View Single Post
08-24-2012, 09:14 AM
Sore Loser
HF Partner
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,426
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by FlaggerX View Post
It's hard to tell about Hockey's Future's 'scouts'. I'm sure they love the game and watch more games then I do, but some of their picks mystify. Calvert over Atkinson? Okay, neither has a full season so they get a pass. Tynan should be under either, but it's my understanding Tynan has even more speed, maybe even the fastest guy we have, and like Atkinson a scorer and playmaker's touch. He might have more potential, if that's what they're grading for. And it's interesting that they see Savard over Erixon. I haven't seen Erixon, and while i like Savard he needs to improve his defense. If he does that, he'll have a very long NHL career. If not.

They've been wrong so much in the past, it's more of a fun guide to be taken with salt.
As someone who is a "scout" myself (I actually use that term loosely, as it's more a recreation than anything), I can see where they are coming from, to an extent.

I certainly wouldn't place Calvert's upside ahead of Atkinson, and their grading system is exactly the reason Atkinson should be higher than Calvert on the list. I think Atkinson has second line potential, whereas Calvert looks like a safe bet to play on our third line in a year or two. So, while Atkinson certainly has more upside, I actually think Calvert at this point is a safer bet for the NHL. Yes, I said it ... reason being, if Atkinson doesn't become a scoring forward for us, I don't think he has the tangible assets to play another role - Calvert, however, has proved above average two-way play at every level, and bases his game primarily off of effort and compete. Not to say Atkinson doesn't have effort or show up to compete, just that Calvert's game will allow him a depth role.

As for Erixon vs. Savard, I think the upside is similar. The people thinking Erixon is going to be a top pairing player for us are going to be a little bit disappointed, I'm afraid. I would put both he and Savard as potential second pairing guys with powerplay skill, but I don't think either of them will be that 25+ minute defenseman for us. That's why we needed Ryan Murray at the draft. You have guys like Erixon, Savard, and Moore already in the system, and a guy like Murray could be the anchor that allows them to all play their risky styles. I think if you took a poll of 100 scouts, it would be fairly close to 50/50 between Erixon and Savard. They simply chose Savard for their list.

Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote