The point of the post was to point out that Teravanien was not considered one of the best players on his team, let alone this tournament. If he was as good as represented he would have been a standout and an obvious pick by the coaches. Didn't happen.
Teravanien was a player I looked forward to seeing in the WJC. Frankly, of all the players I had expectations for, heading into this tournament, Teravanien was the second most disappointing player I watched (after Yakapov). I let Teravanien's draft position and hype build some unfair expectations he clearly could not live up to. I was expecting a dominant player and he was mostly a no-show (as were most of the Finns). Wasn't impressed and neither were the coaches.
How can you say the coaches weren't impressed? Did you talk to them? Look at the other choices of coaches: From Switzerland there's no Sven Andrighetto nor Richard Tanner; Both much better prospects than their goalie (who was good btw). From Sweden there was Arvidsson but not Lindholm. From Russia there was whats his face but no Yakupov. Is whats his face a better prospect than Yakupov? You're giving way too much emphasis on the coaches decisions. They're like "thanks for doing your best"- trophies. Take Lindbohm for example from Finland. He was solid, did his best, showed heart and gave his all. Yet you'd be silly suggesting he was a better player than TT or Ristolainen for example.
edit: Whats his face turned out to be Nesterov, lol. Anyways people get the point
And some other points:
1) I don't know what you expected, TT was pretty good and he's one of the youngest players on the team.
2) IMO TT was better than Armia or Granlund
3) Team Finland wasn't a very good place for a young player to shine this year; weren't playing well as a team.
Oh SO SORRY flames fans. Are you guys nit picking because I put 5th instead of 4th round pick?????
Then Imagine the comparison between 4th and 1st.
That is why you all make 0 sense...get all pissy about that minor detail yet can't realize why everyone thinks TT's draft position makes sense.
After reading up and watching highlights games and multiple sources my points are as follows:
-TT is better at skating what really counts at the NHL level, at age 17 he was still better than Gaudreau
-Teravainen plays with Men in an elite league, Johnny plays against kids who will rarely get drafted and are underdeveloped.
-Teravainen was drafted because of his offensive capabilities and skating, mid first round, Gaudreau was passed by how many selections (I will let you kids figure that out again)
-The main reason Gaudreau was passed was his skating in comparison to his size was just fair. In order to be relevant in the NHL at 5'7 you have to be DYNAMIC AND AGILE OR FLEXIBLE like one Teravainen.
SOLID POINTS NO BRTRIAD????????????
I AM REPRESENTING THE CHICAGO BLACKHAWKS AND I SUPPORT THIS MESSAGE.
If you don't know the facts, then guess what that makes your opinion worth.
How can you say the coaches weren't impressed? Did you talk to them? Look at the other choices of coaches: From Switzerland there's no Sven Andrighetto nor Richard Tanner; Both much better prospects than their goalie (who was good btw). From Sweden there was Arvidsson but not Lindholm. From Russia there was whats his face but no Yakupov. Is whats his face a better prospect than Yakupov? You're giving way too much emphasis on the coaches decisions. They're like "thanks for doing your best"- trophies. Take Lindbohm for example from Finland. He was solid, did his best, showed heart and gave his all. Yet you'd be silly suggesting he was a better player than TT or Ristolainen for example.
And some other points:
1) I don't know what you expected, TT was pretty good and he's one of the youngest players on the team.
2) IMO TT was better than Armia or Granlund
3) Team Finland wasn't a very good place for a young player to shine this year; weren't playing well as a team.
People were saying earlier in the thread that tt was the best player for finland. this is merely proving them wrong not saying gaudreau is better because he played better at one tournament.
People were saying earlier in the thread that tt was the best player for finland. this is merely proving them wrong not saying gaudreau is better because he played better at one tournament.
One tournament. I guess MacKinnon shouldn't be a top 10 pick then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by YARR123
How can you say the coaches weren't impressed? Did you talk to them?
Didn't have to talk to them. This was the coaches' poll as to who were the best players in the tournament. Can it be any more obvious than a list from the coach, picking his three best performers?
Quote:
Look at the other choices of coaches: From Switzerland there's no Sven Andrighetto nor Richard Tanner; Both much better prospects than their goalie (who was good btw).
