HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Ottawa Senators
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Does Size Matter

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2011, 05:37 PM
  #51
Goat Boy
In support of BMurr.
 
Goat Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedrospecialk View Post
My ex certainly thinks so.
Lol... Hope you realise what this sentence is implying...

Goat Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2011, 05:39 PM
  #52
The Waffler
Can wipe my own ass!
 
The Waffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Grenville
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,390
vCash: 500
Well, you cant build a team full of gritty 2 way players with limited offensive abilities and expect to win a championship. You need a good mix of the big tough guys and the smaller skilled guys.

The gritty guys will keep you in the game, the skilled guys are gonna win you the game.

The Waffler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2011, 06:58 PM
  #53
Berserker*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minister of Offence View Post
He'll just continue to make decisions faster than any one can skate to hit him.

Have you seen the gifs of him dropping players that have tried to clock him anyways? It's jokes. RNH is sturdy as hell.

RNH has been damn impressive. This is a very similar point to the one I made in my last post. A players physical strength and willingness to play physical are what is important, not necessarily their size.

Berserker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2011, 09:40 PM
  #54
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Let's try something different. Let's say we are GMs & we get to re-draft. There are two choices, one is Mark Stone with his attributes & the other choice is between one of Pageau, Prince or Petersson. All three were drafted higher than Stone, all three are better skaters than Stone, I believe & all three may be better stickhandlers or more skilled with the puck. I'm not sure if they also have a better hockey IQ than Mark & none have played in the NHL yet.

Who would you pick for your team right now Stone or one of the other three?

I would pick Stone.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2011, 10:34 PM
  #55
Berserker*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
Let's try something different. Let's say we are GMs & we get to re-draft. There are two choices, one is Mark Stone with his attributes & the other choice is between one of Pageau, Prince or Petersson. All three were drafted higher than Stone, all three are better skaters than Stone, I believe & all three may be better stickhandlers or more skilled with the puck. I'm not sure if they also have a better hockey IQ than Mark & none have played in the NHL yet.

Who would you pick for your team right now Stone or one of the other three?

I would pick Stone.
It's kind of hard to compare those players. Stone would have been a top 15 pick if anyone knew he was going to progress the way he did. IMO Stone is are 2nd best forward prospect only behind Zibanejad -who is still very raw but has tremendous upside. One of the issues we have when evaluating players like Stone is that he is an anomaly. Power forward prospects are , generally speaking, North-South players that tend to lack vision and passing. They are very valuable players and when they are at their best they are like a bull in a china shop. A good power forward is physically imposing and intimidating, they drive the net hard, out muscle players for position or for the puck and tend to create havoc for goal tenders. Stone has that vision and passing that more traditional power forwards lack -to an extent Dziurzynski is very similar-. This makes Stone a very valuable prospect; he is an offensive catalyst rather than just a finisher.

Berserker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 01:16 AM
  #56
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruiser View Post
It's kind of hard to compare those players. Stone would have been a top 15 pick if anyone knew he was going to progress the way he did. IMO Stone is are 2nd best forward prospect only behind Zibanejad -who is still very raw but has tremendous upside. One of the issues we have when evaluating players like Stone is that he is an anomaly. Power forward prospects are , generally speaking, North-South players that tend to lack vision and passing. They are very valuable players and when they are at their best they are like a bull in a china shop. A good power forward is physically imposing and intimidating, they drive the net hard, out muscle players for position or for the puck and tend to create havoc for goal tenders. Stone has that vision and passing that more traditional power forwards lack -to an extent Dziurzynski is very similar-. This makes Stone a very valuable prospect; he is an offensive catalyst rather than just a finisher.
While I agree with all you said I'm not comparing those players. I simply want to know given a choice which player would people pick if they could only pick one. One of the three guys who are highly skilled or the big powerforward who is not as skilled considering what people have said in this thread they think is most important when picking players. Now I just want to add some names to the discussion to see where it goes.

Here's another one where size is less of a factor. Given what we know to date which player would people prefer on their team if they could only have one, Zack Smith or Nikita Filatov? Filatov was a 6th overall pick, excellent speed & I have read with world class skill. Smith was a 3rd rd pick after being passed over in two previous drafts, he is a good but not great skater & I've never seen Zack & world class skill in the same sentence. Keep in mind that Regin or Foligno could play 3rd line centre if Filatov is taken over Smith. Both are playing in the NHL at the moment, one is a top 6 forward the other a bottom 6 forward, which one would you prefer?

