HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Notices

Draft post-Mortem

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-25-2012, 01:07 PM
  #26
Hawkster
Got Cup?
 
Hawkster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Zambia
Posts: 1,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
TT is an outstanding pick and outstanding value. He's 5'10.75" and 165lbs right now, but let's not forget that if he was a few days younger he'd be in the 2013 draft, he's really really young. He has plenty of time to grow and add weight.
This is a valid point that generally gets missed or ignored. TT is very young - Yakupov is 11 months older than him.

Hawkster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:12 PM
  #27
HjamSandwich
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Caps-Lock Post Mortem

HjamSandwich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:16 PM
  #28
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
For all this talk about being a top five talent, he wasnt drafted in the top five.

Says something right there, imo.

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:20 PM
  #29
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
For all this talk about being a top five talent, he wasnt drafted in the top five.

Says something right there, imo.
Just like Saad.. oh wait.

Players slide all the time, players are taken too early, all the time. Anze Kopitar clearly isn't a top-5 talent from his draft, he wasn't drafted there. Claude Giroux, again, not a top-5 talent from his draft either.. I could go on, but I think you get the point.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:22 PM
  #30
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Yes, it says that teams were scared off due to other things. Hell, Grimaldi last year was probably a top 5 skill set.

What people are saying is that the concerns people have about TT can be partially negated by other things: the fact that he is a year younger than other players in the draft, that his playing style does not require a ton of size, that despite his size he's already played well again men.

It's one thing if he struggled against men in the FEL like Collberg did in the SEL, it's another that he improved dramatically as the year went along and moved himself up the ranks of a very good Jokerit team.

Again, players fall for a lot of reasons, look at Saad last year where a groin injury caused everyone else to think he had attitude problems.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:33 PM
  #31
unbridledid
Registered User
 
unbridledid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
HF50, you simply need to stop while you're behind.
One thing about fiddy, he always finds the silver lining in every cloud...

Imagine him working a suicide hotline phone... people would be dropping like flies.

unbridledid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:36 PM
  #32
Martini*
Gods Team
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Just like Saad.. oh wait.
What has Saad done in the NHL, again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
Players slide all the time, players are taken too early, all the time. Anze Kopitar clearly isn't a top-5 talent from his draft, he wasn't drafted there. Claude Giroux, again, not a top-5 talent from his draft either.. I could go on, but I think you get the point.
Please dont try and compare a kid who weighs 165 to Kopitar or Giroux, first off.

Second with all the bleating here about how this kid was a top five talent, in this day and age of better scouting he wouldnt have fallen as far as he did. There are reasons why he did and after the year Giroux just had, there would have been a rush to take this kid if he was even a shred similar.

He isnt.

Martini* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:40 PM
  #33
hawksfan50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,828
vCash: 500
BUT everyone has missed my main point; that ON AVERAGE in pour position player (non-goalie)picks we were so far BELOW the average weights of the position players taken by most other teams--way below them ...of course we are not going to have the majority of our picks "make it" as nhl'ers --so this doesn't appear as crucial as if every pick in the draft makes it from every team -only then could you say that our "puny" draft crop of position layers will in all probability be "pushed around' by the teams that drafted way way bigger...YET on average it is an indicator of puniness IF such a drafting preference were to continue next year and beyond..then eventually our puniness would manifest to an entire team...
ALL i'm saying is that sTAN went overboard small this draft and that to prevent a trend from happening he's got to go a lot bigger soon (hopefully next draft) so that our average one,two or 3 nhl'ers from a draft (if position players) spread out the size distribution when we ice the BIG club (I mean the NHL club) over the coming years.
Therefore i hope that 2012 was an aberation where our draft was SUBSTANTIALLY below the poundage achieved by most other clubs ..Continuing such a trend to underpondage in relation to everyone else would be sUICIDAL for the club eventually..
Note" PIERRE MCGUIRE screaming at Buffalo to address their BIG centre needs at the draft--with Grigorenko and Girgensons they did that and over their entire draft with that 201.14 lb average succeeded in outweighing Chicago in position players by a huge margin of 28.64 lbs.....that is just one draft and won't mean that much BUT if it persists to that degree they would eventually push us around so easily it would be like men playing boys.

