HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Florida Panthers
Notices

Florida Panthers Prospect Thread 2013-2014

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-19-2013, 02:21 PM
  #751
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
The 2010 draft for me was a success. We got 3 NHL players. Not only that, but 3 players that look to have an important role on our team for years. Could we have hoped for better? Yeah. Is Gudbranson going to become one of the best #3 overalls in recent history? Likely not. But I think they all fill an important need in their own way. And they all represent the size, speed, skill, and character that Tallon wants.
Important? Yet to be determined, but plausible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
The 2010 draft was an identity building draft. Brickley is another big, tough, speedy forward. He'll probably only be a 4th liner if he makes it, and he's had setbacks with injuries too, but he'd be a nasty 4th liner with good speed and would fill a toughness role. McFarland is another forward in the Tallon mold, although he looks like a complete bust now. But it was a boom/bust pick. Had to figure there'd be at least one of those with all the picks we had. But it also makes me wary of boom/bust selections that high now. My preference is for boom/bust players to be taken in rounds 3-7. Where the likelihood of selecting an NHL player in that range in small anyhow. So why not make boom/bust selections there.
I thoroughly disagree that it is an identity builder. What identity has been built? Only 1 player from the draft has played a full NHL season. Seems a bizarre claim. If you're saying it was a builder in the sense that it sets the tone for what Tallon looks for, sure, but seems slightly irrelevant when discussing the merit of this draft on it's own.

Brickely is a write-off. If he becomes an NHL player, it's years away, and it's in a role which has very high turn over and a large pool to choose from.

I don't like the generic term boom/bust anymore. It completely negates any critical analysis of a player and his personality. If you want to select a player, or title him with DND, then have reasoning behind it, not some semantic and cliched tag like boom/bust. It's just a tag fans without enough information use.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
Petrovic looks like a great pick. Basaraba is an OK college player, but likely not an NHLer. He could potentially be a regular in San Antonio though when his college career is over. I admit not the greatest pick, but perhaps he could still play a role in our organization as an AHL power forward that helps out our kids. I still have faith in Brittain. He had his starting job taken away last season, but it was by an outstanding goalie who has already signed an NHL contract with the Jets. This upcoming season is obviously probably the most important of his career. We'll have a better grasp of where he stands in a year.
Petrovic is promising indeed. Will be interesting to track his progression in the NHL.

Basabara can again like Brickely, be written off. If he makes it, it's years away in a role with high turn over. It's of little to no impact to an NHL squad.

Brittain has qualities, but is so far away. Missing 2 years of development in this position is really unfortunate. The odds are against him.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
The rest of the picks are what you'd expect from late round picks. Not much. Although it wouldn't be accurate to say we never have any success with late round picks. Gaiduchenko is a starter in the KHL(even though he'll never play for us). Wade Megan looks like a potential player for us 4 years after his draft, and was an above average college player. He'll definitely be with San Antonio for at least a few years, and then we'll assess after that. Corban Knight was a 5th round pick, also.
It would be entitely accurate to say we haven't had much success. I'm not going to find the brief study i did (it's available via search if you want) but i can assure you Panther drafts (and the later rounds) have seen an absolutely abysmal return.

If we teniously include 2009, the best picks outside the 1st round (which itself has been a "interesting") since 2000 are Kamil Kreps, Ivan Majesky (GMs not with florida), Greg Campbell, Evgeny Dadonov, Michal Repik, David Booth and Drew Shore. Booth comfortably the best and Campbell the only other certified durable NHL'er.

Gayduchenko is emerging now as a KHL starter. He's not an NHL player now and needs further development to realistically become NHL quality. Clutching at straws.

Wade Megan has 13 professional games. Far too early to call, and if that is the measurement of late round success .... i'm sorry, what happened saturday night, because I GOT ********* HAMMERED.

Knight is promising. Well be interesting to see how his career develops in Calgary.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline  
Old
07-19-2013, 06:25 PM
  #752
Markstrom Rules
Great Finnish
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 15,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
Important? Yet to be determined, but plausible.
I said they look to have important roles. It's not guaranteed, but as things stand now, they figure to.

