Completely agree about his hockey IQ (and his coaching - thank you, U of M). He simply does not make bad decisions with the puck - even more impressive is that more often than not he's going to try making the best possible play available.
But I disagree that he's out of place on the first line with Richards and Gabby - his IQ let's him to keep up with them and his speed adds an element to this line that creates space for his linemates. Which is what he's done with every position in the line-up he's been on - from the 1st line all the way down to the 4th.
I disagree that he doesn't make bad decisions with the puck in the offensive zone. He doesn't have great vision, and he panics at times on the cycle. A Lot of that has to do with inexperience. Doesn't mean he can't improve. But he hasn't shown me anything in terms of puck possession ability where he can be effective on the first line.
He is fast(he is great at chasing down pucks)and has knack for getting open. But his playmaking/decisions with the puck in offensive zone need significant improvement; if he is going to be a top 3 forward.
I've been singing Calle's praises since his freshman season. He's one of my favorite prospects, ever.
I said all along that watching him, you see the kid has "it." That "it" that you can't teach to a player. He just understands the game and what he needs to do on a given night to succeed. I've been saying ideal third line player, good second line player if things broke right for him. Things look like they may be breaking right for him!
I see a lot of people voicing concerns about things that were considered Hagelin's strengths in the NCAA. I'm going to mark it down to his game still making the transition to the big leagues. His shot is pretty damn good, not the best release but the accuracy is there and his hands along the boards are perfectly fine, maybe he panics and swings it the wrong way every once and a while but he is a player who will force the organization to make some tough decisions in the coming years due to his speed, conditioning, willingness, and age.
And his hands are pretty good, but when they catch up to the rest of him he could be a scary player whenever he breaks through the neutral zone. Also, he just completed his first 50 games in the NHL, and with 17 less games he has 3 less points than Anisimov. All things indicate that we have a very good player for now and the future on our hands.
Just a bit. You'd think that after all the worries over McDonagh not signing, and how that ended up being a total non-issue, that people would be less apt to parse every Kreider quote for hidden reasons as to why he won't sign.
The truth is, very few players refuse to sign with the team that drafted them. Few enough that it's not worth stressing over until it actually happens.
Just a bit. You'd think that after all the worries over McDonagh not signing, and how that ended up being a total non-issue, that people would be less apt to parse every Kreider quote for hidden reasons as to why he won't sign.
The truth is, very few players refuse to sign with the team that drafted them. Few enough that it's not worth stressing over until it actually happens.
especially not big market teams. its 1 thing if a guy doesnt wanna sign to play with the Blue Jackets...its another for them not wanting to sign with an original 6 team, in first place, with a roster spot almost giftwrapped for the kid.
I don't think he has the shot or offensive creativity to be a top 6 forward, but that can always develop. Either way, he's going to be a fantastic third liner in the league for years no matter what.
I don't know how any of you can say he is ill suited to the top line, when he is not only producing on the top line right now, but making the two all-stars that he is playing with BETTER in his rookie year. You can say that in the long run he may prove out to be more well suited towards the second or third, but saying he is not a top liner when he has been the best player on the ice for the best team in the conference almost half hte games he has played in this, his rookie season, is kind of ridiculous?
I see a lot of people voicing concerns about things that were considered Hagelin's strengths in the NCAA. I'm going to mark it down to his game still making the transition to the big leagues. His shot is pretty damn good, not the best release but the accuracy is there and his hands along the boards are perfectly fine, maybe he panics and swings it the wrong way every once and a while but he is a player who will force the organization to make some tough decisions in the coming years due to his speed, conditioning, willingness, and age.
And his hands are pretty good, but when they catch up to the rest of him he could be a scary player whenever he breaks through the neutral zone. Also, he just completed his first 50 games in the NHL, and with 17 less games he has 3 less points than Anisimov. All things indicate that we have a very good player for now and the future on our hands.
Totally agree, we haven't seen him at his full potential. But his full potential isn't here yet, and its probably not going to emerge this season. He has plenty of time to maximize his game.
I don't know how any of you can say he is ill suited to the top line, when he is not only producing on the top line right now, but making the two all-stars that he is playing with BETTER in his rookie year. You can say that in the long run he may prove out to be more well suited towards the second or third, but saying he is not a top liner when he has been the best player on the ice for the best team in the conference almost half hte games he has played in this, his rookie season, is kind of ridiculous?
Dude, he has played what two games as a top 3? He didn't get a single point last night. He has an ability to create space from his speed. I'm not sure if that is going to be enough to get Gabs and Richie going. I'm going to wait at least five games before I say for sure one way or another.
Hags is a great player. But I'm not sure if he has the skill set yet to be effective as a top 3. From what I have seen from him this season, I don't really think so. Doesn't mean he can't develop into that guy down the road.
I don't think he has the shot or offensive creativity to be a top 6 forward, but that can always develop. Either way, he's going to be a fantastic third liner in the league for years no matter what.
He showed good creativity in college. I'll think we'll see more of it at the pro level as he gains confidence and experience.
Dude, he has played what two games as a top 3? He didn't get a single point last night. He has an ability to create space from his speed. I'm not sure if that is going to be enough to get Gabs and Richie going. I'm going to wait at least five games before I say for sure one way or another.
Hags is a great player. But I'm not sure if he has the skill set yet to be effective as a top 3. From what I have seen from him this season, I don't really think so. Doesn't mean he can't develop into that guy down the road.
Points based mentality doesn't make any sense. As I said, he has arguably been the best player on the ice for the best team in the Eastern Conference for about half the time he has been in the NHL. I am not saying this makes him without a doubt a sure fire first liner, but arguing that he doesn't have the necessary skills to play there doesn't make any sense at this point. The kid has earned his current opportunity on the top line through his effort and skills all season long.
Points based mentality doesn't make any sense. As I said, he has arguably been the best player on the ice for the best team in the Eastern Conference for about half the time he has been in the NHL. I am not saying this makes him without a doubt a sure fire first liner, but arguing that he doesn't have the necessary skills to play there doesn't make any sense at this point. The kid has earned his current opportunity on the top line through his effort and skills all season long.
Sure it does. My stance is not whether he is playing well or not but whether he is effective on a first line. I don't see it. I'm not arguing how he has been slotting between second and third line minutes. His only great skill set, atm, is his speed and defensive ability. IMO, he is lacking in other areas to be effective.
Also, I think you are being way too generous in saying he has been our best player. He has been consistent, but he also has been used carefully.
I agree that points don't make the man, but from your original post it seemed like he was dominating as a first line player.
He makes every player he plays with better. He's one of the most effective forwards we have. In every situation. At both ends of the rink.
A 20 goal/50 point pace isn't good enough from a rookie?
Not arguing any of that.
I said in my previous posts he has been phenomenal. But that doesn't mean he works well as a top 3. I've been thrilled with how he has played as a rookie.
You don't need a line with three superstars in order to be successful.
Agreed, but none of those guys are rookies or inexperienced. Let me put this another way, would it be fair to say that all the players mentioned above are better than Carl atm?
