HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012 Prospect Thread IV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-03-2013, 10:29 AM
  #876
pbunder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 430
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota View Post
Random thought:

If he was still available when we picked, does anyone think the Wild would have picked Jake McCabe (#44) over Bussieres (#46)?
I actually like ralphy buss a lot from what i've seen out of camps + reports. He bring size, can score and can get snarly. But watching mccabe in WJC, err. that'd be a hard one.

pbunder is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:42 AM
  #877
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota View Post
Random thought:

If he was still available when we picked, does anyone think the Wild would have picked Jake McCabe (#44) over Bussieres (#46)?
Sure, if you think there's someone in the room who was going to be the one to tell Guy LaPointe...


__________________

After Meaningless Win - 3/29/12 - Game 77 | SoH-"Who knows, that could have cost us a Cup tonight." | Dooohkay
this providence is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 10:42 AM
  #878
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,890
vCash: 500
Well, Dumba should be behind Suter, Brodin, and Scandella in the future. I'd also like to keep Gilbert around long-term.

So, hopefully Dumba can be that 2nd pairing PP guy.

nickschultzfan is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 12:46 PM
  #879
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minnesota View Post
Random thought:

If he was still available when we picked, does anyone think the Wild would have picked Jake McCabe (#44) over Bussieres (#46)?
McCabe was #1 on my "list" for the 2nd round. Shame he went 1 or 2 picks before. He'd be a really solid 2nd pairing LD behind Suter.

Dr Jan Itor is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 01:02 PM
  #880
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,945
vCash: 500
I'm going to take Russo's advice and not give up on an 18 year old defenseman 5 months after being drafted, however after seeing much more of Trouba than I did pre-draft (he's been good in the Michigan games I've seen and great in the WJC) I think it is very well possible that he turns out to be the better player.

Having said that, I think that the jump from 'being the wrong pick at #7' to 'being a glorified MAB' is too big to make right now, or even in the next few years. He has too much raw talent at this point.

The best thing that the Wild can do for him is find a Willie Mitchell-type defensive partner who can take care of the D-zone and let Dumba be what we drafted him for, which a lot of people need to remember, didn't include a guarantee of a great defensive defenseman. If his offensive abilities go to ****, then we may have problems.

Dr Jan Itor is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 01:33 PM
  #881
Keke
Registered User
 
Keke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 463
vCash: 500
Although Trouba would've been a "better" pick than Dumba I am very happy that they selected Brodin over Murphy in 2011.

Keke is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 01:50 PM
  #882
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaykay View Post
A little early?
Not really; Granlund and Brodin were excelling in their 2nd year in a men's league that is a step below the AHL. You also had Zucker, Larsson and even Bulmer doing well after their draft along with Lucia.

The one thing about Dumba that is concerning is you can't teach hockey IQ. You can have the tools but if you don't have the toolbox, it's hard to build one.

After that Bussieres is meh, Draeger and Gilmour is meh, Gunnarsson is an overager and might be a decent pick, Bertschy has looked bad and Nanne was a token pick. While I understand that the draft was a bunch of projects, it doesn't look like are going to be anything special.

BTW I would have loved Forsberg, Grigs or Trouba over Dumba.

thestonedkoala is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:15 PM
  #883
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
I'm fully aware of Dumba being a project, but the longer it takes to develop, the lower the upside for the most part. Especially with a questionable hockey IQ.

Really the only excuse he has is that he's very young for his draft and that his team sucks (but not really because all they do is win).

So it's POSSIBLE he breaks out next year and is dominant and tears up the WJC and storms into his pro career...but I don't like seeing a kid stall out for nearly a full year after being drafted.

Jarick is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:16 PM
  #884
Minnesota
Moderator
L'Étoile du Nord
 
Minnesota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 14,828
vCash: 404
How does one truly measure hockey IQ?

Also, Bussieres is doing very well for Baie-Comeau Drakkar. I think he'll have a tough transition once he leaves the QMJHL due to his play-style, but I wouldn't label him a "meh" pick.

Minnesota is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:19 PM
  #885
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
My quick and dirty way to measure hockey IQ:

1. High scoring at a young age (compared to peers)
2. High assist-to-goals ratio (assuming higher PPG)

Jarick is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:19 PM
  #886
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I'm fully aware of Dumba being a project, but the longer it takes to develop, the lower the upside for the most part. Especially with a questionable hockey IQ.

Really the only excuse he has is that he's very young for his draft and that his team sucks (but not really because all they do is win).

So it's POSSIBLE he breaks out next year and is dominant and tears up the WJC and storms into his pro career...but I don't like seeing a kid stall out for nearly a full year after being drafted.
Luckily it's barely been 1/2 a year. He doesn't need to dominate next year's WJC, making the team would be a step in the positive direction.

