Would Mike Ricci be considered a bust in today's NHL?

[agentblack]

Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[Michael Farkas]

Well, the NHL doesn't dish out the label of "bust" to anyone...so I don't really get the question.

If you're asking if some of the NHL '18 players on the main board might consider him a bust...then sure...probably...Auston Matthews could not score for a week and a half and be considered a bust over there though...attention span of...uhh...sorry, got a new snapchat...but yeah I actually think the Colts become relevant if Andrew Luck is even close to 100%...

 

[GlitchMarner]

Maybe... but he wasn't a top three pick and it's not like there are no longer top picks who don't pan out (Yakupov says hi).

Is Jordan Staal really better than Ricci?

There were some players taken top five in the draft in the 1990s that didn't become stars but became solid NHL'ers (Primeau, Ricci, Bonk, Legwand - maybe throw Chris Gratton and Rob Niedermayer in there as well).

 

[13 others]

Well, the NHL doesn't dish out the label of "bust" to anyone...so I don't really get the question.

If you're asking if some of the NHL '18 players on the main board might consider him a bust...then sure...probably...Auston Matthews could not score for a week and a half and be considered a bust over there though...attention span of...uhh...sorry, got a new snapchat...but yeah I actually think the Colts become relevant if Andrew Luck is even close to 100%...

That's not what he asked and you know it. Don't be obtuse.

 

[agentblack]

I m not aware of what expectations PHI had for him or what he was supposed to be , but id have to think if say Brady Tkachuk turned into a very fine 3rd line LW over the next 5 years thats prob not what OTT or their fans had in mind when they picked him.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

Is this a thinly veiled Sam Bennett thread?

 

[Doctor No]

That's not what he asked and you know it. Don't be obtuse.

I don't know what he's asking, either - maybe you could explain it to us.

Or maybe threads should be started with more information than "Thoughts?".

 

[Laphroaig]

Mike Ricci was far from a bust playing 1099 games and racking up 605 points. He could, however, be considered an unfortunate draft pick being taken one slot ahead of Jaromir Jagr.

Ricci was one of those guys like Dan Cleary who were being talked up two and three years before they were draft eligible but who never achieved the heights projected for them in their mid teens.

 

[Big Phil]

Would he be a "bust" today? I am assuming because of social media explosions since 1990 when Ricci was drafted. I'll start by saying I don't think his career as it was would be considered a "bust", but there is no denying that Ricci didn't quite live up to the expectations that people had of him going into 1990. He developed into a fine, serviceable player though who contributed to a Cup and had a decent career himself.

Would you have assumed he could be a future HHOFer back in 1990? Oh yeah, for sure. 1990 was a pretty top heavy draft. But then again, he's miles better than Patrick Stefan or Daigle or Yakupov and he's even better than someone like Erik Johnson.

But since we lack patience in 2018 compared to 1990, then yeah, there would be complaints about him left, right and centre.

 

[frontsfan2005]

As he did play 1099 games, it's hard to call Ricci a bust.

He was a 20 goal scorer as a 19 year old rookie and peaked at 30 goals when he was 22 in 93-94. Then he dropped to six in 95-96 at the age of 24, followed by 13 in 96-97 and nine in 97-98. Did he suffer an injury? He rebounded from 1999-2001 with two twenty goal seasons and 19 goals in the other.

His playoff numbers with the Avs in 95-96 (6G-17 PTS in 22 games) were much better than his reg. season numbers (6G-27 PTS in 62 games), helping them win the Cup. He potted five goals in 12 playoff games with the Sharks in 99-00, and had a couple of runs just under a PPG with them (5PTS in 6 games in 98-99 and 10PTS in 12 games in 01-02).

I don't think he's a bust, but I don't think he hit the expectations, at least offensively, that people had for him, especially after his breakout season in 92-93 with 78 points in 77 games when he was 21 years old.

 

[Iceman]

Is this a thinly veiled Sam Bennett thread?

