You're spot on with this. People deny that there is a Russian bias, but there is. Grigorenko is a stud and I'd gladly take this guy and run. Yakupov may have the better start to his career, but I think Grigorenko will develop into the better player who has a greater impact on his team. Kind of like the Duchene and Tavares dynamic. Elite hockey sense trumps physical gifts IMO.
honest questions: can anyone answer for me why this guy is better than couturier was at this time last year, though? there seems to be much more love for grigorenko than there was couturier and i'm wondering why. couturier fell...why can't this kid fall without it being perceived as a bias?
honest questions: can anyone answer for me why this guy is better than couturier was at this time last year, though? there seems to be much more love for grigorenko than there was couturier and i'm wondering why. couturier fell...why can't this kid fall without it being perceived as a bias?
Well, from what I remember, people feared that Couturier did not have as high a ceiling as Grigorenko appears to have
That being said, there really wasn't any thing in Couturier's game to suggest that he drops to the #8 spot IMO.
I just don't like people piling on against prospects based on one sensationalist report (although our fellow posters have been fair for the most part). Rather have the whole side of the story.
honest questions: can anyone answer for me why this guy is better than couturier was at this time last year, though? there seems to be much more love for grigorenko than there was couturier and i'm wondering why. couturier fell...why can't this kid fall without it being perceived as a bias?
Couturier was a victim of over-scrutiny IMO. He burst onto the scene in Juniors and was the #1 projected pick at a very early stage of the draft process. He didn't do anything to not warrant #1 overall consideration, but scouts just picked his game apart in his draft year. There were concerns about his skating and his upside. Scouts saw him plateau maybe because he didn't have a huge jump in points from the year before. Could he have peaked and wasn't going to get much, much better? That was the main question that plagued him. Tavares was seen in a similar way because scouts stopped seeing all the good and just focused on the bad.
Grigorenko is better skater than Couturier and thus is considered to have higher upside it seems. I don't know how valid that is, but I get that gist. Plus, it's his first year in the Q and he's been ripping it up. It's debatable that Grigorenko will be a better pro than Couturier, but big Mikhail is considered the top center prospect in this draft. Galchenyuk may have a shot, but he's been injured all season with an ACL injury. Couturier had to compete with RNH, Huberdeau (huge riser), and Strome (another huge riser) for the top billing at his position.
All in all, the Draft is a crapshoot and very unpredictable.
i just really hope that snow doesnt go for a huge riser like he usually does. go with the proven body of work that SHOWS the kid belongs. Im not saying Nino or Strome wont be fantastic but it seems like snow passes over people who have proven their skills for years for people that have ONE dominating tourney or ONE great season. It makes me a bit nervous because...well, thats how we wound up with The Rick..
I agree its time for Garth to take the BPA and at 5ish it will be Dumba,Galchenyuk Trouba, IMO.
Now lets play devils advocate, if the Isles called Buffalo and offered the 5th pick for the 9th and 26th. Would u do it?
Or if the call the Crapitals and offfer the 5th pick and a 3rd for the 11th and 13th would u do it?
Buffalo scenario plays out and the Isles end up with Reinhardt or Ceci and Wilson or Thrower
Caps scenario plays out as 2 of Reinhardt,Ceci, Faska, Gaunce,Girgensons
Should the Isles be in the position to grab a Grigorenko or Murray or Galchenyuk, I sure as heck am hoping that they'll not once again decide to grab some kid who more or less has just arrived on the scene this year (as was honestly the case with de Haan, Niederreiter and Strome).
Quote:
Grigorenko is better skater than Couturier and thus is considered to have higher upside it seems. I don't know how valid that is, but I get that gist. Plus, it's his first year in the Q and he's been ripping it up. It's debatable that Grigorenko will be a better pro than Couturier, but big Mikhail is considered the top center prospect in this draft.
From what I've seen, would should talking about Grigorenko as more of Malkin type than anything else. That's the kind of player I envisionhim being able to be become. If the team picking him is unlucky, his downside appears to be that of a Yashin.
Bummer, eh?
Quote:
Galchenyuk may have a shot, but he's been injured all season with an ACL injury.
As such, this could be the year that a team picking 8-15 lucks out and takes a guy who may actually be every bit as good as the top 3.