Dr Jan Itor is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:22 PM
  #887
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
My quick and dirty way to measure hockey IQ:

1. High scoring at a young age (compared to peers)
2. High assist-to-goals ratio (assuming higher PPG)
The second one is interesting, how does being a playmaker vs. goal scorer play into IQ?

And not for nothing, but Zucker only had one of those, and it's the same one as Dumba.

Dr Jan Itor is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:48 PM
  #888
Jbcraig1883
Registered User
 
Jbcraig1883's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Louisville, KY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
My quick and dirty way to measure hockey IQ:

1. High scoring at a young age (compared to peers)
2. High assist-to-goals ratio (assuming higher PPG)
I am not so sure you can quantify hockey IQ. But if we are going to try, we need to define it.

I don't even think I can define it in words. The only thing I can say is that I believe hockey IQ and leadership are the two most subjective attributes when talking with other fans. I am also not so sure that someone can develop hockey IQ. I think they either have it or they don't. Yes, experience may allow it to be manifested but I think it's as genetic as it is to say a 5'9 forward needs to learn to play like a power forward. I also think there are a lot of guys that have high hockey IQ's that do not find themselves lighting up the scoresheet. Also, with prospects, confidence is so important. If a prospect at an equal or lower level displayed high hockey IQ and then appears to be making the same mistakes over and over later in , I'd contend that the issue is one of confidence, not hockey IQ.

There have been some one dimensional guys that can only skate N/S, have a rocket shot, and are physically imposing that score tons but, to me, do not have high hockey IQ.

Anywho, out of that ramble, my point is I don't think you can measure hockey IQ. As for Dumba, I have not seen enough of him to say whether or not he lacks hockey IQ or confidence. At this point, I am not too worried. If he plays this way next year at our camp, his junior team, and does not make the WJC team, then I will start being concerned.

Jbcraig1883 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:51 PM
  #889
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
It's not foolproof, but...

I define hockey IQ as the ability to read plays and react on the ice. Usually it involves good vision of the ice and making passes that others don't see or getting to places with or ahead of the play.

Assists are obvious, when you have good vision and can read plays on the ice, you make the passes that turn into goals. Guys with poor vision tend to take the shot or turn the puck over instead.

Scoring at a young age is also a hockey IQ trait. You adapt and score quickly because you learn the game at the next level, assuming your skills are up to it. That makes you more likely to excel at higher levels as well.

Classic example is Gretzky, who went where the puck would be, not where it was. Of course it was easy for him, hard for everyone else. And he tended to play and dominate against kids 2-3 years older than him.

Let's look at some examples of who I'd consider high and low hockey IQ for the Wild:

Low:

Clutterbuck
- great speed and shot, not much for passing or pretty plays
- CHL breakout at 18
- made NHL at 21
- 58g to 42a in the NHL

Setoguchi
- great speed and shot, not much for passing or pretty plays
- CHL breakout at 17.5
- made NHL at 21-22
- 103g to 92a in the NHL

High:

PMB
- good skills but great passing
- CHL breakout at 16-17
- made NHL at 18
- 98g to 229a in the NHL

Granlund
- great skills and very smart
- SM-Liiga breakout at 17.5
- likely would have made NHL at 19.5
- 41g to 86a in SM-Liiga

Jarick is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 02:53 PM
  #890
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
Obviously if you have really low or high PPG the goals-assists thing gets out of whack. And there are exceptions to any rule. But I think it's a nice starting point.


I could be VERY wrong though, so please test and let's refine!

Jarick is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:00 PM
  #891
Jbcraig1883
Registered User
 
Jbcraig1883's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Louisville, KY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
It's not foolproof, but...

I define hockey IQ as the ability to read plays and react on the ice. Usually it involves good vision of the ice and making passes that others don't see or getting to places with or ahead of the play.

Assists are obvious, when you have good vision and can read plays on the ice, you make the passes that turn into goals. Guys with poor vision tend to take the shot or turn the puck over instead.

Scoring at a young age is also a hockey IQ trait. You adapt and score quickly because you learn the game at the next level, assuming your skills are up to it. That makes you more likely to excel at higher levels as well.

Classic example is Gretzky, who went where the puck would be, not where it was. Of course it was easy for him, hard for everyone else. And he tended to play and dominate against kids 2-3 years older than him.

