Obviously the scouting consencious last draft was that Kadri was clearly the better player. And I would clearly agree with this having seen them both play a few times the last couple of years.
But I read an article recently that seemed to favour Holland.
Now this isnt in any way trying to diss the writer, as everyone has their own opinion, but I just dont get it.
Just like to get some more opinions on this. I just cant see how anyone that has seen them play can say Holland is better.
I watched about 3 games in of the London-Guelph playoff series, and Kadri was much better. However, I'm pretty sure that Kadri was on the ice more.
From Guelph I liked Latta and Beck just as much as Holland, they were playing at around the same level. Kadri was playing on a whole other level in that series.
Obviously the scouting consencious last draft was that Kadri was clearly the better player. And I would clearly agree with this having seen them both play a few times the last couple of years.
But I read an article recently that seemed to favour Holland.
Now this isnt in any way trying to diss the writer, as everyone has their own opinion, but I just dont get it.
Just like to get some more opinions on this. I just cant see how anyone that has seen them play can say Holland is better.
Any chance you you can link the article, so that Anaheim fans can keep tabs on our prospect?
Holland has the world of talent unfortunately he has an on-off switch and cruise control. When the switch isn't set to "off" it will be on cruise control. Once in a while the switch gets accidentally bumped will be in the "on" position for a few shifts then it's back to normal.
It's a hockey pool website, but the article seems somewhat credible (doesn't seem to be blowing steam out of his ass for the sake of it). Let the **** flinging begin.
BTW, it seems to discredit Kadri more than anything.
It's a hockey pool website, but the article seems somewhat credible (doesn't seem to be blowing steam out of his ass for the sake of it). Let the **** flinging begin.
BTW, it seems to discredit Kadri more than anything.
Basically this guy likes Holland better then Kadri because he doesn't like Kadri or Brian Burke.
All he says about Holland is his stats and that he is inconsistent.
BTW pointing out he and his brother have liked a bunch of guys as stars before they were drafted doesn't impress me as most of them were can't miss with a couple of number one picks in there.
Basically this guy likes Holland better then Kadri because he doesn't like Kadri or Brian Burke.
All he says about Holland is his stats and that he is inconsistent.
BTW pointing out he and his brother have liked a bunch of guys as stars before they were drafted doesn't impress me as most of them were can't miss with a couple of number one picks in there.
I'm not say the guy is right or wrong, and personally don't care. I just stated the article is an interesting read, but is the option of a single person. Take it for what you will.
It's a hockey pool website, but the article seems somewhat credible (doesn't seem to be blowing steam out of his ass for the sake of it). Let the **** flinging begin.
BTW, it seems to discredit Kadri more than anything.
He could have saved a ton of space and just said that he thinks Holland's game translates better to the NHL than does Kadri's. It's a legit opinion. We'll have to wait and see. That said, if someone in my keeper pool offers me Kadri for Holland I take it and run.
I'm not say the guy is right or wrong, and personally don't care. I just stated the article is an interesting read, but is the option of a single person. Take it for what you will.
I'm not blaming you but when the guy spends more time bashing the Leafs and Burke then he does on explaining why Holland is better it hurts his credibility.
When they played one another in the first round Holland was the best player on the ice for either side by a fairly significant margin in games three and five in London IMO. He was the most dangerous every time he touched the puck and didn't have the luxury of not really playing in a system like Kadri. Kadri was the best the rest of the series and Holland didn't really show up a couple of games. They both could be very good NHL players, it wouldn't surprise me to see either be better than the other. Holland isn't consistently flashy like Kadri but he can dangle when he wants to, has good size and skills.
Holland has the world of talent unfortunately he has an on-off switch and cruise control. When the switch isn't set to "off" it will be on cruise control. Once in a while the switch gets accidentally bumped will be in the "on" position for a few shifts then it's back to normal.
edit: to clarify, I'm not laughing because I disagree -- I'm laughing because I find it hilarious how he felt compelled to point out an Olympic gold medalist is better than a 19 year old prospect who has yet to crack an NHL line-up. Not to mention the person he was quoting was referring to Holland and not Kadri.
Last edited by KesselySnipes: 04-20-2010 at 02:47 PM.
Obviously the scouting consencious last draft was that Kadri was clearly the better player. And I would clearly agree with this having seen them both play a few times the last couple of years.
But I read an article recently that seemed to favour Holland.
Now this isnt in any way trying to diss the writer, as everyone has their own opinion, but I just dont get it.