I do like Wilson, however I do not feel that he has the value of a late 1st/ early 2nd. He has been mentioned to be compared to Lucic, Clowe and Kassian, all of whom have much better hands then Wilson. I feel that he'd be a Matt Martin clone at best. I just see him as a "project" forward. Not saying that he won't be an NHL player, I feel he's a boom/bust player, if you get the "boom" you got a "poor man's" Lucic and if you get the "bust" you get Tom Sestito.
Good size and intensity, risky pick this early in the draft.
I agree its time for Garth to take the BPA and at 5ish it will be Dumba,Galchenyuk Trouba, IMO.
Now lets play devils advocate, if the Isles called Buffalo and offered the 5th pick for the 9th and 26th. Would u do it?
Or if the call the Crapitals and offfer the 5th pick and a 3rd for the 11th and 13th would u do it?
Buffalo scenario plays out and the Isles end up with Reinhardt or Ceci and Wilson or Thrower
Caps scenario plays out as 2 of Reinhardt,Ceci, Faska, Gaunce,Girgensons
I do like Wilson, however I do not feel that he has the value of a late 1st/ early 2nd. He has been mentioned to be compared to Lucic, Clowe and Kassian, all of whom have much better hands then Wilson. I feel that he'd be a Matt Martin clone at best. I just see him as a "project" forward. Not saying that he won't be an NHL player, I feel he's a boom/bust player, if you get the "boom" you got a "poor man's" Lucic and if you get the "bust" you get Tom Sestito.
Good size and intensity, risky pick this early in the draft.
I always get excited with getting two other first rounders in exchange for a #5-8 pick.
One thing is clear though, no shot at Yakupov, Grigorenko or Murray should be offered up to drop back in the draft.
There are exceptions if certain bodies are coming in exchange as well.
I always get excited with getting two other first rounders in exchange for a #5-8 pick.
One thing is clear though, no shot at Yakupov, Grigorenko or Murray should be offered up to drop back in the draft.
There are exceptions if certain bodies are coming in exchange as well.
I want the isles to get the kid on the top of their draft board, who's available.
If the isles go into the draft holding 5th overall and their scouts want say Trouba, who's still available...then don't get cute. Take Trouba and don't risk losing him because oh joy,someone offered a two lower picks for the isles 1st.
i'm just not seeing what all the hype is about when it comes to grigorenko. i certainly don't see the comparison to malkin. while i don't agree with the one scout who said he wouldn't take him anywhere in the first round, i do find it problematic that he doesn't "bring it" every night. this criticism has come from more than one source. so, when the isles pick, i would rather they pick a kid who they have to tame down rather than one that have to try to rev up.
Should the Isles be in the position to grab a Grigorenko or Murray or Galchenyuk, I sure as heck am hoping that they'll not once again decide to grab some kid who more or less has just arrived on the scene this year (as was honestly the case with de Haan, Niederreiter and Strome).
From what I've seen, would should talking about Grigorenko as more of Malkin type than anything else. That's the kind of player I envisionhim being able to be become. If the team picking him is unlucky, his downside appears to be that of a Yashin.
Bummer, eh?
As such, this could be the year that a team picking 8-15 lucks out and takes a guy who may actually be every bit as good as the top 3.
It'll add some real excitement to the event.
Quote:
From what I've seen, would should talking about Grigorenko as more of Malkin type than anything else. That's the kind of player I envisionhim being able to be become. If the team picking him is unlucky, his downside appears to be that of a Yashin.
The knock on Yashin wasn't his skill, it was his not using it all the time.
If Grigorenko has Yashin skill no one could be unhappy, it just has to be accompanied by full time effort.
The only way I'd move that pick is if the NYI won the lottery and were in the position to draft Yakupov - and the only teams I'd talk about moving the pick to would be sending a top-9 pick back from the Western Conference along with an ever-sought-after top-4 d-man (since I'm not about 'helping' another team in the east without making them pay a premium another GM wouldn't. Think John Carlson OR Karl Alzner + WAS 1st for NYI 1st + 2nd. Not going to happen, since any deal would be predicated on how gaining Carlson would mitigate giving away Yakupov.)
Other than that, I could care less about how 'taboo' or whatever it is to draft for organizational need, because ALL teams need young, high-end players of all positions in their organization - from Boston, all the way to Columbus. The center depth in the system is light years beyond the blueline depth, and while it's no guarantee that 3-5 recent NYI-draftee centers will hit or excede their potential, the team needs the fewer D-men drafted to hit that potential that much more, since Tavares & Frans are slotted in as #1 & #2/#3 for at least 4 more years, and the only 2 d-men not made of glass to show promise are Hamonic & Ness. There's almost twice the number of high-end centermen drafted than D, but twice the number of openings on the blueline.