Quote:
I thoroughly disagree that it is an identity builder. What identity has been built? Only 1 player from the draft has played a full NHL season. Seems a bizarre claim. If you're saying it was a builder in the sense that it sets the tone for what Tallon looks for, sure, but seems slightly irrelevant when discussing the merit of this draft on it's own.
Brickely is a write-off. If he becomes an NHL player, it's years away, and it's in a role which has very high turn over and a large pool to choose from.
It's not irrelevant. Do you think it's a coincidence that 4 of our first 6 picks that year were 6'2" or taller? And were all above 6'0"? And three of them were 6'4" or taller? It was Tallon's first draft. He was setting the foundation. He went heavy on size and character in 2010.

Yes, Brickley and even moreso Basaraba are longshots to make the NHL, and they fill a role that has a large pool to choose from, but Brickley could be an NHLer someday. Only three years have passed since the draft and you're already writing him off. If he finds a way to contribute to our organization, then it's not a wasted pick. And you can't just draft trying for top 6 forwards with every pick. Bottom 6 types that are developed within the organization are valuable too, namely because they are cheap. Also, who cares if he's years away? Since when is there a deadline? It's understood that most draft picks outside the 1st round are going to be years away.

Quote:
I don't like the generic term boom/bust anymore. It completely negates any critical analysis of a player and his personality. If you want to select a player, or title him with DND, then have reasoning behind it, not some semantic and cliched tag like boom/bust. It's just a tag fans without enough information use.

I don't know what you're talking about here. The term boom/bust will continue to be used by GM's, scouts, and experts. Who cares if it's cliché? It continues to be used because it makes sense. Quinton Howden is a safe prospect. Rocco Grimaldi is a boom/bust prospect. Howden was thought to be a likely NHLer when he was drafted. And as of right now, it's pretty safe to say he will be an NHLer. Grimaldi has certain qualities, some of which are out of his hands, that make him much less likely of a bet to be a longtime NHLer. He'll either be a top6/9 scorer, or he won't be in the NHL. He won't be able to adapt to a bottom 6 defensive/grinding role. It really has little to do with personality. It's usually more of a playing style, and sometimes mother nature that makes a prospect boom/bust.



Quote:
Petrovic is promising indeed. Will be interesting to track his progression in the NHL.


Brittain has qualities, but is so far away. Missing 2 years of development in this position is really unfortunate. The odds are against him.
I agree that it will be an uphill battle for Brittain, but you can't say it was a bad pick. Some factors have hindered his development that were out of his control. He still looks like a decent prospect. I think we should just take a wait and see approach this season with him. We'll be able to much better assess him in a year.




Quote:
It would be entitely accurate to say we haven't had much success. I'm not going to find the brief study i did (it's available via search if you want) but i can assure you Panther drafts (and the later rounds) have seen an absolutely abysmal return.

If we teniously include 2009, the best picks outside the 1st round (which itself has been a "interesting") since 2000 are Kamil Kreps, Ivan Majesky (GMs not with florida), Greg Campbell, Evgeny Dadonov, Michal Repik, David Booth and Drew Shore. Booth comfortably the best and Campbell the only other certified durable NHL'er.

Gayduchenko is emerging now as a KHL starter. He's not an NHL player now and needs further development to realistically become NHL quality. Clutching at straws.

Wade Megan has 13 professional games. Far too early to call, and if that is the measurement of late round success .... i'm sorry, what happened saturday night, because I GOT ********* HAMMERED.

Knight is promising. Well be interesting to see how his career develops in Calgary.
Oh I'm sure we've have an abysmal late round draft history with the nightmare drafts we had in the late 90's/early 2000's. I'm just saying I don't think we can look at our late round picks from 2010 and declare it "just another Panthers draft" yet. And even if none of them turn into anything, we have had what looks to be a little bit of recent success in the late rounds(for late round picks). Unless you expect a team to pull a Zetterberg or Datsyuk out of the late rounds every couple years. Being more realistic, I think we have done a decent(not good) job lately. Gaiduchenko may not be a bluechip prospect, but he's still a starter in the 2nd best league in the world, and has been for a couple years. He would obviously have some adaptations to make if he were to come over to North America and have success(which he won't), but it would be no different from most European goalies that come over and try their hand in North America.

Megan and Knight are obviously anything but proven yet, and are just embarking on their professional careers. Is it a sin to say they look promising so far, like they could possibly contribute to an NHL roster one day? I find it funny that you have such strict guidelines on this, considering you are so quick to write off Brickley. Megan is a projectable bottom six forward who had a pretty decent college career. Knight was a top 10 NCAA scorer last season and was highly sought after when it was made known he wouldn't sign with us. They look like decent late round picks so far, that's all. Which is all you can say only 3 years out from a draft.