I would take Zack Smith.


Last edited by aragorn: 12-01-2011 at 01:26 AM. Reason: FQL corrected me.
aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 01:22 AM
  #57
FolignoQuantumLeap
A mad Mup
 
FolignoQuantumLeap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: A Blue Box
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,653
vCash: 500
Filatov was a 6th overall pick, fyi

FolignoQuantumLeap is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 01:51 AM
  #58
Bueller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
Let's try something different. Let's say we are GMs & we get to re-draft. There are two choices, one is Mark Stone with his attributes & the other choice is between one of Pageau, Prince or Petersson. All three were drafted higher than Stone, all three are better skaters than Stone, I believe & all three may be better stickhandlers or more skilled with the puck. I'm not sure if they also have a better hockey IQ than Mark & none have played in the NHL yet.

Who would you pick for your team right now Stone or one of the other three?

I would pick Stone.
This analysis isn't flawed at all. You would pick Stone because he's the leading scorer in the CHL, not because he's bigger than the other 3.

Here's another one: would you pick Martin St. Louis, or 6'3, 215 lb forward Blair Jones?

Bueller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 01:58 AM
  #59
DylanSensFan
Walk On!
 
DylanSensFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by This View Post
It is not the size of the army, but the fury of the onslaught.
13 assassins, 300, etc etc etc.

DylanSensFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 07:22 AM
  #60
nanuuq
HFBoards Sponsor
 
nanuuq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ottawa
Country: Estonia
Posts: 4,291
vCash: 500
Chara agrees
Attached Images
File Type: jpg sizematters2zp.jpg‎ (49.7 KB, 2 views)

__________________
Hrundi Bakshi (Peter Sellers) in the movie The PartyWisdom is the province of the aged, BUT the heart of a child is pure!!
nanuuq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 11:35 AM
  #61
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bueller View Post
This analysis isn't flawed at all. You would pick Stone because he's the leading scorer in the CHL, not because he's bigger than the other 3.

Here's another one: would you pick Martin St. Louis, or 6'3, 215 lb forward Blair Jones?
Eric Fehr had over 100 pts in a season in junior & has been a 3rd line forward at best in the NHL. There is no guarantee that Stone will be a top 6 forward at the NHL level, we all like him now because he continues to score at the junior level & has been picked to the WJC. The difference between Stone versus Prince, Pageau or Petersson IMO is that they are all still unknown as to how good any of them will be at the NHL level, we already know how good St Louis is.

I would pick Stone because he is bigger than the other three because if he doesn't work out as a top 6 forward I think he can play on the bottom 6. To me he is the safer pick because of his size & rather than take a chance on picking a guy who may not make the NHL I would take the safer pick. All of them can score, the other three have more skill but Stone with his size has more options of where he can play. That's my point.

The title of the post is "Does Size Matter" & most have indicated that it isn't that great a factor. People have said that hockey IQ, skating, skill & other variables are more important. I'm putting that to the test, since Prince, Pageau & Petersson have all been reported here as being highly skilled, great skaters & playmakers while issues remain around Stone's skating. The only reason Stone is in the discussion with these three is because he continues to score, if that goes dry he becomes a different player.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 11:46 AM
  #62
Minister of Offence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
Let's try something different. Let's say we are GMs & we get to re-draft. There are two choices, one is Mark Stone with his attributes & the other choice is between one of Pageau, Prince or Petersson. All three were drafted higher than Stone, all three are better skaters than Stone, I believe & all three may be better stickhandlers or more skilled with the puck. I'm not sure if they also have a better hockey IQ than Mark & none have played in the NHL yet.

Who would you pick for your team right now Stone or one of the other three?

I would pick Stone.
Flawed example...Stone was likely a 2nd rounder and maybe even a 1st had there been no concussion, other injury, and being buried on Brandon in his 2nd year.

Stone's not a better prospect then these guys because of his size.

Minister of Offence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 11:54 AM
  #63
Minister of Offence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
While I agree with all you said I'm not comparing those players. I simply want to know given a choice which player would people pick if they could only pick one. One of the three guys who are highly skilled or the big powerforward who is not as skilled considering what people have said in this thread they think is most important when picking players. Now I just want to add some names to the discussion to see where it goes.