If Grigorenko has Yashin skill no one could be unhappy, it just has to be accompanied by full time effort.
Something that would then be up to the coaching staff to get out of him.
After reading the comments form Patrick Roy, I'm really not worried about the claims as to his lack of effort or desire.
In fact, in light of the nagging ankle injury and his production despite not being able to move at 100%, perhaps even 80%, I'm hardly giving any of this uncertainty any attention.
Last edited by Chapin Landvogt: 03-07-2012 at 10:19 AM.
Something that would then be up to the coaching staff to get out of him.
After reading the comments form Patrick Roy, I'm really not worried about the claims as to his lack of effort or desire.
In fact, in light of the nagging ankle injury and his production despite not being able to move at 100%, perhaps even 80%, I'm hardly giving any of this certainy any attention.
Bravo Chapin, my sentiments exactly.
I have been shaking my head at all of this 'Grigorenko is a tin man' business lately. The knee jerk overreaction isn't surprising though, it happens every year to a couple of the top prospects. Couturier's fall last year should be fresh in the minds of many and look at how that turned out.
I have been shaking my head at all of this 'Grigorenko is a tin man' business lately. The knee jerk overreaction isn't surprising though, it happens every year to a couple of the top prospects. Couturier's fall last year should be fresh in the minds of many and look at how that turned out.
This is when certain prospects get chiselled by the draft rags. I have found it commonly irrelevant to how they eventually perform. I trust my eyeballs more than a publication that is looking for goats and heros.
If the Isles have the 5th pick and Grigorenko is still there you take him or u trade the pick for a kings ransom. Either way if you take him, u have a solid future top line center and if u trade him he get a top 4 Dman a pick and another good prospect from a team that needs a potential number 1 center.
I personally would pick Grigorenko unless the offer was insane. Even if he turns out to be Yashin, thats not to bad of a player...
If the Isles have the 5th pick and Grigorenko is still there you take him or u trade the pick for a kings ransom. Either way if you take him, u have a solid future top line center and if u trade him he get a top 4 Dman a pick and another good prospect from a team that needs a potential number 1 center.
I personally would pick Grigorenko unless the offer was insane. Even if he turns out to be Yashin, thats not to bad of a player...
Questions like this are fun, but at the end of the day, it is March.
So much will change before June....we could be talking about Murray going #1 or Grig slipping to past top 5... At about this time last year, Couturier was in the BIG THREE talk with Lando and RNH . Huberdeau was outside the top 5!
so much can happen between now and june 22 it is crazy!
Questions like this are fun, but at the end of the day, it is March.
At about this time last year, Couturier was in the BIG THREE talk with Lando and RNH . Huberdeau was outside the top 5!
so much can happen between now and june 22 it is crazy!
Actually, the big 3 were RNH, Couturier and Adam Larsson. By this time last year, Landeskog was already making a "top 4" and soon you had a top 8 including Dougie, Strome, Huberdeau, Ryan Murphy. Huberdeau's Memorial Cup run created a "top 5", with Couturier already looking like the faller.
You're right, it is too early, we could make a playoff run and fall short and end up picking 10-12 and end up with the leftover top d-man after the first 4 or 5 are picked. After the consensus top two (Murray and Dumba), the following three (Trouba, Reilly, Reinhardt) are all flawed in some way and there's much variability in the order pundits have them ranked.
Actually, the big 3 were RNH, Couturier and Adam Larsson. By this time last year, Landeskog was already making a "top 4" and soon you had a top 8 including Dougie, Strome, Huberdeau, Ryan Murphy. Huberdeau's Memorial Cup run created a "top 5", with Couturier already looking like the faller.
You're right, it is too early, we could make a playoff run and fall short and end up picking 10-12 and end up with the leftover top d-man after the first 4 or 5 are picked. After the consensus top two (Murray and Dumba), the following three (Trouba, Reilly, Reinhardt) are all flawed in some way and there's much variability in the order pundits have them ranked.
Good call. Thanks for the correction.
Either way, I am just frustrated having the draft be the only time of hope for the Islanders. Unless Nail is donning blue and orange, a draft pick isn't that exciting for the future given our track record with development.