Markstrom Rules is offline  
Old
07-19-2013, 09:58 PM
  #753
Dr Beinfest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 585
vCash: 500
It's crazy to think -- so far the 2010 NHL draft is pretty bad. For the entire league, it's been a weak class.

2011 on the other hand is quick to it.

Dr Beinfest is offline  
Old
07-20-2013, 08:47 AM
  #754
Brock
Moderator
 
Brock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Oakville
Posts: 9,210
vCash: 500
http://ohlprospects.blogspot.ca/2013...thers.html?m=1

A review of Florida's OHL prospects (season review and future outlook).

__________________
OHL Prospects Blog - http://ohlprospects.blogspot.com/
OHL Prospects on Twitter - @BrockOtten
Brock is offline  
Old
07-20-2013, 09:51 AM
  #755
Mogo
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Mogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 9,530
vCash: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Beinfest View Post
It's crazy to think -- so far the 2010 NHL draft is pretty bad. For the entire league, it's been a weak class.

2011 on the other hand is quick to it.
Gotta love our 3rd round picks 2011

Mogo is offline  
Old
07-21-2013, 02:21 PM
  #756
Dr Beinfest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 585
vCash: 500
Definitely. I often forget Trochek wasn't a 2nd, he was a 3rd.

Dr Beinfest is offline  
Old
07-21-2013, 02:26 PM
  #757
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
I said they look to have important roles. It's not guaranteed, but as things stand now, they figure to.
All 3 are quite far from being impact players at the NHL level. Lets wait and see before making assumptions.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
It's not irrelevant. Do you think it's a coincidence that 4 of our first 6 picks that year were 6'2" or taller? And were all above 6'0"? And three of them were 6'4" or taller? It was Tallon's first draft. He was setting the foundation. He went heavy on size and character in 2010.
It's irrelevant when discussing the merit of the draft on it's own. Tallon shapes our identity, not this draft. This draft may form a part of our identity, but it's niether where the ideals of this identity derive from, nor as of yet, is it a source of success and impact for this identity.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
Yes, Brickley and even moreso Basaraba are longshots to make the NHL, and they fill a role that has a large pool to choose from, but Brickley could be an NHLer someday. Only three years have passed since the draft and you're already writing him off. If he finds a way to contribute to our organization, then it's not a wasted pick. And you can't just draft trying for top 6 forwards with every pick. Bottom 6 types that are developed within the organization are valuable too, namely because they are cheap. Also, who cares if he's years away? Since when is there a deadline? It's understood that most draft picks outside the 1st round are going to be years away.
3 years have passed and he's struggled at the NCAA level. Limited offensive abilities. Does he make the NHL? Unlikely, but plausible. Do we care if he makes the NHL at this point? Not particularly.

Developing and finding 4th line players isn't particularly hard. Developing and finding very good bottom line players is much harder and i'm afraid Brickely is a million miles away from that.

Yes, it is understood draft picks outside of the 1st round take years? Your point? Brickely has shown absolutely no development curve and has extremely limited projectability.










Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
I don't know what you're talking about here. The term boom/bust will continue to be used by GM's, scouts, and experts. Who cares if it's cliché? It continues to be used because it makes sense. Quinton Howden is a safe prospect. Rocco Grimaldi is a boom/bust prospect. Howden was thought to be a likely NHLer when he was drafted. And as of right now, it's pretty safe to say he will be an NHLer. Grimaldi has certain qualities, some of which are out of his hands, that make him much less likely of a bet to be a longtime NHLer. He'll either be a top6/9 scorer, or he won't be in the NHL. He won't be able to adapt to a bottom 6 defensive/grinding role. It really has little to do with personality. It's usually more of a playing style, and sometimes mother nature that makes a prospect boom/bust.
Sigh. Boom or bust is a generic phrase blasted out because you're too lazy to go into further analysis. Buchnevich may be seem as a classic "boom or bust pick" from this draft. On it's own, what is the use of this tag? What does it tell us? Not a lot. It means absolutely nothing. Analyse the player and tell us the upsides/downsides. It's hilariously lazy.

You said this "My preference is for boom/bust players to be taken in rounds 3-7.". Which seems bizarre, uneducated and frankly stupid. Assess players on their own merit and the other players available instead of living by a generic cliche.







Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
I agree that it will be an uphill battle for Brittain, but you can't say it was a bad pick. Some factors have hindered his development that were out of his control. He still looks like a decent prospect. I think we should just take a wait and see approach this season with him. We'll be able to much better assess him in a year.

Did i say it was a bad pick? I simply said he's very far from the NHL, and unlikely to make the NHL. Which seems fair. Of course we shall wait and see.






Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
Oh I'm sure we've have an abysmal late round draft history with the nightmare drafts we had in the late 90's/early 2000's. I'm just saying I don't think we can look at our late round picks from 2010 and declare it "just another Panthers draft" yet. And even if none of them turn into anything, we have had what looks to be a little bit of recent success in the late rounds(for late round picks). Unless you expect a team to pull a Zetterberg or Datsyuk out of the late rounds every couple years. Being more realistic, I think we have done a decent(not good) job lately. Gaiduchenko may not be a bluechip prospect, but he's still a starter in the 2nd best league in the world, and has been for a couple years. He would obviously have some adaptations to make if he were to come over to North America and have success(which he won't), but it would be no different from most European goalies that come over and try their hand in North America.
Early 2000's? You mean up to 2007.

I'm simply assessing the draft 3 years later. It's not an accurate assessment because we don't have complete data. Still, we're at a point in time since the event where educated assessments can begin to be formed. It isn't unreasonable to write several of these players off. You can play the sitting on the fence game, but i'm happy to form stronger opinions now.

Never mentioned Zetterberg or Datsyuk. The data simply shows we have a poor record drafting in the later rounds.

Gayduchenko can't be used to counter that notion.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
Megan and Knight are obviously anything but proven yet, and are just embarking on their professional careers. Is it a sin to say they look promising so far, like they could possibly contribute to an NHL roster one day? I find it funny that you have such strict guidelines on this, considering you are so quick to write off Brickley. Megan is a projectable bottom six forward who had a pretty decent college career. Knight was a top 10 NCAA scorer last season and was highly sought after when it was made known he wouldn't sign with us. They look like decent late round picks so far, that's all. Which is all you can say only 3 years out from a draft.
To say they are promising? Sure. To use their names as some form of counter argument against a bad record of drafting in the later rounds? Yes, it isn't clever. We'll see how they turn out, but for now they can't be used as any proof that things have turned around.

Strict guidelines? I don't understand. Perhaps you missed the point.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 07:20 PM
  #758
florida pwnthers
Registered User
 
florida pwnthers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,402
vCash: 500
Bjugstasd invited to orientation camp for US

http://olympics.usahockey.com/page/s...50-camp-roster

florida pwnthers is offline  
Old
07-22-2013, 07:41 PM
  #759
RampageNate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: San Antonio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to RampageNate
Quick question:

Do the Panthers even hold the rights to Wade Megan anymore. He was drafted in 2009 and has since graduated college. Don't they have 30 days to sign him? I thought I saw Aug 15th as a deadline to sign him to an ELC or he becomes a UFA.

Any insight would be appreciated.

RampageNate is offline  
Old
07-24-2013, 06:31 AM
  #760
florida pwnthers
Registered User
 
florida pwnthers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,402
vCash: 500
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1474427 140+ page prospect thing,

Bjugstad is a huge, physical offensive forward, who also brings
some nice top end skills, similar to that of which power forwards like
Eric Lindros and Keith Primeau used to bring to the
table.


ok nvm lol


Last edited by florida pwnthers: 07-24-2013 at 06:41 AM.
florida pwnthers is offline  
Old
07-24-2013, 08:59 AM
  #761
Acadmus
Moderator
 
Acadmus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vermont
Country: United States
Posts: 15,085
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RampageNate View Post
Do the Panthers even hold the rights to Wade Megan anymore. He was drafted in 2009 and has since graduated college. Don't they have 30 days to sign him? I thought I saw Aug 15th as a deadline to sign him to an ELC or he becomes a UFA.
This could be wrong completely...but I seem to recall his rights were traded to Boston along with Campbell and Horton?

EDIT: no, I'm wrong...though I know we sent some prospect to Boston over the last couple of years (Knight maybe? - no, that was Calgary...I give up)

__________________
"...and ultimately it doesn't matter."
Acadmus is offline  
Old
07-24-2013, 09:13 AM
  #762
Ghoste
Vigo the Carpathian
 
Ghoste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,925
vCash: 835
Last I heard with Megan (which Rampage Nate already knows) is his time with the Rampage at the end of their season. He scored in his first game but no other points after that.