Doesn't matter whether they were better prospects, they were not top performers according to the coach of the team. How freaking hard is this for some people to figure out? A player and his prospect status don't mean **** when you gauge his play in a tournament or after that moment his name is called at the draft. Just because he was drafted high doesn't mean he's going to be a high performer or retain that high level prospect status. Well, in the real world that is how it works. On Hockeysfuture the value of a player is defined by their draft position and remains that until they are flipping burgers.
Quote:
From Sweden there was Arvidsson but not Lindholm. From Russia there was whats his face but no Yakupov.
Exactly! Neither played well and, frankly, Yakapov provided plenty of ammunition who suggested prior to the draft he wasn't worthy of the first pick overall or even a first round selection. That's the point of learning to ignore draft position after the draft.
Quote:
Is whats his face a better prospect than Yakupov?
Probably not, but it sure puts Yakapov's play under a spotlight and makes you question his future as a top end player. Character is a big thing in becoming a NHL player. Coaches recognize this.
Quote:
You're giving way too much emphasis on the coaches decisions.
Really? Who decides who dresses and who plays again?
Quote:
They're like "thanks for doing your best"- trophies. Take Lindbohm for example from Finland. He was solid, did his best, showed heart and gave his all. Yet you'd be silly suggesting he was a better player than TT or Ristolainen for example.
edit: Whats his face turned out to be Nesterov, lol. Anyways people get the point
What was your point again? Draft position is everything and player performance doesn't matter?
Quote:
And some other points:
1) I don't know what you expected, TT was pretty good and he's one of the youngest players on the team.
2) IMO TT was better than Armia or Granlund
3) Team Finland wasn't a very good place for a young player to shine this year; weren't playing well as a team.
I expected a player getting all the hype humanly possible to shine. He didn't. And no, he wasn't better than Granlund or Armia, who wasn't that impressive either. He looked like an average player who feasted on the weak teams in the tournament to pad his stats. I wanted to see performances like that against good teams. He didn't do much against good competition. What works in Teravanien's favor is he can come back and try and dominate next year. He has time on his side.
Didn't have to talk to them. This was the coaches' poll as to who were the best players in the tournament. Can it be any more obvious than a list from the coach, picking his three best performers?
Doesn't matter whether they were better prospects, they were not top performers according to the coach of the team. How freaking hard is this for some people to figure out? A player and his prospect status don't mean **** when you gauge his play in a tournament or after that moment his name is called at the draft. Just because he was drafted high doesn't mean he's going to be a high performer or retain that high level prospect status. Well, in the real world that is how it works. On Hockeysfuture the value of a player is defined by their draft position and remains that until they are flipping burgers.
I expected a player getting all the hype humanly possible to shine. He didn't. And no, he wasn't better than Granlund or Armia, who wasn't that impressive either. He looked like an average player who feasted on the weak teams in the tournament to pad his stats. I wanted to see performances like that against good teams. He didn't do much against good competition. What works in Teravanien's favor is he can come back and try and dominate next year. He has time on his side.
In case you didn't pay much attention to Team Finland WJC thread, us Finnish posters don't give much credit to the views of our coaches after their failures with this team.
What you failed to see that since team lacked or was unable to play according to the system they should have been familiar both from the their club teams and national federations doctrine, the players who are most familiar with playing under a good system, such as Teräväinen, found it hard to thrive in a no-system team. They were used to players being "on their rails" but 99% of the time they were not but completely outside of the play.
In case you didn't pay much attention to Team Finland WJC thread, us Finnish posters don't give much credit to the views of our coaches after their failures with this team.
Ya, the coaching was pretty bad.
__________________________________
This thread is getting ridiculous. TT is an amazing prospect. JG is an amazing prospect. Both have their strengths, both of their weaknesses. One was drafted in the 1st 2012, the other was drafted in the 4th 2011. Both had great tournaments, and both are playing great for their respective teams....
At the end of the day the Flames are happy to grab JG in the 4th, and the Hawks are happy TT fell to them late in the 1st.
I'm sure TT has more value as of right now due to his physical stature / play, but the Flames are ecstatic to have a quality hockey player in Gaudreau, and will let him mature and grow into his frame.
This thread is getting ridiculous. TT is an amazing prospect. JG is an amazing prospect. Both have their strengths, both of their weaknesses. One was drafted in the 1st 2012, the other was drafted in the 4th 2011. Both had great tournaments, and both are playing great for their respective teams....
At the end of the day the Flames are happy to grab JG in the 4th, and the Hawks are happy TT fell to them late in the 1st.