Here's another one where size is less of a factor. Given what we know to date which player would people prefer on their team if they could only have one, Zack Smith or Nikita Filatov? Filatov was a 6th overall pick, excellent speed & I have read with world class skill. Smith was a 3rd rd pick after being passed over in two previous drafts, he is a good but not great skater & I've never seen Zack & world class skill in the same sentence. Keep in mind that Regin or Foligno could play 3rd line centre if Filatov is taken over Smith. Both are playing in the NHL at the moment, one is a top 6 forward the other a bottom 6 forward, which one would you prefer?

I would take Zack Smith.
It's 2003 and you are the NJ Devils with the 17th pick... Zach Parise, Brian Boyle, Anthony Stewart and Mike Richards are the next guys on your list handed to you by your scouts.
-Mike Richards: Meh, feisty kid, but he's gonna get squashed, too small.
-Parise: "Lol guys, can we get him with our 2nd?"
-Brian Boyle: "Hmm, he's cant miss right?
-Anthony Stewart: "Wow he's huge and he doesn't work hard, recipe for success".

What do you do?

Aragorn forcefully rips up the sheet of paper, rips the phone up and deals smallish Scott Neidermayer to the Rangers for who they had selected at #12, the guy you had a sizeable hard-on for, 6'6 230 pound Hugh Jessiman.

You're examples aren't proving anything.

Minister of Offence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 11:56 AM
  #64
ErikKarlsson
The Best (per IOC)
 
ErikKarlsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJam613 View Post
I'm sorry but Karlsson is not 6'0 - 180. I would be surprised if he's bigger than 5'10 - 160.

This is a very recent picture of Karlsson that someone on my facebook took with her daughter.



He's tiny. Pretty much everyone has their size exaggerated on NHL or TSN or w/e.
Yeah as a guy that is that size. Karlsson is CLEARLY more muscular and he isn't even close to 160. just sayin.

ErikKarlsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 02:35 PM
  #65
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minister of Offence View Post
It's 2003 and you are the NJ Devils with the 17th pick... Zach Parise, Brian Boyle, Anthony Stewart and Mike Richards are the next guys on your list handed to you by your scouts.
-Mike Richards: Meh, feisty kid, but he's gonna get squashed, too small.
-Parise: "Lol guys, can we get him with our 2nd?"
-Brian Boyle: "Hmm, he's cant miss right?
-Anthony Stewart: "Wow he's huge and he doesn't work hard, recipe for success".

What do you do?

Aragorn forcefully rips up the sheet of paper, rips the phone up and deals smallish Scott Neidermayer to the Rangers for who they had selected at #12, the guy you had a sizeable hard-on for, 6'6 230 pound Hugh Jessiman.

You're examples aren't proving anything.
I would have taken Mike Richards there, loved the way he played as captain of the WJC & I like the way he plays the game. Parise may be the sexy pick or the best prospect but I would have taken Richards. It's not always about size you know.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 02:46 PM
  #66
Minister of Offence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn View Post
I would have taken Mike Richards there, loved the way he played as captain of the WJC & I like the way he plays the game. Parise may be the sexy pick or the best prospect but I would have taken Richards. It's not always about size you know.
You wouldn't have had the luxury of taking Richards after he played in the WJC. He was drafted before that....you may have taken Boyle afterall

Minister of Offence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 02:52 PM
  #67
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minister of Offence View Post
Flawed example...Stone was likely a 2nd rounder and maybe even a 1st had there been no concussion, other injury, and being buried on Brandon in his 2nd year.

Stone's not a better prospect then these guys because of his size.
You think he would have gone 1st or 2nd rd & dropped to the 6th rd because of injury, concussion or buried in Brandon. That's a hell of a drop 4 rds. I think every scout knows where Brandon is, I think he was a guy who many thought maybe got most of his points from his line mates Glennie & I forget the other guy. I had never heard of Stone myself but after drafting him I liked what I read of him. At the time I thought if he could make the NHL he was perfect for a 3rd or 4th line role not knowing he could score.

I don't understand why is it not a good example? He's still a prospect, the jury is still out whether he will make the NHL, sure it looks great now because of what he is doing in junior but there are still no guarantees he can do it in the NHL. Didn't it take him a while to score during the rookie tournament? Correct me if I'm wrong but the other three are all considered to be better skilled players than Stone so if the draft was held tomorrow would you take one of the skilled guys or the bigger player who is scoring in junior? I explained my reasons I think he is a safer pick.

