Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by rt, May 18, 2007.
Rank the two with '07 eligables, until you've ranked both guys.
3. the rest
Kane, Voracek, Turris, JVR
Voracek, Turris, Cherepanov, JVR, Alzner, Gagner
People who have Little at #2 need to give their heads a shake, IMO. Mueller could go 1, but I'd probably go with Kane over him.
Kane is one year (to the week) younger than Little and outscored him by 38 points this season. I know Little is a better two-way player, but why exactly would anyone take Little over Kane? That's just nuts.
Little was a bit of a steal, but he wouldnt go 2nd
Mueller would contend for the #1 spot, at the VERY least. He would very possibly go there. I think I'd take him over anyone in this draft, at least, but it'd be close.
Any of Johnson, Staal, Kessel, Backstrom or Toews would easily go #1 in this draft.
Little is solid in his own end compared to Kane, Kane needs a lot of work on his defensive play. Little has a decent frame, Kane has a small frame, lacks strength. Kane is slicker with the puck, he's really shifty but I'd be concerned about how he handles the pros.
Also London is a high powered offensive team and their top players get a lot of quality ice time. I think people put too much into stats.
But then again, I think this years first round stinks.
For both my teams' needs, I'd take Little first. He's the perfect player for either Atlanta or Vancouver, moreso Atlanta though.
I agree that Little is solid in his own end, but this year's first round doesn't stink to the point that last year's No. 12 pick would be in the top two.
ok. Clearly I don't agree but no biggee. As a London fan I can see why people want Kane, but I think you get more of a safer bet with Little. He doesn't have the offensive skills of Kane but he's still highly skilled with the puck plus he gives you much better two way play and he's got a thicher frame, whereas Kane there has to be concerns for when he hits the AHL in another year. (assuming he's not in the NHL by then)
I'm a little puzzled as to why people think Mueller and Little are better then the top prospects this year. They were ranked 6th and 7th last year in the central scouting rankings in NA. Don't see a big difference this year. Why would Little - who has the late birthday - be ranked ahead of Gagner? Heck Chris Stewart was ranked 8th. Would anyone rank Chris Stewart 8th in this years draft?
Kane/Mueller (Pick 'em)
Maybe I overrate Mueller, but I happen to think he's one of the top prospects in the CHL, so if I were picking 1st and he was back in the draft, then I'd pick him. I would take Little over Gagner cause I think he's a safer bet in the pros. It's not like Little isn't highly skilled, I like his wrist shot and would rather have him then Gagner. I can see why others would take Gagner who's a good setup guy, this is just one persons opinion.
But I think that's the problem with this whole question. Everyone is basing their opinion on what Mueller and Little are today, not what they were on draft day. The question is biased. Everyone's opinion would change if 07 drafties were a year older too. I just can't see how Little would be a highter draftie if he was actually in his draft year compared to the kids this year.
And I still don't think Mueller is number one overall talent (in his draft year!)
Why would you base your opinion on them last year when it's this year? I was thinking the person meant if they somehow rentered the draft but perhaps I understood it wrong. I also don't think Mueller is the number one talent, but he's who I would pick 1st. I think Cherepanov or Kane might be the most talented but I'd rather a safer pick that brings more then just skills. Certainly Mueller is one of the top prospects in the CHL imo. As for Little, I think he would easily be higher in this years draft, since last years draft was stronger top end wise imo.
Hilarious, not one person has made the obvious comparison.
Mueller and Kane have played together (on the same team) 1 time, this years U20s.
G 3 (2 PPG)
G 5 (2 PPG) [Led Team]
SOG 23 [Led Forwards]
S% 21.7 [Led Team]
So let's see, more goals, more assists, more SOG, better Shooting %, a year younger.
Now let's talk about Bryan Little in comparison with Kane. The "knock" on Kane is that he is too small. Don't give me crap about defensive awareness-- neither one of them are going to be PK'ing in the NHL anytime soon.
