...suppose you were a team drafting in the 16-20 range and one of your needs was a big physical tough forward who could change the very essence of your current team which gets abused by teams having these very types of players....what if you asked your scouts--GET ME A LUCIC or a BACKES ...are you then going to wait till the 2nd round just because the majority of the scouting orgs' ranking lists only put those types in round 2 as if they just can't "value" them as much for impact because after all their upside ceiling is not that of a "top line elite scorer" -so they MUST be put only in round two or MAYBE on a few opinions worth "a late first" but certainly NOT in the mid to late teens or early 20's?
CONSIDER if you ased fans of a lot of teams--even ones drafting far later than 16-20 if they would PASS on a LUCIC or a BACKES after the impact these "types" have for BOS and STL --and especially if there own team has nothing like that?
THEY would CRUCIFY their scouting staffs if they bypassed such OPPORTUNITY to risk on some Jr. ostensiuble pipsqueak "scorer" who may never pan out drafted that late in the first round talent ranking ANYWAY (a much longer shot at impacting than a top ten guy) --especially IF such "scoer with upside" FAILS to do in the NHL what he did in jrs. or euroleagues...
CONSIDER : BACKES was ONLY drafted #62 in 2003 (there were comp picks then so he was still 2nd round) and LUCIC went 50th in 2006....we see NHL teams and scouting orgs making the SAME MISTAKES about IMPACT PHYSICAL FORWARDS over and over again...WHY?
CONSIDER THIS YEARS CANDIDATES:
SOME of the REQUIRED check boxes:
. SIZE/STRENGTH
.TOUGHNESS
.WORK ETHIC
. DEFENSIVE RESPONSIBILITY ALREADY or desire to improve it as matures into vet NHL pro
.HITS
.FIGHTING ABILITY/EQUALIZER AGAINST OTHER PHYSICAL TEAMS
. BONUSES: SHOT/SCORING ABILITY to project to 20-30 goals and 50-60 pts
DECENT to GOOD SKATING..
PP or PK useful role;OTHER *
Not all the candidates in the draft of this "type" have all these checkboxes
already--but have most already checked..
SO we consider 3 possibly UNDERVALUED candidates of this type for 2012:
TOM WILSON Plymouth RW 6'4 45GP 8g 17 a 25pts 129 pIM's +21 (b. Mar '94)
---- ISS #36 CRAIG BUTON (Feb 13th) #33; CSS (mid-term) : #33NA skater
BOB MCKENZIE #20...
So the conensus to date on Wilson from the Scouting orgs is seemimgly early 2md round--but MCKENZIE who actually talks to NHL teams own scouting depts seems to project Wilson value much hIGHER at #20? Dos this indicate that SOME NHL teams are finally learning and won't wait too long this time before this rare "type" goes off the board? I guess the others couldn't project him higher because his scoring doesn't look so good (BUT LUCIC in his draft year was not that great a scorer either--but he did improve in jr, the year after his draft)...so maybe actual NHL scouts will give Wilso the same benefit of the development curve? BUT even the scout Mckenzie quotes on his evaluaation notes says Wilsondoesn't have good puck skills and won't put up big numbers-yet NOW they still value the physical presence and his size/speed aspect and good defense!
Now consider case #2: STEFAN MATTEAU 6'1 207 (b. Feb '94) USNDTP 11gP 5g1a 80 PIM's +3 ....MCKENZIE has him at #25; so does the ISS; CSS had him at #13 NA skater so I guess they like him the most....CRAIG BUTTON likes him least--he not in Button's top 60! so hard to get a consensus on him bu again since Mckenzie talks to actual NHl team scouts -he probably goes late first ...SO again VALUE of this type seems to be more desireable than in the BACKES/LUCIC draft years--maybe they HOPE this type can improve scoring as he matures..
FINALLY the most interesting case of all---LUKAS SUTTER (C) 6'1 207...(b. Oct '93)
Saskatoon (WHL) 27g 28 a 56 pts +18 152 pim's so far this year--had 179PIM's for that team last year...so VERY TOUGH ....SUTTER BLOODLINE (son of RICH SUTTER) --so you know the work ethic and character are there.... TERRFIC AT FACEOFFS (a big bonus)....defense-first conciousness ...can fight... good shot...can pK ...virtuall all the check-boxes ticked --except his skating speed -BUT he did work to improve that over last year --and STILL somehow despite all these other glowing areas including he is a centre-he projects only an NHL 3rd line shutdown physical centre BUT with more offense than Matteau or Wilson the 2 physical wingers...despite this--- CSS rates him ONLY #86 NAskater (a late 3rd rounder?)....