If I were a GM, the following would be a key, key component of my drafting strategy with respect to a top 5-10 pick:
If a kid thought to be a top 2-4 pick in his draft year has been scouted, talked and raved about for several years and then his game starts being dissected after the WJC in his draft year, I never, ever, ever pass over him in favor of a kid who has first "arrived" as a high flight prospect in the course of his draft year.
Never!
That means, no way I'd have taken Huberdeau or Strome over Couturier.
That means, no way I'd have taken Johansen or Niederreiter or Skinner over Fowler.
I won't even discuss what took place in the theatrical "The Infatuation for C de Haan". I still don't know how a staff could have considered him to be worth all those picks AND more than Kulikov.
Again, I absolutely LOVE our late round drafting, with the exception of the '10 draft (of course). But the first round picks certainly haven't been cases of going with conventional wisdom (with the exception of Tavares). Anything but, actually.
The only way I'd move that pick is if the NYI won the lottery and were in the position to draft Yakupov - and the only teams I'd talk about moving the pick to would be sending a top-9 pick back from the Western Conference along with an ever-sought-after top-4 d-man (since I'm not about 'helping' another team in the east without making them pay a premium another GM wouldn't. Think John Carlson OR Karl Alzner + WAS 1st for NYI 1st + 2nd. Not going to happen, since any deal would be predicated on how gaining Carlson would mitigate giving away Yakupov.)
Well, that naturally wouldn't be a deal with an Western Conference team, but I know what you're getting at.
If you ask me, if we have the #1 overall pick and are willing to move it, we need a better deal than that, and admittedly one where we wouldn't be moving 2nd rounders as well. Either Carlson or Alzner would help, but I have to think there are roughly 5 teams out there who'd give more to grab Yakupov.
Still, when tossing around the names Yakupov and Grigorenko, gotta think a team like Washington would be as interested as any. Great deal of doubt lingering around those parts nowadays! They could generate some hot media interest and excitement by adding one of those two to the fading Ovechkin aura.
Quote:
The center depth in the system is light years beyond the blueline depth, and while it's no guarantee that 3-5 recent NYI-draftee centers will hit or excede their potential, the team needs the fewer D-men drafted to hit that potential that much more, since Tavares & Frans are slotted in as #1 & #2/#3 for at least 4 more years, and the only 2 d-men not made of glass to show promise are Hamonic & Ness.
I think 'made of glass' is the wrong phrase. Certainly, it applies to de Haan and Katic thus far, but it has not yet applied to Donovan, Ness and Wishart, much less Mayfield, Pedan, Rosso, and Kichton.
Now, looking at those last four names, we can happily say that the Isles certainly looked at the blueline in the last draft and made a number of picks in that direction. The first round has overbearingly been devoted to forwards and the '09 and '10 drafts saw some wasted opportunities to grab a number of promising Dmen in several rounds.
Again, had our staff been one that works with conventional wisdom and was more concerned over what truly proven skillset a kid had and had promisingly displayed over the course of 2-3 seasons before his draft, then we'd have no less than Fowler and Couturier in our line-up RIGHT NOW!
Ok, back to the topick at hand: Dunno if the team actually practices a strict policy of only going "forward" with a top 10 pick, but it'd be easy to think that. It has been the case in every Snow-led draft.
Now, looking at our prospects, let's line up things a bit per position:
CENTERS (4 NHL slots)
Strome
Nelson
Cizikas
Sundstrom (also wing)
Ullstrom (also wing)
Trivino
DMEN (7 NHL slots)
de Haan
Donovan
Ness
Katic
Wishart
Mayfield
Pedan
Russo
Kichton
As you mentioned, we already know that Tavares and Nielsen are taking up two of those NHL slots while Hamonic and MacDonald look like long-term answers on the blueline.
There's also Bailey in the center slot.
You're right thought that our C position looks 'settled' in comparison to our defensive ranks.
Quote:
There's almost twice the number of high-end centermen drafted than D, but twice the number of openings on the blueline.
Strength down the middle is huge, also on the trade market. I know Snow 'n co. can draft, especially in later rounds, but Snow rarely trades, he's stopped adding waiver wire pick-ups and he hasn't gone out and signed a hot college UFA since what, Trevor Smith?
I'm extremely critical of his asset management to date. For a bottom feeder, we've lost a number of NHL-capable bodies per waiver wire in recent years while not replacing them with anything but often times rushed prospects. I really, really despise this practice.
Gotta see what he does with the depth he's supposedly been adding. Gathering and nurturing is great, but the assets have to evolve in contributors or be turned into other assets... not just pissed away into the wind.
