Anaheim (1 playoff appearance)
Boston (3 playoff appearances)
Buffalo (2 playoff appearances)
Calgary (0 playoff appearances)
Carolina (0 playoff appearances)
Chicago (3 playoff appearances)
Colorado (1 playoff appearance)
Columbus (0 playoff appearances)
Dallas (0 playoff appearances)
Detroit (3 playoff appearances)
Edmonton (0 playoff appearances, 3 first overall picks,)
Florida (1 playoff appearance)
Los Angeles (3 playoff appearances)
Minnesota (0 playoff appearances)
Montreal (2 playoff appearances)
Nashville (3 playoff appearances)
New Jersey (2 playoff appearances)
New York I. (0 playoff appearances, 1 first overall pick)
New York R. (2 playoff appearances)
Ottawa (2 playoff appearances)
Philadelphia (3 playoff appearances)
Phoenix (3 playoff appearances)
Pittsburgh (3 playoff appearances)
San Jose (3 playoff appearances)
St. Louis (1 playoff appearance)
Tampa Bay (1 playoff appearance)
Toronto (0 playoff appearances)
Vancouver (3 playoff appearances)
Washington (3 playoff appearances)
Winnipeg (0 playoff appearances)
TEAMS WITH THREE BALLS (7)
Calgary, Carolina, Columbus, Dallas, Minnesota, Toronto, Winnipeg
TEAMS WITH TWO BALLS (6)
Anaheim, Colorado, Florida, New York (I), St. Louis, Tampa Bay
TEAMS WITH ONE BALL (17)
Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Montreal, Nashville, New Jersey, New York (R), Ottawa, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Vancouver, Washington
How have the Islanders had a first overall pick in the past 3 years when it's been all Edmonton?
__________________
I told ya so. I was right all along!
Okay, I have very tediously watched all 29 games Alexander Wennberg has played in the Allsvenskan. And here are my thoughts...
The first thing that jumps out to you is how smart he plays. That's what has gotten him into Allsvenskan at this age and what has helped him work his way up the line up. He is a cerebral kind of player, in the same sense the Sedins are (Not saying he's as good as them in any case). He is willing to battle along the boards, can fight for the puck and wins a fair amount of the battles there, but i'd still say some strength to those bones would go a long way. On the main boards, he is known as the Russian Swede, and i can see where they get that from. He is an effortless skater who can accelerate quickly when he wants to and slip away from opposing checks, can stickhandle in a phone booth and does that often to get out of trouble on the PP. A very slick player. He has good passing vision but also has a quick snapper which is deadly when he is in front of the net and also seems to find loose pucks in front of the net.
He started on the 4th line, then has slowly worked his way up the line up. He didn't see any special teams until the 12th game of the season, mainly got 2nd PP time. Then around the 20th game, he was getting some sparse PK time and 1st PP time. By the 26th game, he moved from the wing to center. He looked fairly good on the dot for such a young guy and i felt he looked better as a center than a winger. It actually suits his game much more being the guy high while his wingers battle for the puck. He is great at dishing the puck on the rush, so it works. By the time he left for the WJC, he was playing a ton of minutes plus special teams. What i admire is that he really made the most of his opportunities in the beginning of the season, gained his coaches trust and is now heavily relied on for offense and in all situations. What I am excited about is that he has really progressed from the beginning of the season to where he is now and he is still progressing.
Some stats: In his last 11 games, he has 7 goals and 5 assists for 12 points. For the youngest player on his team, thats's darn impressive against men. I would say he has played better than both drafted forwards on Djurgarden (Aberg and Sorensen).
--------------
Also, watching him led me to watching Burakovsky. I'm not sure what's happening with him there, heard rumblings of a trade to Frolunda sooner than later. But he isn't getting much playing time when I watched (sometimes benched for the entire 3rd period) and from what the swedish posters are telling me, it isn't the coach not playing young guys as he's been playing a 16 year old regularly. But i found Burakovsky rather ineffective. You can see the tantalizing package, he looks huge on the ice and can skate well. But beyond that, he didn't generate much offensively, but he did look good on the boards. And his line was hemmed in a couple of times. Currently, from what i've watched, there is nothing to tell me this guy is a 1st round pick, much less a top 15 pick where i've seen him ranked. It seems like its all based on potential right now and not on his actual play. And I hate drafting based on potential that is not supported by performance.
If i had to rank the top swedish forwards right now: Lindholm, Wennberg, De La Rose, Burakovsky.
Any Giants fans watched Jackson Houck? He's been going off lately on the stats sheet.