-ghoste

Ghoste is offline  
Old
07-24-2013, 09:14 AM
  #763
MickOlax
Registered User
 
MickOlax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Finland
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acadmus View Post
This could be wrong completely...but I seem to recall his rights were traded to Boston along with Campbell and Horton?

EDIT: no, I'm wrong...though I know we sent some prospect to Boston over the last couple of years (Knight maybe? - no, that was Calgary...I give up)
I'm pretty sure it was Matt Bartkowski. He's doing pretty well in the Bruins organisation btw.

MickOlax is offline  
Old
07-24-2013, 09:49 AM
  #764
RampageNate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: San Antonio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to RampageNate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghoste View Post
Last I heard with Megan (which Rampage Nate already knows) is his time with the Rampage at the end of their season. He scored in his first game but no other points after that.

-ghoste
On his third shift and first shot. Was nowhere to be seen for the final 12.75 games.

In his defense though, and I sound like a broken record when I say this, that team was so bad, no one would've looked good.

RampageNate is offline  
Old
07-29-2013, 05:11 AM
  #765
slasher911
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 834
vCash: 500
A few Michael Matheson photos from last season:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/88298351@N03/9388546243/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/88298351@N03/9391323612/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/88298351@N03/9388546017/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/88298351@N03/9391315624/

He's going to be interesting to watch this year.

slasher911 is offline  
Old
07-29-2013, 06:01 AM
  #766
pb1300
BLEED RED
 
pb1300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Aiyio, Greece
Country: Greece
Posts: 10,337
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to pb1300
Our future Soupy! I expect big things this year from him at BC.

pb1300 is offline  
Old
08-06-2013, 09:11 PM
  #767
Markstrom Rules
Great Finnish
 
Markstrom Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 15,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
3 years have passed and he's struggled at the NCAA level. Limited offensive abilities. Does he make the NHL? Unlikely, but plausible. Do we care if he makes the NHL at this point? Not particularly.

Developing and finding 4th line players isn't particularly hard. Developing and finding very good bottom line players is much harder and i'm afraid Brickely is a million miles away from that.

Yes, it is understood draft picks outside of the 1st round take years? Your point? Brickely has shown absolutely no development curve and has extremely limited projectability.
I wouldn't say Brickley has struggled. When he's been healthy, he's been productive(remember, for a guy who is not projected to be a scorer in the NHL). He's one of the Vermont's best forwards when he's in the lineup. He has struggled to stay healthy, yes. Do we care if he makes the NHL at this point? Yes, I do. I don't understand your viewpoint on this. Of course we should care. Even if he just becomes a regular call-up/top AHL guy, that's contributing positively to the franchise. You can't expect every draft pick to become an NHL player in an important role. If he fills a role that Florida needs in several years, and comes cheaply, then that's a positive. Of course, it would be nicer if every draft pick becomes a top 6 forward/top 4 defense, but I'll take some draws too. Not everything has to be black and white.


Quote:
Sigh. Boom or bust is a generic phrase blasted out because you're too lazy to go into further analysis. Buchnevich may be seem as a classic "boom or bust pick" from this draft. On it's own, what is the use of this tag? What does it tell us? Not a lot. It means absolutely nothing. Analyse the player and tell us the upsides/downsides. It's hilariously lazy.

You said this "My preference is for boom/bust players to be taken in rounds 3-7.". Which seems bizarre, uneducated and frankly stupid. Assess players on their own merit and the other players available instead of living by a generic cliche.
I don't know why you feel the need to be the hipster of hockey or something, but it doesn't change the fact that 'boom/bust' is still used and will continue to be used. It makes sense and is convenient, and not everybody has time to go into a lengthy critical analysis of a player's game when describing a player. Cliches are clichés for a reason. As long as GM's and hockey experts use it, it's fine for me.

Yes, Buchnevich would be seen as a boom/bust pick. I don't know why that upsets you, and frankly I don't care. I've already explained what the tag tells somebody, in a very logical way. If you choose to put earplugs in, that's your business.


Quote:
To say they are promising? Sure. To use their names as some form of counter argument against a bad record of drafting in the later rounds? Yes, it isn't clever. We'll see how they turn out, but for now they can't be used as any proof that things have turned around.