Pat Kane OHL listing: 5'10" 170lbs
Bryan Little OHL listing: 5'10" 175lbs [When drafted, currently listed at 195]
Now I guess you can talk about intangibles... because every Stat favors Kane (and by quite a bit, btw).
[Yes I am a hawk fan, and one who STRONGLY feels that we should draft Kane not trying to pretend I don't have a dog in the fight...]
well, everyone knows kane is an offensive wizzard, but with mueller you get more then that and sometimes you cant just look at offense. mueller brings a lot more to the table then just offense. its really close between them. personally i would go with kane, but by a very very small margin.
Of course we are comparing them in draft years. The whole trick of the draft is to predict a players future. It's not fair if we already know how Meuller and Little are a year later. This is a draft question. I don't think their draft position changes much if they were eligable for this year.
Mueller is one of the top prospects in the CHL - that's good enough for 8th overall in his draft year. As for Little, good two way player is good enough for 12th overall. Looking at the prospects this year, he'd go in the same place.
That arguement won't stand up in court. Obviously it is know that Little and even Mueller are older, one year removed from their draft year.
I was higher on Little last year and at this moment am higher on Mueller this year but that is on an individual basis only. Honestly it is difficult for me to put Mueller ahead of Little. What is easy is putting them ahead of the 07 class, I have seen their improvement since their draft. The margin is not that great with the top 10. IMO
Well, I don't suppose 18-22 year old guys get a lot of PK time as a sweeping generalization. But I would expect Little to be an everyday PKer when he hits his stride as an NHL regular.
I guess this whole thread is based on speculation anyway. So as long as we're engaging in speculation, I'll say Little would have had around 170 pts this year, if he had played in Kane's spot on London.
I don't mean that as belittling Kane's perfomance in any way. Kane a year older
would probably get 170 pts on that London team too. Maybe even more. I just feel that the stats in the London system are inflated to that large an extent. FWIW.
So you are saying that Kane is going to get 170 points next year?
NO WAY Little gets that many on any team. Some people think the Knights are a point fest. It has a lot to do with the caliber of talent more so then the city they play for.
Again, people say these things as if they were scored in a vaccuum.
Kane led the U18 in points.
Kane was 1 pt behind the leaders in the WJCs (and ahead of Every "big name" forward).
Kane has always put up points in bunches, at every level he has played at.
I'm not trying to belittle Little (pun intended!). But at some point people have to stop dogging this class because last year at this time we were hearing how:
(1) Kessel was a bust
(2) Toews couldn't score
(3) Staal had never shown offensive flair
(4) Backstrom was the man who came out of nowhere and was thus "unproven".
Time and time again it was: there is only one franchise player in this draft, erik johnson. Everyone else has a chance at a good player... blah blah blah.
Now a year later it looks as if all the top 5 are really really good players, Okposo, Mueller and Little look the same...
I'm continually amazed how this is just whitewashed on the net... unless your name is Woodlief or Eklund I guess.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how London looks. Kostitsyn would be gone. Some others might be. Depends on how the kids step up. Depends on where Hunter goes and what direction the team would take if he left. But I am saying that if you airlift Kane 1 year older onto this past season's London team, he would be a better player at 18-19 than he was at 17-18, enough to bump 140-some points up to 170.
The City has nothing to do with it. The style of play that gives a handful of ultra-talented players massive icetime, exceptional PP opportunity, and more green lights than they would get anywhere else certainly plays a part. It's a great opportunity for the star players who get to play there. The Knights *are* a point fest. I'm not exactly knocking that. It has certainly worked. But I don't think it's fair either to overlook the calibre of other players in the OHL. Bryan Little is an excellent player who would have had HUGE numbers if he had been utilised as the go-to guy on that London team. IMHO he actually compares more to Kostitsyn than to anybody else on London. And if Kostitsyn could get 130+ pts with a slow start, then I really don't have any doubt that Little could have significantly exceeded that. 170 does sound reasonable to me.
Separate names with a comma.