I'm sure TT has more value as of right now due to his physical stature / play, but the Flames are ecstatic to have a quality hockey player in Gaudreau, and will let him mature and grow into his frame.
It's not a given that Teravainen will grow to be any bigger than he is now. He has a very slight frame; usually a small guy is always gonna be a small guy and at 18 you're usually done growing. He'll get a bit stronger as Gaudreau will too, but it's not a guarantee that it will be anything major.
I have no doubt that Gaudreau is the better pure scorer. He can undress a defenseman one on one, take it to the backhand and go top shelf like it's easy. He scored a goal at the WJC's like that, he hit the cross bar like that, he scored a goal in the NCAA Championship game like that. His backhand is as good as his forehand and both are very accurate. He's also proven to be a very clutch player and consistently an MVP type player; a reputation that Terevainen has yet to build for himself. Gaudreau is also a great playmaker which goes unmentioned by his critics in this thread.
Gaudeau has a long list of accolades, so anyone saying that this is all just off of one tournament is either amazingly ignorant, or just being a troll.
Exactly! Neither played well and, frankly, Yakapov provided plenty of ammunition who suggested prior to the draft he wasn't worthy of the first pick overall or even a first round selection. That's the point of learning to ignore draft position after the draft.
Wow it's like talking to a wall. A stupid and incredibly biased wall.
It's not a given that Teravainen will grow to be any bigger than he is now. He has a very slight frame; usually a small guy is always gonna be a small guy and at 18 you're usually done growing. He'll get a bit stronger as Gaudreau will too, but it's not a guarantee that it will be anything major.
Teräväinen has yet to have one full summer of off-season training as a pro. He wasn't penciled into making the teams in 2011 so he trained like he was going to play with the a-juniors (and that summer in general was probably the fist summer he took off-season training seriously by his own accord). Last summer his training was messed up by the constant travelling between the continents (4 trips), he said himself the recovery from the trips (jet lag) took about a week before he could train normally again. We should be seeing some weight/strength gained after this summer.
I was not aware CGY fans were like Edmonton and Toronto, biased as hell, I think it's just because it is media based. They get too much exposure.
And yet you are defending Teravainen at every turn (with some rather nonsensical arguments, I might add). It is the nature of the beast.
I have seen more than a handful of Calgary posters write that they would take Teravainen over Gaudreau at this point, and yet you seemingly only focus on the one or two that disagree with you. Get over it, these things happen.
Very few prospects can match the strides and improvements Gaudreau has made over the past few seasons. He deserves all the praise he is getting.
Both of these prospects play a very similar game and have similar upsides, while also having smaller statures than your regular NHL player. They both have obstacles to overcome but neither player should be discredited for what they have accomplished to this date. If I were to choose at this very moment, I would lean towards Teravainen due to his larger frame, and slightly better speed. In saying that, it would not come as a surprise to see Gaudreau have a more prolific career in the future.
They both have an incredible amount of offensive potential. Let's leave it at that.
JG was a 2011 pick so not the same thing at all I have shown 1 source who has JG ahead of TT.
The Draft is pretty much the only time we see actual scouts weighing in on players quality. Guys like Pronman or Crazy Craig aren't real scouts as in they don't work for any teams
Gaudreau , if you want to compare him with a player, start with Kruger.
He led his European team in scoring as an 18 year old and we were all going crazy about him. Marcus was a 5th round pick who we were exclaiming comparisons to great swedes.
The difference is Kruger can skate and is a two way forward...Gaudreau not so much.
Gaudreau , if you want to compare him with a player, start with Kruger.
He led his European team in scoring as an 18 year old and we were all going crazy about him. Marcus was a 5th round pick who we were exclaiming comparisons to great swedes.
The difference is Kruger can skate and is a two way forward...Gaudreau not so much.
I don't know if you're a moron or just a troll; either way it's not good.
Gaudreau has really quick hands, shifty moves; explosive speed and this really small centerman could stickhandle in a phone booth. He has the determination and big time skill to prove the doubters wrong about his size, similar to Martin St. Louis. The teenager can make bigger players miss their checks while sliding off them with his elite edge control and quick skating.
ASSETS: Owns tremendous instincts in the offensive zone and can generate a ton of offense at lower levels. Skates very well and is extremely creative with the puck.
But you would know better, right?