BUTTON does not have him in his top 60;nor is he in the ISS top 50;nor is he in Bob Mckenzie's top 40 or honourable mentions list ....YET the logic doesn't hold up ---he has a better shot,hands,hockey sense than the 2 big wingers--matches or eceeds them in physical play and toughness...you add the PK and faceoff roles as well and HOW THE HELL can they allbe missing the mark --he probably skates 100 times nnetter than a michael Handzus and yet that guy pls in the league years and years and probably won't post the offense this kid will ...IT MAKES NO SENSE.... It looks like some team will get a big STEAL by taking him and others willbe kicking themselves for betting they could grab him much later... YOU jst KNOW there willbe so many busts comimg from the first 2 rounds -and you would be CRAZY to bet against this SUTTER and his bloodlines,work ethic,already superior defense,and indicators he does have some scoring ability--PLUS face-offs alone has to be of great VALUE...I just cannot understand why is is not ranked that high ornot even on most 2nd rounds let aloe firsts..
I'd bet a team taking him 16-20 has a better chance of him being a long-term staple on their roster tha a host of MAYBE they will maybe they won't ever will be's likely to be taken in that range...BUT SURELY he is wotth a 50-62 LUCIC/BACKES type selection --at MINIMUM?
Check boxes the bLACKHAWKS might consider:
. Is he tough? YES! Does he hit? Yes! Is he defensively responsible? Yes! CAn he fight and protect? Yes! Can he neutralize Backes? WEll we have no one presntly who can--so hell yes! Can he shoot better than Kane ? A blind man could--so hell yes! CAn he win face-offs so that if Toews is out with injury we have SOME puck possession to start? Yes! Does he have WORK ETHIC instead of the lazy fat cat 'core" that hardly show up for certain games (too many) let alone play 60 minutes when they do show up? He's a SUTTER--of course he will!
So will they draft him in round one? Probably not -after all the "consensus" is that he probably is only a 3rd rounder--so they will think they can get him in round two anyway...Of course SOME team will REALIZE the value far earlier than anyone expected --and reap the rewards when he does hit the NHl and once there will once again prove the value of this type of player...
SO somehow he may not be a consensus first or even second rounder---but If you had to bet on him eventually "making it" and putting money on the majority of first rounders from this "WEAK DRAFT" (per Brian Burke) -I think i'd know where to place my money on... Lots of teams are going to blow this and kick themselves and their scouts all over the place afterwards...He does too many attractive check boxes well not to consider him A LOT HIGHER than current rankings or lack thereof...
Of course if you like passive sissy just ready to be abised "skill guys" in a "weak draft"--by all means GO AHEAD bypass him,and MAKE SOME ONE ELSE's DAY1
You can tell we Blackhawks fans are sick of being abiused and pushed around like Backes and his blues did to our "NO MAS" wimpering team and certain core "starrs" in that 5-1 shellacking they gave us..Maybe if we had a SUTTER in the lineup --they wouldn't be so abusive... Unfortunately we also could use a Wilson and a Matteau but hey we can't get everything you want in one go)...Then agin we ALSO need elite goaltending --so perhaps they will draft Vasilevski or Dansk ---but what's the use if our team is "cowering" ? NAH-we gotta get some Sutter in there and fix this scared bunch of cheque -casher atmosphere and change it to we are mad as hell and we won't take it anymore-we'll give it!
Skimmed through your op, every gm drafts with different player evaluations & team needs.
Many teams trade down (late 1st rounder for 2 high second rounders for example), avoiding the high ceiling/high risk 1st rounders & acquire multiple lower picks. Why draft a small late 1st round bust when you can roll the dice & try for 2 players like Lucic? Or a Backes & the best goalie in the draft.
If you're looking to fill a need "now" make a trade or sign a free agent. You can't fill your team's "today's needs" via the draft, you're filling a need five years from now.
If your need 'now' is for that type of player, you're better off to trade the pick for that type of player if you can.
Drafting for what you need now rarely ever works, since it takes 1-4 years for a player to develop to the NHL on average. What your teams needs are down the road often differs from what they are now.
It's why it's best to draft the BPA and use trade/free agency to fill the holes you need filled. The best teams do this, see Detroit. Much of their team is homegrown, but they use trade or free agency to fill in the pieces. They've also added one additional talent, and that is reviving players once thought to have besically seen their NHL careers die (Cleary and Samuelsson for example).