I would like to add that the Kamloops Blazers new version of JC Lipon for this draft year is Cole Ully. He's a better skater than JC and showing more offensive touch (less grit) at this point in his career. He'd have more points on the year but was gone for a month with Mono. The major difference being this is his draft year, he hasn't been passed over. Good pick up 4th round and on.
I wasn't impressed with MacKinnon in this tournament at all. He was stuck behind some very good 19 year olds but he looks like a weak 1st overall pick IMO. From this tournament, I would lean towards Drouin and Jones...
Heck, I thought MacKinnon didn't look anywhere near as impressive as Marko Dano - a draft eligible player that isn't even expected to go in the 1st round.
I wasn't impressed with MacKinnon in this tournament at all. He was stuck behind some very good 19 year olds but he looks like a weak 1st overall pick IMO. From this tournament, I would lean towards Drouin and Jones...
Heck, I thought MacKinnon didn't look anywhere near as impressive as Marko Dano - a draft eligible player that isn't even expected to go in the 1st round.
Then he should probably fall to ~25th overall, right? Sweet, we might be able to draft him.
His skill set is a winger who drives the puck to the net (something we lack for sure), but stars can pass, stars make plays, stars display on ice vision.
We've seen a lot of big guys over the years with size and ability to get to the net.
I'm not convinced Nicushkin has the rest of the package to be a star.
Still be an excellent pick in the back half of 1st round though.
His skill set is a winger who drives the puck to the net (something we lack for sure), but stars can pass, stars make plays, stars display on ice vision.
We've seen a lot of big guys over the years with size and ability to get to the net.
I'm not convinced Nicushkin has the rest of the package to be a star.
Still be an excellent pick in the back half of 1st round though.
Star is a hyperbole by my part. However, this guy has 1st line 30-30 potential. He is an outstanding skater (lateral, balance, straight away speed, etc) at 6'4, and is extremely good at protecting the puck. He has an extremely heavy shot and good playmaking abilities. Most importantly, he works hard. He's good defensively and is willing to take a hit, finish a check, and backcheck hard. He's ranked around 10-15 and if we can somehow get him we should.
Feebster- What do you think of Marko Dano? Would you be disappointed if the Canucks used a late 1st rd pick on him?
I've gotten around to watching the Slovakia games so i can finally answer your question.
I thought his best game was against Canada and his worst was against the USA. But nonetheless, I agree, he impressed me for a guy who was not ranked in the top 3 rounds prior to this tournament. He was easily the best player for Slovakia and was a driving force for his line every shift.
I remember in another thread you may have compared him to Hodgson IIRC. I can see it, but i think Dano also has a fiestiness that Hodgson has never shown. That fiestiness is good and bad. He channelled it well against Team Canada by being relentless on the forecheck and in puck battles. However, it sort of came off the rails in the USA game. He took 3 avoidable penalties and got away a couple too. But he was still noticeable in that game for good reasons too.
He is a smart player, who can really shoot it. Perhaps not like Hodgson, but i'd still consider his shot a strength. Skilled with the puck and rarely stops working. Needs to work on his foot speed.
I'd take him in the mid to late 2nd. That's no slight on him, its just a deep draft. And its still early.
I put my video on the mainboards if you are interested.
One thing is for sure, JC Lipon's stock dropped a lot after the WJC's. Was considered to be the Tanner Pearson of the draft, but now I can't see him going higher than a late 3rd round pick.
One thing is for sure, JC Lipon's stock dropped a lot after the WJC's. Was considered to be the Tanner Pearson of the draft, but now I can't see him going higher than a late 3rd round pick.
It shouldn't have (although I didn't see his stock as more than a 3rd prior)
How much did he play? He hardly played!!!
You can't judge a player based on how he was used at the WJC, Couturier dropped in his year, because he didn't set the tournament on fire offensively (because the coach couldn't coach a PP to save his life). But I'd still take him 3rd in that group behind RNH and Larsson.
Hell, reading around here Mackinnon's stock dropped, not because he didn't play well, but because he HARDLY played.
I know you've seen him Royal, but for the people that haven't Lipon obviously had a poor first impression, but I thought in his limited time he showed to be a Burrows/Marchand type player. Decent on the forecheck, finishes checks, can create the odd chance.
I'd take him in the 3rd today, just as I likely would have before the WJC.
Curtis Lazar is having a nightmare of a season. If he's available when we pick (if we pick late) I would probably take a chance on him. Subban in the late 2nd round would be a steal too.
)