Last edited by NightBlazer: 01-11-2013 at 08:05 AM.
Wow it's like talking to a wall. A stupid and incredibly biased wall.
Talking to yourself?
Since draft position is the end-all-be-all, maybe you can explain the value of Thomas Hickey (4) versus Alec Martinez (95)? How about Logan MacMillan (19) versus Jamie Benn (129)? How about Angelo Esposito (20) versus Matt Halischuk (117)? How about just explaining Dennis Persson? Or putting into terms you should really be able to understand, how about Johan Fransson (34) versus Alexander Elder (91)? We're talking first round studs versus scrubs from later rounds. This should be pretty easy for a real smart guy like yourself to explain.
Also, you'll notice in my posts I have not stated that one player was better than the next. I discussed, and pointed out, that one player was over achieving, as indicated by specific accolades, and one player was under achieving. I have not stated that one player was superior because that is an unknown until they get to the NHL level. What I have done is pointed out where the logic breaks down in this argument. Examples:
Teravanien is a first round pick, so is superior. That is demonstrably false based on historical examples you're going to explain.
Teravanien out performed Gaudreau at this tournament. Data seems to indicate otherwise as the coaches selections of their best players counters the developing mythology surrounding Teravanien. The tournament stats and quality of competition when points were scored seems to counter the claims as well.
The coaching was bad, invalidating the selections of Team Finland. Coaching was supposedly the bane of every team at one point. Housley was an idiot for his handling of Galynchuk, even though his team won the tournament. If the coaching was bad maybe the hosts of the tournament could support the claim Teravanien was the best Finn player. How many players of the game did he win during the tournament? Any of them when games mattered?
My favorite, Gaudreau excelled on international ice so Teravanien will have an advantage on the smaller ice surface. I forget. How many NHL size ice surfaces does Teravanien play games on over in Finland? How many NHL surfaces does the NCAA use? How is that guy that can't play on the small ice surface doing on those small ice surfaces? How is Teravanien doing on the small ice surfaces (how about this sample size?) and what accolades has he collected?
"create offense at lower levels" How about higher levels? Teräväinen has proved he can do that already.
LOL, that's just a non-valid argument. If Gaudreau was born in Finland he'd be in that league too.
Besides, if SM-Liiga was such a strong men's league, and these guys were superior for dominating it, then they should have dominated a bunch of kids at the WJC, no? But it didn't happen. I was looking forward to seeing Terevainen and Barkov tear up this tournament but unfortunately neither of them could match the greatness that is Markus Granlund. AKA the Finnish Eberle.
LOL, that's just a non-valid argument. If Gaudreau was born in Finland he'd be in that league too.
Besides, if SM-Liiga was such a strong men's league, and these guys were superior for dominating it, then they should have dominated a bunch of kids at the WJC, no? But it didn't happen. I was looking forward to seeing Terevainen and Barkov tear up this tournament but unfortunately neither of them could match the greatness that is Markus Granlund. AKA the Finnish Eberle.
Like you said, Gaudreau would also play in the SM-liiga if he were finnish. Just because we have some players in the SM-liiga that are playing well (nobody is dominating save for maybe Barkov) doesn't mean that they are somehow better than players of USA, Canada, Sweden etc. All players from team USA would probably play in som kind of role in the SM-liiga, some would play in very big roles
Do people realize that Martin St. Louis is a nearly generational exception? You shouldn't expect any player to do what he has, you should wish for it.
It amazes me how many people make arguments by listing exceptions as if that supports them. Yes St. Louis has had an amazing career at a small stature, but the list of players who have struggled due to size(and strength) is much longer. Yes, Jamie Benn was better than MANY players drafted before him, but on that same merit Patrick Kane turned out better Jim O'Brien, and Jonathan Toews ended up better than Bryan Little.
Gaudreau has to put on over 25 pounds to weigh what Teravainen does.
Also, how can you ignore that TT is playing at a much higher level? Sure, Gaudreau may be playing at a similar level if he was born in Finland, BUT HE ISN'T. And that is extremely valuable experience that TT is gaining right now against much closer to NHL level players.
Both very talented players in their own right, and I would love nothing more than to see Johnny Gaudreau be successful player because he has flair and tenacity that you just don't see that often. But one of these players looks a lot closer to being an NHLer than the other. NHL scouts usually know what they're doing, and there's a reason one was taken later as a much higher risk.