Strict guidelines? I don't understand. Perhaps you missed the point.
When a draftee struggles slightly, you have no problem writing them off after 2 or 3 years. But when they show a modicum of success, then you say it's too premature to heap praise and further evaluation is needed.

Markstrom Rules is offline  
Old
08-07-2013, 09:17 AM
  #768
CapeShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Markstrom Rules;69988301]I wouldn't say Brickley has struggled. When he's been healthy, he's been productive(remember, for a guy who is not projected to be a scorer in the NHL). He's one of the Vermont's best forwards when he's in the lineup. He has struggled to stay healthy, yes. Do we care if he makes the NHL at this point? Yes, I do. I don't understand your viewpoint on this. Of course we should care. Even if he just becomes a regular call-up/top AHL guy, that's contributing positively to the franchise. You can't expect every draft pick to become an NHL player in an important role. If he fills a role that Florida needs in several years, and comes cheaply, then that's a positive. Of course, it would be nicer if every draft pick becomes a top 6 forward/top 4 defense, but I'll take some draws too. Not everything has to be black and white.

I love our NCAA guys. I understand that Brickley shows up at our most recent d -camp fully recovered from three major set backs, most recent is reconstruction wrist surgery and puts on a show of speed, skill and conditioning. As a member of USA U20team, he is far from struggling. When healthy he is the best player on any given night during any NCAA game. However, he is very difficult to play with and/or against. He comes as advertised, first line skill (hand, head and playmaking) with third/fourth line attitude (speed, strength and aggression). He will soon be in the fold for many years.

CapeShamrock is offline  
Old
08-07-2013, 12:01 PM
  #769
IceManCat
Tank Disarmed
 
IceManCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Miami
Country: United States
Posts: 1,620
vCash: 500
Brickley is a fun player to watch hits everything in sight plays hard

IceManCat is offline  
Old
08-07-2013, 12:05 PM
  #770
Gudbranson4Prez
Yu - Behr - Doe
 
Gudbranson4Prez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,508
vCash: 50
Kyle Clifford upside?

Gudbranson4Prez is offline  
Old
08-07-2013, 04:32 PM
  #771
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,758
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
I wouldn't say Brickley has struggled. When he's been healthy, he's been productive(remember, for a guy who is not projected to be a scorer in the NHL). He's one of the Vermont's best forwards when he's in the lineup. He has struggled to stay healthy, yes. Do we care if he makes the NHL at this point? Yes, I do. I don't understand your viewpoint on this. Of course we should care. Even if he just becomes a regular call-up/top AHL guy, that's contributing positively to the franchise. You can't expect every draft pick to become an NHL player in an important role. If he fills a role that Florida needs in several years, and comes cheaply, then that's a positive. Of course, it would be nicer if every draft pick becomes a top 6 forward/top 4 defense, but I'll take some draws too. Not everything has to be black and white.
Brickley hasn't been productive at the NCAA level.

I don't care if he makes the NHL, because i don't believe he has anything significant to offer. Can he be an NHL player? Sure, it is plausible, if not entirely likely. Can he bring anything to the table at the NHL level that isn't within the boundaries of the bottom line turnover sphere of the NHL? Not in my opinion.

So we can ramble on about semantics here (if he plays games he contributes etc etc etc) but i don't see how Brickley isn't a pretty marginal NHL prospect at this point. His production is poor, his development has stalled, he doesn't have any particularly interesting abilities that truely set him apart in a very competitive field and he hasn't played a full season in 3 years. Call it what you will, pontificate until the toaster has evolved into oven ; he's a long way from the NHL.

It's not that i think Brickley won't be a Top 6 impact player, it's that i think Brickley will struggle to be an NHL player.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
I don't know why you feel the need to be the hipster of hockey or something, but it doesn't change the fact that 'boom/bust' is still used and will continue to be used. It makes sense and is convenient, and not everybody has time to go into a lengthy critical analysis of a player's game when describing a player. Cliches are clichés for a reason. As long as GM's and hockey experts use it, it's fine for me.
If being a hipster is pointing out generic, lazy and meaningless cliches, then my hat and my sandals are in the wash.

Boom or bust is just a meaningless term. Why are they boom or bust? Contextless phrase. Either expand on it in great detail or don't bother. Furthermore you suggested you'd prefer not to take "boom or bust" players before the 3rd round ..... which again, completely negates context, free thinking and the situation. It's just lazy.

GM's and experts use it within a context and don't make up generic rules. They adapt to situations and make decisions on any number of variables.

