__________________
Exhibit A as to how hockey doesn't matter on ESPN:
Last night an ESPN program was discussing how the Detroit Pistons needed a hero citing the heroes on the Detroit Tigers, Detroit Lions and no mention of the Detroit Red Wings. All this despite the Red Wings probably being the most succesful team in Detroit right now.
I'd vote Hall if I knew what I was talking about. No troll (newish fan here) but can someone explain to me what makes Hall such a blue chip prospect? I'm trying to appreciate him but from the few games I've watched, he's got great speed and an above average wristshot...and not much else that stands out.
Let me know where I'm off-base: he's a below average playmaker, has average vision, stick handling, and passing ability, and he's not particularly good at dekes/skating laterally, etc. I watched a few highlights online and many of his goals seem to be either cleaning up rebounds around the net or a straight wristshot on a breakaway with no fake. He doesn't seem to create space and offense for others with any other talent besides speed.
I haven't seen enough to get a sense of his defensive play and "intangibles" and I certainly didn't watch him in junior when he was dominant.
He's basically a faster version of Marleau with slightly higher upside. Would Hall be considered a successful draft pick if he had, by the end of his career, Marleau's numbers and ability (leaving aside guts, clutch play, leadership)? Would he have reached his potential?
My SO is an Edmontonian so I want to like Hall, but Eberle seems like he plays at an entirely different level...though I realize the age difference and injuries.
You mean the same Marleau that's top 20 in post-lockout scoring? I think that's a pretty nice acquisition then, if Hall can be even better than that.
You mean the same Marleau that's top 20 in post-lockout scoring? I think that's a pretty nice acquisition then, if Hall can be even better than that.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Post-lockout = Thornton era + better offensive numbers league-wide (at least at first).
Scoring in the range of 75-85 points is still nothing to sneeze at, I realize that. This Sharks fan has no gripes about those stats (everything else though is a different story...see Roenick).
But I was wondering if Edmonton would be happy with a 75-85 peak for 5 years (following around 7 years of 45-55pts) or if he has a chance to put up HOF-level numbers. Basically, what's expected of Hall given his potential? Marleau can play wing or center and will probably get to 1000 pts but he's no HOFer.
As a forward, is he more Iginla/Hossa or Doan/Marleau? The answer to that question will help me better answer the OP's question.
Definitely Hall. Not because of his play, but because of his injuries. He's played 65 and 61 games in his 2 seasons in the league. That's not very good.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Post-lockout = Thornton era + better offensive numbers league-wide (at least at first).
Scoring in the range of 75-85 points is still nothing to sneeze at, I realize that. This Sharks fan has no gripes about those stats (everything else though is a different story...see Roenick).
But I was wondering if Edmonton would be happy with a 75-85 peak for 5 years (following around 7 years of 45-55pts) or if he has a chance to put up HOF-level numbers. Basically, what's expected of Hall given his potential? Marleau can play wing or center and will probably get to 1000 pts but he's no HOFer.
As a forward, is he more Iginla/Hossa or Doan/Marleau? The answer to that question will help me better answer the OP's question.
To put it simply before his injury last year Hall was on pace for 35 goals and 71 points in his 2nd NHL season. He did this facing some the toughest competition in the NHL. Eberle and Nugent both up good numbers with the benefit of favorable line matchups and zone starts. This wasn't the case for Hall. He played the toughest minutes and still dominated.
Voted Yakupov. Im probably very alone on this, but Im just not a fan of Yakupov's potential from watching him in Sarnia. Seemed very easy to shutdown. I would have drafted Galchenyuk first overall.
Yakupov is the easy answer as he hasn't played an NHL game yet. Personally, I think he's too talented to underachieve though. My guess would have to be Hall if anything, partly due to injuries. Look at Hemsky in example, that guy had so much promise coming in. But with the rash of injuries and the new talent up from he's certainly expendable. That could be Hall in time.
I'd have to say Hall if I had to choose, if only for the reasons already mentioned.
That said, I don't see it happening. The injuries he's sustained have been freak occurrences, and he's got more will and drive than I've seen in a player in a long time. If anyone can overcome these hurdles, it's Taylor Hall. So, I guess "All Will End Up Being the Best Player from Their Draft Year"
I'll go against the grain and say RNH. Had a great rookie season, which personally I think put expectations for his career/next few seasons much too high.
To put it simply before his injury last year Hall was on pace for 35 goals and 71 points in his 2nd NHL season. He did this facing some the toughest competition in the NHL. Eberle and Nugent both up good numbers with the benefit of favorable line matchups and zone starts. This wasn't the case for Hall. He played the toughest minutes and still dominated.
I haven't seen the sabremetrics yet but I did notice Hall was scoring at a good clip. "On pace" are some famous last words though. By the way, what statistic would you suggest I look at when evaluating how good a player is and why?
Anyways, I'm just trusting what I see with my eyes. I see speed, desire, and a decent shot...and not much else. Perhaps someone can point me to a game or play where he showed elite hands, vision, playmaking, play-creating, creativity, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kishire
Lol, if Yak turns out to be a better Marleau, Edmonton fans would be very happy with that, Marleau is a fantastic player.
Ok, that's cool. Given the hype around the time he was drafted, I thought he was potentially just short of a generational talent...but we all tend to get overexcited at draft time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bure All Day
As a non-Oilers fan, I expect him to be better than marleau
Why? What do you see that I don't? Break it down for me. I like watching the Oilers, Eberle in particular. But, for example, other than speed, I don't see what sets Hall apart from a guy like Evander Kane.
It's really early to project for this year's draft, there's a lot of uncertainty when it comes to how good Galchenyuk/Rielly will be after their injuries last year (and Forsberg is tearing up as well). Yakupov seems to be the best player from that draft thus far, but it's not absolute. I can't really see him falling off the radar and becoming a 3rd liner, but he's definitely not a lock to be the absolute best in his draft year. In the traditional sense of the word "underachieve" which to me means being a Daigle-esque draft bust, I don't see any of them doing that. I think all 3 will be first line calibre forwards in the NHL. As far as being the best player in their respective drafts, Hall is probably the one most at "risk", which is not a slight against Hall, just a testament to how good Seguin is.
I don't really like the word underachieve here. It doesn't really apply to any of these guys at this point. Yakupov projects to be a first line forward and RNH/Hall have already basically got there. I don't think a #1 overall pick getting outplayed by the #2 overall pick is "underachieving", unless it's a drastic difference in play. If we were talking Patrik Stefan vs Daniel Sedin it's a different story, but Taylor Hall isn't "underachieving" because he's arguably been outplayed by Seguin, they're both first line forwards with lots of upside. Similarly, if 5 years from now Yakupov is getting outplayed by Galchenyuk, Rielly, Grigorenko, or Forsberg, it doesn't mean Yakupov underachieved, as odds are he'll be a first line calibre forward too.
Hall, then perhaps Yakupov. Eberle has already exceeded expectations, in my opinion, and RNH looked fantastic in his first season. I think Hall has the ability to put up 35+ goals for several seasons, but he already has an injury history (however flukey some of the injuries may have been) and I think his style of play will lead to more injuries in the future.
You could make the argument Landeskog is as good as RNH and given RNH's size, he could end up having as many injury problems as Hall. Furthermore, after RNH there is a slew of players that could be just as good as him (Larsson, Brodin, Hamilton, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Baertschi). So in terms of underachieving compared to those taken after him, RNH could end up underachieving.
Same with Hall. You got Seguin, Skinner, Granlund, Gudbranson, Schwarz, all taken after Hall. Not as strong as 2011.