Power forwardstake about as long as Dmen to devellop, and they are pretty much useless if they don't have a good team around them...
Think about it... Who are the power forwards that come to mind when you hear "power forward"?
Lucic
Backes
Hartnell
JVR
Clowe
Etc...
All on good teams. Rick Nash is a power forward, but he's on a crummy team and he can't do anything himself. He needs good linemates to truly be effective.
Power forwards are complimentary players. Not individual performers. So if you are a good team, and you know it takes a few years for these guys to devellop, then you take a "skill guy" first. It's just how it is.
Power forwardstake about as long as Dmen to devellop, and they are pretty much useless if they don't have a good team around them...
Think about it... Who are the power forwards that come to mind when you hear "power forward"?
Lucic
Backes
Hartnell
JVR
Clowe
Etc...
All on good teams. Rick Nash is a power forward, but he's on a crummy team and he can't do anything himself. He needs good linemates to truly be effective.
Power forwards are complimentary players. Not individual performers. So if you are a good team, and you know it takes a few years for these guys to devellop, then you take a "skill guy" first. It's just how it is.
JVR, powerforward? What? He does not play physical.
JVR, powerforward? What? He does not play physical.
He's a streaky player. When he's on he plays physical, while at other times he's timid. We all know he can be a power forward after watching him in the playoffs, he just needs to be consistent.
He's a streaky player. When he's on he plays physical, while at other times he's timid. We all know he can be a power forward after watching him in the playoffs, he just needs to be consistent.
...suppose you were a team drafting in the 16-20 range and one of your needs was a big physical tough forward who could change the very essence of your current team which gets abused by teams having these very types of players....what if you asked your scouts--GET ME A LUCIC or a BACKES ...are you then going to wait till the 2nd round just because the majority of the scouting orgs' ranking lists only put those types in round 2 as if they just can't "value" them as much for impact because after all their upside ceiling is not that of a "top line elite scorer" -so they MUST be put only in round two or MAYBE on a few opinions worth "a late first" but certainly NOT in the mid to late teens or early 20's?
CONSIDER if you ased fans of a lot of teams--even ones drafting far later than 16-20 if they would PASS on a LUCIC or a BACKES after the impact these "types" have for BOS and STL --and especially if there own team has nothing like that?
THEY would CRUCIFY their scouting staffs if they bypassed such OPPORTUNITY to risk on some Jr. ostensiuble pipsqueak "scorer" who may never pan out drafted that late in the first round talent ranking ANYWAY (a much longer shot at impacting than a top ten guy) --especially IF such "scoer with upside" FAILS to do in the NHL what he did in jrs. or euroleagues...
CONSIDER : BACKES was ONLY drafted #62 in 2003 (there were comp picks then so he was still 2nd round) and LUCIC went 50th in 2006....we see NHL teams and scouting orgs making the SAME MISTAKES about IMPACT PHYSICAL FORWARDS over and over again...WHY?
CONSIDER THIS YEARS CANDIDATES:
SOME of the REQUIRED check boxes:
. SIZE/STRENGTH
.TOUGHNESS
.WORK ETHIC
. DEFENSIVE RESPONSIBILITY ALREADY or desire to improve it as matures into vet NHL pro
.HITS
.FIGHTING ABILITY/EQUALIZER AGAINST OTHER PHYSICAL TEAMS
. BONUSES: SHOT/SCORING ABILITY to project to 20-30 goals and 50-60 pts
DECENT to GOOD SKATING..
PP or PK useful role;OTHER *
Not all the candidates in the draft of this "type" have all these checkboxes
already--but have most already checked..
SO we consider 3 possibly UNDERVALUED candidates of this type for 2012:
TOM WILSON Plymouth RW 6'4 45GP 8g 17 a 25pts 129 pIM's +21 (b. Mar '94)
---- ISS #36 CRAIG BUTON (Feb 13th) #33; CSS (mid-term) : #33NA skater
BOB MCKENZIE #20...
So the conensus to date on Wilson from the Scouting orgs is seemimgly early 2md round--but MCKENZIE who actually talks to NHL teams own scouting depts seems to project Wilson value much hIGHER at #20? Dos this indicate that SOME NHL teams are finally learning and won't wait too long this time before this rare "type" goes off the board? I guess the others couldn't project him higher because his scoring doesn't look so good (BUT LUCIC in his draft year was not that great a scorer either--but he did improve in jr, the year after his draft)...so maybe actual NHL scouts will give Wilso the same benefit of the development curve? BUT even the scout Mckenzie quotes on his evaluaation notes says Wilsondoesn't have good puck skills and won't put up big numbers-yet NOW they still value the physical presence and his size/speed aspect and good defense!