It doesn't mean that I am right, I acknowledge that. If I was Edmonton last yr I would have taken Larsson over RNH. While RNH is making all kinds of headlines with his play & he's been great no question, I think Larsson is & will also be a pretty good player. RNH might be the better of the two, different positions hard to guage & that remains to be seen but having Larsson isn't so bad either.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 02:59 PM
  #68
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minister of Offence View Post
You wouldn't have had the luxury of taking Richards after he played in the WJC. He was drafted before that....you may have taken Boyle afterall
Sorry your right, but I'm from the Kitchener - Waterloo region originally & have family still down there, I go down often & my brother-in-law is somewhat involved with the Rangers through a children's agency that does things with the Rangers & gets free tickets for their kids regularly. He used to brag about Richards all the time & Landeskog over the last few yrs. So I started reading about him, watching the odd game on TV & caught him at a 67s game once. I like the way he plays, I like the way Landeskog plays too. I might have taken him over RNH too. I already had my mind made up at that point about Richards but was unsure if Ottawa would be in a position to draft him.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 03:01 PM
  #69
Minister of Offence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23,466
vCash: 500
You picked a guy at ranked in the 50s at midterm and compared him to Pageau who wasn't even ranked.

It's not hard to drop a lot as a player in the 2nd round when you have those factors working against you. Especially when the times they do see you, you have skating issues.

If you're a 1st round prospect and get hurt...like a mid 1st rounder, you may drop to the 2nd or mid 2nd if you're out for extended time and buried...or you may not drop much because everyone knows about you.

But if you're a 2nd or 3rd rounder you can drop quite a bit if you miss extended time.

All I'm saying is of course size matters, but the biggest factor in making it nowadays is actually combination of things....and the X-factor is almost always hockey sense. Big, fast player A has 4th line upside because he has no IQ, big fast player B has 2nd line upside because he's smart.

Corey Locke had little chance because his skating sucked. JG Pageau has better skating and is very smart, he may have a chance, and a chance at top 6.

Big enough + bad skater + great IQ = Good prospect

Too small + Solid skater + great IQ = Good prospect

You need to have certain combinations of qualities to be a prospect, there are many different factors that go into the evaluation. Hockey sense is the one you can't train...and it's the one that lifts players or makes them nothing.

Magnus Paajarvi's upside was overrated big time because he's a big body that can skate real fast.....the guy has no hockey sense, so he isn't what some thought he would be given his physical talents.

Minister of Offence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 03:38 PM
  #70
aragorn
YES WE CAN
 
aragorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Azores
Posts: 11,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minister of Offence View Post
You picked a guy at ranked in the 50s at midterm and compared him to Pageau who wasn't even ranked.

It's not hard to drop a lot as a player in the 2nd round when you have those factors working against you. Especially when the times they do see you, you have skating issues.

If you're a 1st round prospect and get hurt...like a mid 1st rounder, you may drop to the 2nd or mid 2nd if you're out for extended time and buried...or you may not drop much because everyone knows about you.

But if you're a 2nd or 3rd rounder you can drop quite a bit if you miss extended time.

All I'm saying is of course size matters, but the biggest factor in making it nowadays is actually combination of things....and the X-factor is almost always hockey sense. Big, fast player A has 4th line upside because he has no IQ, big fast player B has 2nd line upside because he's smart.

Corey Locke had little chance because his skating sucked. JG Pageau has better skating and is very smart, he may have a chance, and a chance at top 6.

Big enough + bad skater + great IQ = Good prospect

Too small + Solid skater + great IQ = Good prospect

You need to have certain combinations of qualities to be a prospect, there are many different factors that go into the evaluation. Hockey sense is the one you can't train...and it's the one that lifts players or makes them nothing.

Magnus Paajarvi's upside was overrated big time because he's a big body that can skate real fast.....the guy has no hockey sense, so he isn't what some thought he would be given his physical talents.
To be fair I also included Prince & Petersson. You know what hasn't been mentioned yet is leadership & character two things that scouts also think is very important. One of the things I like a lot about some of our prospects is that they are captains of their teams as both Pageau & Stone are. Fascinating discussion, too bad some people get so upset over comments on a hockey board like what we say actually matters or will happen but all in all very interesting. Hasn't changed my mind & it's likely hasn't changed anyone else's mind, I'll still take Stone.

aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2011, 03:39 PM
  #71
koreaboy
Registered User
 
koreaboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikKarlsson View Post
Yeah as a guy that is that size. Karlsson is CLEARLY more muscular and he isn't even close to 160. just sayin.
i was here and got my son a signed stick. i was really surprised to see how tall he was. but he sure wasnt thick. a very lean guy. and he shoulda put his tooth in. he kinda looked like a hillbilly.

koreaboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.