Because he already had a big NHL body, a mature defensive game, and didn't have a high ceiling that could be ruined by playing too early.
Exactly. Each player is unique and subject to different personal and organizational circumstances. In this case the other two players in question were committed to college and needed all of the time they spent there. Reilly Smith was an undersized kid out of a lower level Ontario hockey league and IIRC Chiasson added quite a bit of mass to his body during his time at BU, not to mention his offensive game really blossomed while in college.
I agree with those first two, but I have a hard time believing that the organization was making a comment on his apparently low ceiling when they called him up to the big leagues.
Well, considering the numbers he was putting up in the WHL it's not exactly as if they considered him a top flight offensive prospect. In fact, off the top of my head I can't recall a Les Jackson or anybody Stars related actually saying they expected big things offensively out of Vincour. More likely that was almost entirely fan generated because as usual we hope every flavor of the month is the cat's meow.
Well, considering the numbers he was putting up in the WHL it's not exactly as if they considered him a top flight offensive prospect. In fact, off the top of my head I can't recall a Les Jackson or anybody Stars related actually saying they expected big things offensively out of Vincour. More likely that was almost entirely fan generated because as usual we hope every flavor of the month is the cat's meow.
The year he was drafted the scouts mainly gave profiles:
Quote:
"He is a big power winger with very good hands. He is really a two-way guy that uses his size extremely well. He was the first pick in the European Draft and is in his second year in North America. He's a good young player with a lot of potential." - Stars scout Shane Churla
Saw that same quote from Churla. To me that type of quote means we're seeing exactly what they thought he would be - a big guy who is defensively conscientious with an unknown amount of goal scoring potential.
They looked like pretty average prospects during their time in the A.
i have to disagree with you about grossman... we took a weekend trip to iowa and caught a couple games and he was clearly head and shoulders above the rest.
haha, looked up my post after that trip (1-16-2007):
Quote:
Originally Posted by eartotheground
So I went to Des Moines last weekend and caught a couple of I-Star losses. Cute little arena they've got there. Very nice place to see a game, and our AAC DJ could certainly take some pointers from the local talent.... but more to the point:
Polak was playing defense?!?!. Yup... the guy we always hear about as, "one of the few skilled wingers in the Stars' system..." was playing the point. Both 5-5 and on the power play. He was still on the wing some, but the bulk of his time early in the games was on the left point. From what my limited hockey sense deduced, he had excellent passes, and was rewarded agaist Toronto with a few points. He did seem out of position a few times, and was unable to keep the puck in the zone. However, I'm no expert & it's quite possible he was where he was told to be. Anyone able to comment on this?
Grossman played with more poise than anyone else on the ice. He wasn't the fastest, but he wasn't out paced or out of position consistantly either. His passes were, if occasionally telegraphed, crisp and on the money. I'm anxious to see him in the bigs.
Well, there's my 2 cents from a two game scouting report.
One last thing... if anyone has a link to video of Holtet's spin-o-rama behind the back assist please post it. Absolutely gorgeous!
i have to disagree with you about grossman... we took a weekend trip to iowa and caught a couple games and he was clearly head and shoulders above the rest.
haha, looked up my post after that trip (1-16-2007):
Polak
A couple of good games doesn't amount to a stellar season. Of course he had some great games, but he progressed exactly as he was supposed to... Which means he's better than most in the league.
A couple of good games doesn't amount to a stellar season. Of course he had some great games, but he progressed exactly as he was supposed to... Which means he's better than most in the league.
Just like Dillon and Oleksiak are now.
no, of course not, but i'd say it's not the "average" prospects that get called up. if he were just average, he wouldn't have made it to the nhl.
no, of course not, but i'd say it's not the "average" prospects that get called up. if he were just average, he wouldn't have made it to the nhl.
I think his point was that NHL caliber players should stand out next to the rest of the AHL, which is comprised mostly of non-prospect type players in their late 20's - early 30's. Grossman, Dillon, Oleksiak all appear(ed) to be NHL players at some point.
Oleksiak, Nemeth, and Larsen possess the features that Fistric, Grossman, and Niskanen lacked that made them so ineffective. Nemeth brings everything Grossman does, but adds the intimidation factor, Larsen is pretty much better in every possible way than Niskanen and he has the European smarts and style that Niskanen sorely lacked, and Oleksiak is just a bigger stronger Fistric with offensive ability.
They could disappoint just like the other three, but there's at least some evidence right now that they won't.
Re: Vincour
It's fine if you don't think he'll turn into a superstar. He probably won't. But the logic that Vincour would've made the NHL later if he scored more in the WHL is pretty dubious to me.
It's fine if you don't think he'll turn into a superstar. He probably won't. But the logic that Vincour would've made the NHL later if he scored more in the WHL is pretty dubious to me.
Do you mean this with regard to this one specific player or in general? Surely there are players that organizations are less worried about "rushing" or "ruining" due to a perceived lower ceiling. I don't think it's crazy to say that if Vincour had scored at some amazing pace in the WHL that he would have been handled differently.
Oleksiak, Nemeth, and Larsen possess the features that Fistric, Grossman, and Niskanen lacked that made them so ineffective. Nemeth brings everything Grossman does, but adds the intimidation factor, Larsen is pretty much better in every possible way than Niskanen and he has the European smarts and style that Niskanen sorely lacked, and Oleksiak is just a bigger stronger Fistric with offensive ability.
They could disappoint just like the other three, but there's at least some evidence right now that they won't.
Re: Vincour
It's fine if you don't think he'll turn into a superstar. He probably won't. But the logic that Vincour would've made the NHL later if he scored more in the WHL is pretty dubious to me.
And Oleksiak has the shot. Fistric has probably the softest shot in the league.
is it like the studly wonderbomb, or more like zubie's seeing eye single home run?
Not exactly power, but more control. (Think Zubov, and him keeping his shots low) Plus, when you've got a big guy who can skate like he can, AND pull of a quick wrister like this... You win.
is it like the studly wonderbomb, or more like zubie's seeing eye single home run?
His shot is more about velocity, and it's seem to get heavier throughout the year. He's no Shea Weber though. He actually does have great placement with his wrist shot though. I can think of two goals he's scored off the rush with wrist shots where he just beat the goalie this year.
Not exactly power, but more control. (Think Zubov, and him keeping his shots low) Plus, when you've got a big guy who can skate like he can, AND pull of a quick wrister like this... You win.
good.. i'm not a huge fan of the power sans accuracy style. what were the circumstances of that goal? his demeanor after was interesting.. either a, "that's what i expected, no big deal" or maybe they were just too far up or down to get too excited. was interesting how even in the bench shot they didn't seem too psyched. sucks never getting to see them play. oddly enough i caught more games when they were states away in iowa.
good.. i'm not a huge fan of the power sans accuracy style. what were the circumstances of that goal? his demeanor after was interesting.. either a, "that's what i expected, no big deal" or maybe they were just too far up or down to get too excited. was interesting how even in the bench shot they didn't seem too psyched. sucks never getting to see them play. oddly enough i caught more games when they were states away in iowa.
IIRC ... that looked like his first pro goal, and I believe they actually interviewed him about his lack of reaction. He said he was going for that exact "been there, done that" demeanor you mentioned.
IIRC ... that looked like his first pro goal, and I believe they actually interviewed him about his lack of reaction. He said he was going for that exact "been there, done that" demeanor you mentioned.
good frickin grief i hope you're right... i love that mentality. one of my favorite things about loui. so well suited to the grind that is hockey. (well, apart from labor dispute shortened seasons. -.-)