You should be happy if Bennett becomes a 3rd of the player Mike Ricci was.

 

[VanIslander]

Ryan Kesler is the nearest equivalent in terms of skillset and performances from a 1st rounder.

Is Kesler a bust?

(Note: If Ryan had played in Pittsburgh, there would be an equivalent role, as Mike went to Colorado and played behind Sakic and Forsberg and so transformed his game into an elite 3rd line pivot role, with a lot of checking responsibilities. Ryan in contrast has been a 2nd liner able to concentrate on offense as much as defense. The team's needs dictated their roles and both have done excellently.)

 

[Plural]

Mike Ricci was far from a bust playing 1099 games and racking up 605 points. He could, however, be considered an unfortunate draft pick being taken one slot ahead of Jaromir Jagr.

Ricci was one of those guys like Dan Cleary who were being talked up two and three years before they were draft eligible but who never achieved the heights projected for them in their mid teens.

Wasn't Jagr basically unanimously considered as the best prospect of the draft but because he had been clear that he wouldn't come over for anyone else than Lemieux he dropped to Pens pick?

 

[Rebels57]

@Captain Dave Poulin

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Wasn't Jagr basically unanimously considered as the best prospect of the draft but because he had been clear that he wouldn't come over for anyone else than Lemieux he dropped to Pens pick?

I think that's mostly apocryphal - hindsight that has been taken as truth. At the time (based on The Hockey News Draft Preview) it was really a toss-up based on what you were looking for. Jagr was certainly highly regarded, and the hang-up was him coming over, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion that he was head and shoulders above the other four.

THN compared Ricci to Bobby Clarke, so I was overjoyed with the pick, and crushed when he was included in the Lindros trade. I can't see why anyone would say he was a "bust" - if anything, he was probably underrated.

 

[tony d]

Nope, he had quite a good career. Was one of the better 3rd line centres of the 90's.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Ryan Kesler is the nearest equivalent in terms of skillset and performances from a 1st rounder.

Is Kesler a bust?

(Note: If Ryan had played in Pittsburgh, there would be an equivalent role, as Mike went to Colorado and played behind Sakic and Forsberg and so transformed his game into an elite 3rd line pivot role, with a lot of checking responsibilities. Ryan in contrast has been a 2nd liner able to concentrate on offense as much as defense. The team's needs dictated their roles and both have done excellently.)

well, kesler was picked late in the first round. if it had been 1990, when ricci was drafted, the kesler pick would have been in the 2nd round. in fact, at the exact same position in the 1990 draft (#23), vancouver took jiri slegr with its third pick.

ricci, otoh, was rated number one for a good length of time in his 17 year and went 4th overall. he was projected to be a franchise player. i remember reading back in the day a scout saying about the weak 1989 draft: “if they were available, mike ricci would be the first overall pick and lindros [then 16 years old] would go second.” (of course, i don’t think he thought fedorov or bure were coming over, and i’m sure he didn’t know about lidstrom.)

no, ricci wasn’t a bust by any stretch. but he certainly fell shorter of expectations (low end of projections being 1980s ron francis, ceiling being clarke), than kesler, who in fact dramatically exceeded expectations by turning himself into a 75 point scorer one year and 40 goal scorer in another year. when he was drafted, he had no shot to speak of. it couldn’t break a pane of glass, as they say. with incredible hard work, he became a really good shooter, if given enough time and space. and peak kesler had the wheels, strength, and smarts to buy himself that space.

kes was projected as a very good third line center. i don’t think anyone expected a selke, two runners up, and two more nominations, but i’d say we expected his high end to be a rich man’s jay beagle—more speed, maybe a bit more offense, and an accelerated career arc.