Just like to get some more opinions on this. I just cant see how anyone that has seen them play can say Holland is better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobermay
I watched about 3 games in of the London-Guelph playoff series, and Kadri was much better. However, I'm pretty sure that Kadri was on the ice more.
From Guelph I liked Latta and Beck just as much as Holland, they were playing at around the same level. Kadri was playing on a whole other level in that series.
Scouting is not about judging how good a player is now. It's about judging how good the player will be in five or 10 years.
The opinion expressed in the article is that Holland -- despite being drafted below Kadri and being ranked well below Kadri on the site's prospects list -- will be a better NHL player than Kadri.
Last edited by Ryan Van Horne: 04-20-2010 at 09:12 PM.
Basically this guy likes Holland better then Kadri because he doesn't like Kadri or Brian Burke.
All he says about Holland is his stats and that he is inconsistent.
BTW pointing out he and his brother have liked a bunch of guys as stars before they were drafted doesn't impress me as most of them were can't miss with a couple of number one picks in there.
It's the brother who likes Holland better and the author is sharing that opinion. FWIW, he knows Kadri, too, and likes him. He just doesn't think he'll be a better NHLer than Holland.
As for Burke, the brother expresses no opinion of him. That opinion is the author's and the comments he makes don't reflect a dislike of Burke, they question his wisdom -- specifically the Phil Kessel trade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick
I have a brother who is 11 years old who predicted the top-8 from last years draft. I think the writer has just as much credibility as my brother
That wasn't an interested in read at all. The guys talks about how he has a brother who "recommended" names like Rick Nash, Corey Perry, Logan Couture, Steve Mason, Jordan Staal, Jeff Carter and Bobby Ryan before they were even drafted. Then he goes on to say his brother (the "super scout") thinks Kadri is a "tweener" who would have been a good 2nd round pick. He also throws a jab at Burke for the Kessel trade,
The only thing that seems to make sense is the end of the article where he recommends not selling Holland low or buying Kadri high in fantasy hockey GM games. I guess that's why he plays in a fantasy world and the GMs make the educated executive decisions.
Bravo Ryan Van Horne, Bravo
The brother recommended these guys as solid NHL players well before they were drafted by the NHL and long before most people on this board heard of them -- some as young as 15. That means he's pretty good at predicting what kind of player will make it in the NHL and who won't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grabo84
I laughed that this guys "super scout" only has one criticism of Kadri - that he needs more "jam". What an idiotic article.
Other criticisms: Not a great finisher -- especially for a No. 7 pick.
Not physical enough, not good enough defensively, and lacks the start-up speed what you'd want in a small player who needs to make it as a top-six scorer.
To his credit, he admits he could be wrong. He knows as well as anyone that it's difficult to project a player's development.
The opinion is meant to challenge the conventional wisdom and make you think.
The gap between the two shouldn't be as great as some say. In one person's view, a person who is plugged in and speaks to scouts, coaches and GMs in the OHL, there is no gap and Holland could possibly be better.
If that opinion scares you or makes you feel uncomfortable as a Leafs fan, then you can take solace in the fact that there are no certainties in predicting the future NHL performance of teenage hockey players. You'll just have to hope that this is one of those cases where he's wrong.
Just be aware though, that he's right a lot more than he's wrong.
Keep your fingers crossed, Leafs nation.
Edit: After checking with the mods and getting the OK, I will disclose that I am the author of the article in question.
Last edited by Ryan Van Horne: 04-21-2010 at 07:09 PM.
Reason: Disclosure
Other criticisms: Not a great finisher -- especially for a No. 7 pick.
Not physical enough, not good enough defensively, and lacks the start-up speed what you'd want in a small player who needs to make it as a top-six scorer.
This part right here is what would make most go "huh". I won't enter this versus debate, as it's all elementary right now (as all of these threads are), but...seriously? Not physical enough? Way to watch, author. Kadri regularly gets penalties for those soft head-hit rules in the OHL...most of us are concerned that at his size, he shouldn't try to be SO physical at the next level. Kid's asking for an injury.
I suppose I shouldn't have to point out his 35 goals for the finishing comment...though I'm also too lazy to check when the article was written. The acceleration bit I'll agree with...always thought so. Good skater, just has to wind it up first.
Other criticisms: Not a great finisher -- especially for a No. 7 pick.
Not physical enough, not good enough defensively, and lacks the start-up speed what you'd want in a small player who needs to make it as a top-six scorer.
To his credit, he admits he could be wrong. He knows as well as anyone that it's difficult to project a player's development.