Now consider case #2: STEFAN MATTEAU 6'1 207 (b. Feb '94) USNDTP 11gP 5g1a 80 PIM's +3 ....MCKENZIE has him at #25; so does the ISS; CSS had him at #13 NA skater so I guess they like him the most....CRAIG BUTTON likes him least--he not in Button's top 60! so hard to get a consensus on him bu again since Mckenzie talks to actual NHl team scouts -he probably goes late first ...SO again VALUE of this type seems to be more desireable than in the BACKES/LUCIC draft years--maybe they HOPE this type can improve scoring as he matures..
FINALLY the most interesting case of all---LUKAS SUTTER (C) 6'1 207...(b. Oct '93)
Saskatoon (WHL) 27g 28 a 56 pts +18 152 pim's so far this year--had 179PIM's for that team last year...so VERY TOUGH ....SUTTER BLOODLINE (son of RICH SUTTER) --so you know the work ethic and character are there.... TERRFIC AT FACEOFFS (a big bonus)....defense-first conciousness ...can fight... good shot...can pK ...virtuall all the check-boxes ticked --except his skating speed -BUT he did work to improve that over last year --and STILL somehow despite all these other glowing areas including he is a centre-he projects only an NHL 3rd line shutdown physical centre BUT with more offense than Matteau or Wilson the 2 physical wingers...despite this--- CSS rates him ONLY #86 NAskater (a late 3rd rounder?)....
BUTTON does not have him in his top 60;nor is he in the ISS top 50;nor is he in Bob Mckenzie's top 40 or honourable mentions list ....YET the logic doesn't hold up ---he has a better shot,hands,hockey sense than the 2 big wingers--matches or eceeds them in physical play and toughness...you add the PK and faceoff roles as well and HOW THE HELL can they allbe missing the mark --he probably skates 100 times nnetter than a michael Handzus and yet that guy pls in the league years and years and probably won't post the offense this kid will ...IT MAKES NO SENSE.... It looks like some team will get a big STEAL by taking him and others willbe kicking themselves for betting they could grab him much later... YOU jst KNOW there willbe so many busts comimg from the first 2 rounds -and you would be CRAZY to bet against this SUTTER and his bloodlines,work ethic,already superior defense,and indicators he does have some scoring ability--PLUS face-offs alone has to be of great VALUE...I just cannot understand why is is not ranked that high ornot even on most 2nd rounds let aloe firsts..
I'd bet a team taking him 16-20 has a better chance of him being a long-term staple on their roster tha a host of MAYBE they will maybe they won't ever will be's likely to be taken in that range...BUT SURELY he is wotth a 50-62 LUCIC/BACKES type selection --at MINIMUM?
Check boxes the bLACKHAWKS might consider:
. Is he tough? YES! Does he hit? Yes! Is he defensively responsible? Yes! CAn he fight and protect? Yes! Can he neutralize Backes? WEll we have no one presntly who can--so hell yes! Can he shoot better than Kane ? A blind man could--so hell yes! CAn he win face-offs so that if Toews is out with injury we have SOME puck possession to start? Yes! Does he have WORK ETHIC instead of the lazy fat cat 'core" that hardly show up for certain games (too many) let alone play 60 minutes when they do show up? He's a SUTTER--of course he will!
So will they draft him in round one? Probably not -after all the "consensus" is that he probably is only a 3rd rounder--so they will think they can get him in round two anyway...Of course SOME team will REALIZE the value far earlier than anyone expected --and reap the rewards when he does hit the NHl and once there will once again prove the value of this type of player...
SO somehow he may not be a consensus first or even second rounder---but If you had to bet on him eventually "making it" and putting money on the majority of first rounders from this "WEAK DRAFT" (per Brian Burke) -I think i'd know where to place my money on... Lots of teams are going to blow this and kick themselves and their scouts all over the place afterwards...He does too many attractive check boxes well not to consider him A LOT HIGHER than current rankings or lack thereof...
Of course if you like passive sissy just ready to be abised "skill guys" in a "weak draft"--by all means GO AHEAD bypass him,and MAKE SOME ONE ELSE's DAY1
You can tell we Blackhawks fans are sick of being abiused and pushed around like Backes and his blues did to our "NO MAS" wimpering team and certain core "starrs" in that 5-1 shellacking they gave us..Maybe if we had a SUTTER in the lineup --they wouldn't be so abusive... Unfortunately we also could use a Wilson and a Matteau but hey we can't get everything you want in one go)...Then agin we ALSO need elite goaltending --so perhaps they will draft Vasilevski or Dansk ---but what's the use if our team is "cowering" ? NAH-we gotta get some Sutter in there and fix this scared bunch of cheque -casher atmosphere and change it to we are mad as hell and we won't take it anymore-we'll give it!