i don’t like the ricci/kes comparison. stylistically, ricci was a brainier player, much more of a playmaker on the offensive end, and a more patient, positional defender. he was a slow guy who slowed the game down to his speed. kes was a skater first and foremost, which is why he is useless now. very limited offensive vision and at his best when he just puts his head down and flies down the ice in a solo effort and beats the goalie clean with that wrist shot that took forever to wind up and every person in the building knew was coming. defensively, he was an unbelievable man on man defender. he was smart defensively, don’t get me wrong, but he was more a zetterberg, not a datsyuk, if you know what i mean.

possibly partially due to circumstance as you say (sakic, forsberg), ricci also never combined his decent offensive peak with his excellent defensive play. but i tend to also think the later san jose ricci that centered nik sundstrom and scott thornton was peak defensive ricci. with kesler, those peaks overlapped and he picked up a legit smattering of hart votes in his most visible year (finishing 8th, begind daniel but ahead of both henrik and luongo).

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

actually in terms of pre-draft hype, falling late in his draft year, and what he turned into in the league, how about sean couturier?

you’d have to flip the career trajectory though.

and to answer the question of the thread, no i don’t think anyone considers couturier a bust.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i do want to pour one out for that excellent thornton - ricci - sundstrom line, though.

three very high picks (3rd, 4th, 8th) that each found a very surprising second career as one of the league's best third lines. surprising because ricci was pegged to be a star and even as late as the late 90s should have been a good two-way second line center, sundstrom because he was still young enough and seemed to have enough upside to be a kapanen-level defensively responsible top six winger, and thornton for the opposite reason: we thought he'd long since busted, or at least ceilinged as a fourth line plug. in that line's two years together, thornton scored 19 and 26 goals.

 

[Merya]

Mike Ricci was far from a bust playing 1099 games and racking up 605 points. He could, however, be considered an unfortunate draft pick being taken one slot ahead of Jaromir Jagr.

When Jagr was drafted, there were still anomalous picks for Eastern Europe. Not so much perhaps for Chechoslovakia as for Russians, but I believe it still mattered especially for the dinosaurs who ultimately have the say.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

When Jagr was drafted, there were still anomalous picks for Eastern Europe. Not so much perhaps for Chechoslovakia as for Russians, but I believe it still mattered especially for the dinosaurs who ultimately have the say.

It absolutely played a factor in that draft, no question about it. I just think it's important for those of us who were alive and old enough then to remind people who weren't around that Jagr wasn't necessarily a completely "known" quantity heading into the draft, and was by no means some sort of consensus "best player available" who was only passed over because of the uncertainty of him coming to North America - that just wasn't the case.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

He was still a hell of a lot better than Evander Kane in terms of offense. But he's hard to say because he did contribute and play the best he could, but I think the problem was he could easily be outplayed against superstars.

 

[jj cale]

Wasn't Jagr basically unanimously considered as the best prospect of the draft but because he had been clear that he wouldn't come over for anyone else than Lemieux he dropped to Pens pick?

Don't think so, there were a couple of teams i think who felt he was the best player in the draft but from what i remember the guys with the consensus top billing were Nolan and Nedved with nolan getting the billing of most n.h.l ready best potential star power forward and Nedved considered to have the best offensive ceiling and most skilled. At least that was how the Hockey News draft issue that year told it.

It's funny how it worked out because in that issue it said bobby Clarke was one of the few guys who felt Jagr was the best player in the draft, yet they ended up taking Ricci!! I guess he was convinced otherwise by his scouts come draft day.

lol, I wonder if those guys got fired soon after Jagr started showing what he was about that very next season. Can't see Bobby clobber taking that gigantic mistake very well.

 

[agentblack]

Is this a thinly veiled Sam Bennett thread?

Well I could see Bennett turning into a very fine middle 6 fwd in some fashion, maybe even a great one but if thats what he ends up being after being taken so high we'd crown him a busty boo wouldnt we?

 

[agentblack]

I don't know what he's asking, either - maybe you could explain it to us.

Or maybe threads should be started with more information than "Thoughts?".

I guess Bust is too strong a word. Disappointment rather, I use bust to click bait tbh