.
here's the problem "jam" is in no way one of Kadri's problems, the guy is a spark plug
finishing, also not a huge problem... he has trouble with one timers, but other than that, he knows how to score goals... and in any case, is role is that of a playmaker. Defensively speaking, many offensive players neglect that aspect of their game... Kadri will be the first one back in his zone, so he respects that he needs to defend, even if he's not great at it. Speed... guy's got tons of speed.
Last edited by Blind Gardien: 04-21-2010 at 09:54 AM.
Reason: personal info
I like Holland, he's a nice guy and he does really seem to enjoy playing hockey but when he gets on the ice he goes on cruise control as someone else said and just doesn't give it his all every shift. The kid is very talented, if he could get that switch permanently set to on I think he could be a great NHL player.
I dissagree with the opinion stated in the article but I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I've seen Kadri many times and have gotten to see Holland a good share as well, including several live viewings of each and from what I've seen, I just don't agree.
Not sure why some people are getting defensive, the guy in the article has an opinion that a lot of us don't really agree with, that creates discussion. I'm just not feelin' the need to hate just because this guy has an opinion that differs from mine.
I suppose I shouldn't have to point out his 35 goals for the finishing comment...though I'm also too lazy to check when the article was written. The acceleration bit I'll agree with...always thought so. Good skater, just has to wind it up first.
I know he scored 35 goals, but for a 19-year-old in his fourth OHL season who gets the kind of ice time he gets, 35 goals for the 7th overall pick in the draft is not very good.
Dave Bolland, by comparison, scored 57 goals in 59 games as a 19-year-old in 2005-06. He was a second-round pick, was a better finisher at 19 and will be a better finisher in the NHL than Kadri -- if his back holds up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by glucker
here's the problem "jam" is in no way one of Kadri's problems, the guy is a spark plug
finishing, also not a huge problem... he has trouble with one timers, but other than that, he knows how to score goals... and in any case, is role is that of a playmaker. Defensively speaking, many offensive players neglect that aspect of their game... Kadri will be the first one back in his zone, so he respects that he needs to defend, even if he's not great at it. Speed... guy's got tons of speed.
You're watching Kadri at the junior level and you don't see deficiencies. Others are watching Kadri at the junior level and imagining his game at the NHL level and they're not predicting the same level of success -- certainly not one commensurate with his draft position.
He'll be given many chances to succeed and I certainly hope he does well. This is not personal or spiteful.
I'm just presenting an opinion, one that I knew would be unpopular, and hoping to get people to think and maybe challenge the conventional wisdom.
Holland is big, skilled, and has excellent hockey sense. He tends to coast -- something I pointed out -- but so did Jeff Carter.
I, and others, have said this many times. You can't compare two teenage players in junior and say the better junior will be the better pro. That's not what scouting is about.
Some scouts (and observers) happen to think Kadri will be a better pro, and they have reasons for that opinion. This is reflected in their draft position, but a year later, other scouts (and observers) are beginning to think that Holland will be the better pro.
For some reason, people think the old opinion is right and aren't willing to entertain new information or new opinions. It amazes me. How anyone can possibly hope to learn anything by being so blinkered?
I know he scored 35 goals, but for a 19-year-old in his fourth OHL season who gets the kind of ice time he gets, 35 goals for the 7th overall pick in the draft is not very good.
Dave Bolland, by comparison, scored 57 goals in 59 games as a 19-year-old in 2005-06. He was a second-round pick, was a better finisher at 19 and will be a better finisher in the NHL than Kadri -- if his back holds up.
To be fair, scoring in the Junior leagues tends to cycle through stretches where everyone scores a lot...some years the leading scorers will get 140+ points, some they will barely scratch 100, like the last couple of years.
I know he scored 35 goals, but for a 19-year-old in his fourth OHL season who gets the kind of ice time he gets, 35 goals for the 7th overall pick in the draft is not very good.
Dave Bolland, by comparison, scored 57 goals in 59 games as a 19-year-old in 2005-06. He was a second-round pick, was a better finisher at 19 and will be a better finisher in the NHL than Kadri -- if his back holds up.
Many people are better finishers than Kadri at the junior level, and always have been. Many will continue to be; being possessed of playmaking talents foremost, that doesn't have me terribly bothered. It's pretty much what was assumed since he was drafted with only 25 goals...his role will not be Phil Kessel's.