STAN cannot let such disparity in poundage persist over coming drafts or he risks dooming us eventually for years and years...

This is simply logical.



Also to my question about having TT (even when he adds 20 lbs) and Kane in the same top six ...WE will stillbe too small in the top six...Also if both are similar in style then there is only one puck to distribute --both can't play on the same line -we'll have overplays ...DO we need 2 of this "type" (albeit TT may be less inclined to stay on the perimeter) ?

WHAT is the pefect structure for a top six? for all 4 lines? IF TT is 2c behind Toews at 1C ---then you can't have a small or merely average size C for the 3rd line--Bolland would have to go....Maybe you put a "BIG" centre on line 4--but in the Hawks "star" system we play 3 lines and give only limited minutes to the 4th line
so Toews,TT,Bolland seems too small in the middle for the lines playing most minutes...
IF TT plays LW--then as i said i do not think you can play him with KANe...WHO is the "protector" on Kane's line? On TT's line?


WILL IT ALL MESH right? Or is the actual structuring over lines blend of types within lines the key to real success and not merely throwing 6 talented skill guys for the top 2 lines ut there then telling the bottom 2 lines to shut down opponents...?

hawksfan50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:43 PM
  #34
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,501
vCash: 500
People were scared off by his size, nothing more. Most the picks above him, esp the defensemen, were and are safer. But his upside is one of the highest and i am glad we took him then.

I just hope he is closer to Kane than to Gagner.

Crazy_Ike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:43 PM
  #35
BBSeabs27
#freeseabs
 
BBSeabs27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
People overrate size way too much on this site. Martin St. Louis is 5'8, as well as Brian Gionta and several other good hockey players. When you guys were 18, did you really stay at that size? Most of you probably didn't. Guys can continue growing into their mid 20's. Nothing is set in stone at 18. Besides, except for Teuvo, none of the guys we drafted are going to be in the NHL anytime soon.

BBSeabs27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:44 PM
  #36
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
What has Saad done in the NHL, again?

Please dont try and compare a kid who weighs 165 to Kopitar or Giroux, first off.

Second with all the bleating here about how this kid was a top five talent, in this day and age of better scouting he wouldnt have fallen as far as he did. There are reasons why he did and after the year Giroux just had, there would have been a rush to take this kid if he was even a shred similar.

He isnt.
Giroux weighed like 170 at the combine and still pretty much does, not sure what point you're trying to make there.

Scouting is not a science, never has been and never will be, sure it has been better but it's FAR from perfect. Don't be ridiculous here.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:44 PM
  #37
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
What has Saad done in the NHL, again?
What has any player in the top-5/10 of that draft done? Outside of RNH and Landeskog, next to nothing. Point was, if there was a re-draft, Saad gets picked in the top-10.. just like Giroux and Kopitar do in their drafts, taking what we know now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
Please dont try and compare a kid who weighs 165 to Kopitar or Giroux, first off.
Mah bad brah, I totally forgot Giroux was 6'2" and 200lbs when he was drafted. Not even close to comparable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini View Post
Second with all the bleating here about how this kid was a top five talent, in this day and age of better scouting he wouldnt have fallen as far as he did. There are reasons why he did and after the year Giroux just had, there would have been a rush to take this kid if he was even a shred similar.

He isnt.
Yes, in the "age of better scouting" you'd expect someone to realize Saad's drop-off in the second half of his draft year could have been related to something other than his "attitude" or "compete level".. but they didn't, he fell, and now he's Chicago's best prospect.

Why would Pittsburgh take a Dman at #8 when they have Morrow, Harrington and Despres in the system and had just acquired Dumoulin? Who knows? I don't give a **** why Teravainen dropped to us, I'm just glad he did.