CONSIDER : BACKES was ONLY drafted #62 in 2003 (there were comp picks then so he was still 2nd round) and LUCIC went 50th in 2006....we see NHL teams and scouting orgs making the SAME MISTAKES about IMPACT PHYSICAL FORWARDS over and over again...WHY?
Power forwards tend to take longer to develop, and in part because of this, are generally more difficult to project than scoring forwards.
Of course hindsight is 20/20. Looking back now, Lucic, Backes, and Ryane Clowe (even more overlooked than Lucic and Backes in his draft year), for that matter, would be easy top 10, possibly even easy top 5 picks in most NHL drafts. However, for every Lucic, Backes, and Clowe who are taken too late, there are many more power forward prospects who are taken too early (Dave Steckel, Ben Eager, Hugh Jessiman, Steve Bernier, Anthony Stewart, Brian Boyle, Benoit Pouliot, Ryan O'Marra, Kenndal McArdle, Colton Gillies, Logan McMillan as some more recent examples as well as guys like Brad Church, Jason Weimer, Chad Kilger, many more in the past).
Burke took Biggs at #23 last year. Traded for Ashton this year. Hopefully one of them turns out into a top 6er.
I doubt anybody really thinks Biggs has a decent shot at being a real top six forward, even the Leafs scouts themselves. I mean it could happen, but that's because anything can happen, but it's not like Biggs was an under the radar player last year.
Generally speaking, these guys drop because there's a degree of randomness to the development of Backes and Lucic. Not only do similar physicality-first forwards tend to disappoint when taken in the first round (Eager and Gillies are two of the more obvious examples already mentioned), but the list of "projects" from the second and third round that go nowhere is quite long. If size is undervalued at the draft now, it was not for a long time while teams reached consistently in the hope of landing a power forward or a Zdeno Chara.
I think it's the other way around personally. I don't know why teams use first rounders on forwards who are extremely unlikely to ever be real top six forwards, whether their best attribute is physicality or defensive play. Your odds of getting a Gillies or Chipchura or Nystrom or Nathan Smith out of those low-upside players is so much higher than getting a freak like Lucic, and those guys tend to come from the later rounds anyways. That's what the second round is for, to take seemingly limited players with a standout skill to see where they go.
JVR, powerforward? What? He does not play physical.
That's the thing. PWF take a long time to put it all together and most importantly, find consistency. If I have a good team and don't need the player immediately, I am taking the big, strong forward. Let him grow at his own pace in a good atmosphere. A lot of small, skilled guys come into the league and have success but get figured out. Big forwards always will have the ability to just lean on another player to beat them 1 on 1.
Another "War and Peace" post by fiddy ... and the takeaway line is:
"Can he shoot better than Kane ? A blind man could--so hell yes!"
For the uninitiated - Hawksfan50 (fiddy) is known very well on Blackhawk message boards for his seemingly endless posts of (1) poor grammer/spelling and (2) unclever ways to take shots at Patrick Kane. Fiddy has been ragging Kane since the Hawks drafted him instead of the guy fiddy wanted - Kyle Turris.
Another "War and Peace" post by fiddy ... and the takeaway line is:
"Can he shoot better than Kane ? A blind man could--so hell yes!"
For the uninitiated - Hawksfan50 (fiddy) is known very well on Blackhawk message boards for his seemingly endless posts of (1) poor grammer/spelling and (2) unclever ways to take shots at Patrick Kane. Fiddy has been ragging Kane since the Hawks drafted him instead of the guy fiddy wanted - Kyle Turris.
Nothing new to see here ... move along.
And capitalizing important words, and his unwavering love for Malcolm Subban.
Power forwardstake about as long as Dmen to devellop, and they are pretty much useless if they don't have a good team around them...
Think about it... Who are the power forwards that come to mind when you hear "power forward"?
Lucic
Backes
Hartnell
JVR
Clowe
Etc...
All on good teams. Rick Nash is a power forward, but he's on a crummy team and he can't do anything himself. He needs good linemates to truly be effective.
Power forwards are complimentary players. Not individual performers. So if you are a good team, and you know it takes a few years for these guys to devellop, then you take a "skill guy" first. It's just how it is.