Goal scoring ability at the junior level (or even pro, for that matter) doesn't particularly impress me over helpers either. Jeremy Williams is, was and never had a chance to be anything other than an AHLer despite 41 goals in his draft year, 50+ later, and an AHL career made on scoring goals. Among a zillion other examples. Certainly, there are failures with Kadri's pedigree, and successes with Holland's...flip both of those results, and there are loads of examples too. Naming other goal scorers isn't going to change that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scribe
For some reason, people think the old opinion is right and aren't willing to entertain new information or new opinions. It amazes me. How anyone can possibly hope to learn anything by being so blinkered?
I think it's fairly naive to be "amazed" that just because your opinion is new, it is going to be more popular or right than the old one. It's also unfair to assume everyone who responded who wasn't in agreement with your opinion refuses to "entertain new information". Yeah, there were (and will always be, on good old HF) some "NO IM NOT LISTENING LALA" responses, but not agreeing with you doesn't make one blinkered.
Goal scoring ability at the junior level (or even pro, for that matter) doesn't particularly impress me over helpers either. Jeremy Williams is, was and never had a chance to be anything other than an AHLer despite 41 goals in his draft year, 50+ later, and an AHL career made on scoring goals. Among a zillion other examples. Certainly, there are failures with Kadri's pedigree, and successes with Holland's...flip both of those results, and there are loads of examples too. Naming other goal scorers isn't going to change that.
Jeremy Williams had 7 goals in his draft year, and was passed over. He had 41 the next year when the leafs picked him.
I know he scored 35 goals, but for a 19-year-old in his fourth OHL season who gets the kind of ice time he gets, 35 goals for the 7th overall pick in the draft is not very good.
Dave Bolland, by comparison, scored 57 goals in 59 games as a 19-year-old in 2005-06. He was a second-round pick, was a better finisher at 19 and will be a better finisher in the NHL than Kadri -- if his back holds up.
I see you are in Halifax. Do you regularly watch the OHL or just surf through hockey db. My guess is the later.
I would go on and explain the vast differences between the 05/06 Knights and this years team but I doubt it would do any good.
I know he scored 35 goals, but for a 19-year-old in his fourth OHL season who gets the kind of ice time he gets, 35 goals for the 7th overall pick in the draft is not very good.
Dave Bolland, by comparison, scored 57 goals in 59 games as a 19-year-old in 2005-06. He was a second-round pick, was a better finisher at 19 and will be a better finisher in the NHL than Kadri -- if his back holds up.
You're watching Kadri at the junior level and you don't see deficiencies. Others are watching Kadri at the junior level and imagining his game at the NHL level and they're not predicting the same level of success -- certainly not one commensurate with his draft position.
He'll be given many chances to succeed and I certainly hope he does well. This is not personal or spiteful.
I'm just presenting an opinion, one that I knew would be unpopular, and hoping to get people to think and maybe challenge the conventional wisdom.
Holland is big, skilled, and has excellent hockey sense. He tends to coast -- something I pointed out -- but so did Jeff Carter.
I, and others, have said this many times. You can't compare two teenage players in junior and say the better junior will be the better pro. That's not what scouting is about.
Some scouts (and observers) happen to think Kadri will be a better pro, and they have reasons for that opinion. This is reflected in their draft position, but a year later, other scouts (and observers) are beginning to think that Holland will be the better pro.
For some reason, people think the old opinion is right and aren't willing to entertain new information or new opinions. It amazes me. How anyone can possibly hope to learn anything by being so blinkered?
I think this is a reasonably good post, especially the discussion about junior vs. pro. I agree that what most posters on HF fail to understand is the difference between a great junior player and how that relates to being a great pro. I feel most posters go straight to hockey db, look at point production and base their opinion of prospects almost exclusively on that (coupled with draft position).
That being said, i think what most people see when they watch Holland is a guy with a game that appears will translate very well to the NHL. He is big and smart with great hockey sense and has plenty of intangibles. He is inconsistent with effort as many have stated, but that is not unusual for a junior. Above all though, it is the type of game he plays and the ability for that game to translate well to the NHL that has observers believing he could be very good and in the future could make the transition to the NHL without seeing a significant drop in production (given he continues to improve as he matures).
I have been fortunate enough to watch quite a bit of Kadri, and I really like him as a junior player. He is extremely dynamic (much more than Holland IMO), and i think has a very high ceiling. However, while i think he will transition well to the NHL, I think he is more likely than Holland to show an inability to transition his game to the NHL and thus see a sizable drop in production when he hits the NHL. Given the type of game he plays I wouldn't be shocked if his offensive game doesn't transition to the NHL the way some may hope.
I think both are very good prospects, and I also know that comparing prospects is most definitely an inexact science, but I would be very pleased to have either in my system.
Last edited by nbducksfan19: 04-21-2010 at 10:26 PM.