Let's look at some examples of who I'd consider high and low hockey IQ for the Wild:

Low:

Clutterbuck
- great speed and shot, not much for passing or pretty plays
- CHL breakout at 18
- made NHL at 21
- 58g to 42a in the NHL

Setoguchi
- great speed and shot, not much for passing or pretty plays
- CHL breakout at 17.5
- made NHL at 21-22
- 103g to 92a in the NHL

High:

PMB
- good skills but great passing
- CHL breakout at 16-17
- made NHL at 18
- 98g to 229a in the NHL

Granlund
- great skills and very smart
- SM-Liiga breakout at 17.5
- likely would have made NHL at 19.5
- 41g to 86a in SM-Liiga
I only disagree with the bolded. I think some guys mature earlier than others so simply produce because they are bigger/stronger. Then, once everyone catches up, they do not have the hockey IQ to continue to be successful.

Jbcraig1883 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:01 PM
  #892
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,945
vCash: 500
In my opinion, IQ is an intangible and an intangible, by definition cannot be measured in numbers. It's one of those things that you can see as you watch players, not box scores. I've seen one Red Deer game, and Dumba was average; he did some good things and some bad; he left guys open in the D-zone at times and he made a couple nice anticipatory plays. One game isn't enough judge, so I refrain from doing so.

Right now, there isn't an answer for why he has seemed to regress. I don't think he's gotten physically worse or dumber, so I don't know.

Dr Jan Itor is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:07 PM
  #893
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
There's going to be an interesting test case for that...Coyle and Phillips. One has tools, one has smarts (well both have tools and smarts but...).

Still, hard to say Granlund and Zucker physically developed early enough to dominate against guys a lot bigger, stronger, and older.

Jarick is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:07 PM
  #894
Jbcraig1883
Registered User
 
Jbcraig1883's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Louisville, KY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
In my opinion, IQ is an intangible and an intangible, by definition cannot be measured in numbers. It's one of those things that you can see as you watch players, not box scores. I've seen one Red Deer game, and Dumba was average; he did some good things and some bad; he left guys open in the D-zone at times and he made a couple nice anticipatory plays. One game isn't enough judge, so I refrain from doing so.

Right now, there isn't an answer for why he has seemed to regress. I don't think he's gotten physically worse or dumber, so I don't know.
He didn't manage his expectations.

Haha.

No, I just think it's a part of human development. The guy had a great year last year, got drafted, had high expectations. He came to our prospect development camp, played against guys who were better than him. That was probably the first wakeup call that he had a long way to go. Then his junior team struggles. He thinks he has to do everything. Then he doesn't make the WJC team for which most thought he was a lock for since last year. The guy has lost all of his confidence.

Jbcraig1883 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:09 PM
  #895
Jbcraig1883
Registered User
 
Jbcraig1883's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Louisville, KY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
There's going to be an interesting test case for that...Coyle and Phillips. One has tools, one has smarts (well both have tools and smarts but...).

Still, hard to say Granlund and Zucker physically developed early enough to dominate against guys a lot bigger, stronger, and older.
I still think that if we went through the draft in the past 10 years, we could find a lot of guys that did well in lower leagues because of their physical abilities and not their hockey IQ.

In other words, if I see a 6'2 180 16 year old that scores over a point per game in juniors, how can I conclude that it is hockey IQ instead of sheer physical domination?

EDIT: Also, I think Coyle has a high hockey IQ. I think he understands positioning, his strengths, etc. I think Phillips has more creativity and is a better passer but based on my viewings of them with the Aeros this year, I don't think I would say there is a significant difference between them as far as hockey IQ is concerned.


Last edited by Jbcraig1883: 01-03-2013 at 03:23 PM.
Jbcraig1883 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:21 PM
  #896
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
Usually guys don't use their huge size advantage to make pretty passes.

Jarick is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:28 PM
  #897
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,945
vCash: 500
I think "hockey IQ" is my new, least favorite phrase.

Dr Jan Itor is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:30 PM
  #898
Jbcraig1883
Registered User
 
Jbcraig1883's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Louisville, KY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
Usually guys don't use their huge size advantage to make pretty passes.
I'm not disputing that premise - the one I disagree with is scoring at a young age or a high PPG as a young player.

Jbcraig1883 is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:33 PM
  #899
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,890
vCash: 500
I don't think Dumba's hockey IQ is that "low". He reads the offensive play pretty well. And he knows when to lay a hit.

But I think he's a more impulsive, less thinking, player ala Burns. He is best when he just goes for it and tries to make an impact.

nickschultzfan is offline  
Old
01-03-2013, 03:40 PM
  #900
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbcraig1883 View Post
I'm not disputing that premise - the one I disagree with is scoring at a young age or a high PPG as a young player.
A component of hockey IQ is adjusting to stronger competition quickly and succeeding. Clearly if it takes you until your overage year in juniors to start scoring, your hockey IQ probably isn't the greatest.

Jarick is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:26 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.