which is quite similar, they see the game similarily, can set up plays...Kane has more of a penchant for scoring, but they have way more similar characteristics than Gagner and RNH.

 

[R S]

Was he comparing him to Gagner or Kane there?

Yeah, maybe. If so, it was my bad.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

That was my point.

No you wouldnt leave Brayden Schenn or Ryan Johansen off the team.....but Foligno, Kassian, Ashton, Hamilton.....how many similar guys do you need?

It was probably compounded by Jaden Schwartz getting injured, but its exactly that type of skill that RNH could have brought to the table. It also didnt help that Connolly played poorly or that Leblanc was good in some games, and invisible in others.

Its also hard to judge a team of Canadians (usually a pretty deep group of eligible players) as opposed to Americans (historically not as deep a group).

IM not saying RNH is going to emulate Kane to a tee, but he has elusive skating which is quite similar, they see the game similarily, can set up plays...Kane has more of a penchant for scoring, but they have way more similar characteristics than Gagner and RNH.

I'm not sure I understand the WJC angle here. I simply don't see how RNH would have made a difference in the WJC. The vast majority of the forwards were as prolific scorers as RNH is in the WHL (and isn't a goal scorer anyway) and his lack of impact at camp showed he still has a way to go to figure out to adapt his game to elite 19 year olds of the world. Let's face it - that team was up 3 goals in the 3rd period. Another slight playmaking forward wasn't the missing piece of holding onto the lead. And there were a number of elite small scoring forwards who didn't make the team, so whether it was RNH or Hishon or whomever, I don't really get the point. And if the team had more scoring, and less strength and intensity, one could argue they never get past the U.S. in the semifinal.

 

[HSF]

Couturier can take a seat.