Furthermore, half the time these boom or bust tag picks simply relate to prospects having percieved very high end strengths and glaring weaknesses, yet it's not entirely uncommon for niether "boom" nor "bust" to actually be met.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
Buchnevich would be seen as a boom/bust pick. I don't know why that upsets you, and frankly I don't care. I've already explained what the tag tells somebody, in a very logical way. If you choose to put earplugs in, that's your business.
I logical is saying you'd not choose him before round 3 based on a generality rule, then i'm going to heaven tomorrow and my finger truely does indicate my "size".

It doesn't upset me. It niether troubles me with grief, peturbs me nor does it make me anxious. I don't care that you don't care? Should i say that. I don't care that i don't care th ... oh who the hell knows what is going on anymore. Maybe we should discuss hockey!





Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules View Post
When a draftee struggles slightly, you have no problem writing them off after 2 or 3 years. But when they show a modicum of success, then you say it's too premature to heap praise and further evaluation is needed.
Most drafted players don't make the NHL. Most players who see limited or no development (however you measure that) in 2/3 years following the draft do not make the NHL. Most NHL players are/were very productive in their environments leading up to the NHL.

Conversely, just because a player has developed (again depending on measurement) well in the 2/3 years since the draft, doesn't mean we should heap praise and expectations on them. Further evaluation is needed, because guess what, they haven't established themselves in the NHL yet. Which implies we don't know their likely role and capabilities at that level yet. Thus, one should surely deduce that we must ..... wait further to evaluate!

It's far easier to development a solid evaluation on who likely won't succeed in the NHL than it is on who will.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline  
Old
08-08-2013, 12:45 PM
  #772
CapeShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=J17 Vs Proclamation;70010131]Brickley hasn't been productive at the NCAA level.

So we can ramble on about semantics here (if he plays games he contributes etc etc etc) but i don't see how Brickley isn't a pretty marginal NHL prospect at this point. His production is poor, his development has stalled, he doesn't have any particularly interesting abilities that truely set him apart in a very competitive field and he hasn't played a full season in 3 years. Call it what you will, pontificate until the toaster has evolved into oven ; he's a long way from the NHL.

It's not that i think Brickley won't be a Top 6 impact player, it's that i think Brickley will struggle to be an NHL player.

Brick is an interesting prospect. Forget about his stats at NCAA. If you know your players then you would know WHY he does not NCAA "productive" stats. This player has not been healthy since he cut his hamstring tendon at the u20 world in 2012. However, he shows at d-camp and puts on a show of speed, skill, strength, leadership, character and conditioning to the absolute delight of the Panthers leadership. He again demonstrates his unique ability to have a skill set for first line duty along with 3/4th line if called to do so. The Panthers leadership need to decide what to do with him.

CapeShamrock is offline  
Old
08-08-2013, 08:49 PM
  #773
ControlPuck
@ControlPuck
 
ControlPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manitoba
Country: Canada
Posts: 531
vCash: 500
I'm doing a 2014 mock draft, and I have the Panthers picking 2nd. Do you think they would rather draft Aaron Ekblad to play with Gudbranson or William Nylander to play with Barkov and Huberdeau? Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks.

ControlPuck is offline  
Old
08-09-2013, 12:45 AM
  #774
JP Mick
Fire trucks beware!
 
JP Mick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Homestead, FL
Posts: 4,491
vCash: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by ControlPuck View Post
I'm doing a 2014 mock draft, and I have the Panthers picking 2nd. Do you think they would rather draft Aaron Ekblad to play with Gudbranson or William Nylander to play with Barkov and Huberdeau? Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks.
Picking second? That is very kind of you, but a bit premature.

JP Mick is offline  
Old
08-09-2013, 02:49 AM
  #775
Howboutthempanthers
Registered User
 
Howboutthempanthers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Broward County, Fla.
Country: United States
Posts: 3,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ControlPuck View Post
I'm doing a 2014 mock draft, and I have the Panthers picking 2nd. Do you think they would rather draft Aaron Ekblad to play with Gudbranson or William Nylander to play with Barkov and Huberdeau? Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks.
Even though I have a more optimistic view of the upcoming season. Just for the sake of argument, I would go with Nylander. We have plenty of young defensemen in the organization. And if we are picking second, rather go with the forward than the defensemen at that spot.

Howboutthempanthers is online now  
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 09:10 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.