There's a saying that goes with the NHL draft: "All it takes is one team to like one player more". That's why you have guys like Fowler go from top-5 pick to mid-1st pick. It's why you have Teravainen fall to #18 and why you have Forsberg fall to #11.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:48 PM
  #38
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawksfan50 View Post
BUT everyone has missed my main point; that ON AVERAGE in pour position player (non-goalie)picks we were so far BELOW the average weights of the position players taken by most other teams--way below them ...of course we are not going to have the majority of our picks "make it" as nhl'ers --so this doesn't appear as crucial as if every pick in the draft makes it from every team -only then could you say that our "puny" draft crop of position layers will in all probability be "pushed around' by the teams that drafted way way bigger...YET on average it is an indicator of puniness IF such a drafting preference were to continue next year and beyond..then eventually our puniness would manifest to an entire team...
ALL i'm saying is that sTAN went overboard small this draft and that to prevent a trend from happening he's got to go a lot bigger soon (hopefully next draft) so that our average one,two or 3 nhl'ers from a draft (if position players) spread out the size distribution when we ice the BIG club (I mean the NHL club) over the coming years.
Therefore i hope that 2012 was an aberation where our draft was SUBSTANTIALLY below the poundage achieved by most other clubs ..Continuing such a trend to underpondage in relation to everyone else would be sUICIDAL for the club eventually..
Note" PIERRE MCGUIRE screaming at Buffalo to address their BIG centre needs at the draft--with Grigorenko and Girgensons they did that and over their entire draft with that 201.14 lb average succeeded in outweighing Chicago in position players by a huge margin of 28.64 lbs.....that is just one draft and won't mean that much BUT if it persists to that degree they would eventually push us around so easily it would be like men playing boys.

STAN cannot let such disparity in poundage persist over coming drafts or he risks dooming us eventually for years and years...

This is simply logical.



Also to my question about having TT (even when he adds 20 lbs) and Kane in the same top six ...WE will stillbe too small in the top six...Also if both are similar in style then there is only one puck to distribute --both can't play on the same line -we'll have overplays ...DO we need 2 of this "type" (albeit TT may be less inclined to stay on the perimeter) ?

WHAT is the pefect structure for a top six? for all 4 lines? IF TT is 2c behind Toews at 1C ---then you can't have a small or merely average size C for the 3rd line--Bolland would have to go....Maybe you put a "BIG" centre on line 4--but in the Hawks "star" system we play 3 lines and give only limited minutes to the 4th line
so Toews,TT,Bolland seems too small in the middle for the lines playing most minutes...
IF TT plays LW--then as i said i do not think you can play him with KANe...WHO is the "protector" on Kane's line? On TT's line?


WILL IT ALL MESH right? Or is the actual structuring over lines blend of types within lines the key to real success and not merely throwing 6 talented skill guys for the top 2 lines ut there then telling the bottom 2 lines to shut down opponents...?
And in the years before this one it was our trend to take bigger guys. You have to go back and forth between skill, size, potential, BPA, team needs, etc. year over year. When it comes down to it though, you simply, each pick, need to take the guy you like best.

If TT turns out like Kane then we are blessed, trade one of them if you think our top 6 is too small, that's a GREAT problem to have if we have two players like that.

If we run Toews and TT down the middle then we have a big center like McNeill to run our 3rd line, not a big deal.

Not sure what you're trying to get at here. TT's ceiling is very high and was by far the best player available, I'd have taken him easily over your boy Hertl.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:50 PM
  #39
BBSeabs27
#freeseabs
 
BBSeabs27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HossTheBoss View Post
What has any player in the top-5/10 of that draft done? Outside of RNH and Landeskog, next to nothing. Point was, if there was a re-draft, Saad gets picked in the top-10.. just like Giroux and Kopitar do in their drafts, taking what we know now.



Mah bad brah, I totally forgot Giroux was 6'2" and 200lbs when he was drafted. Not even close to comparable.



Yes, in the "age of better scouting" you'd expect someone to realize Saad's drop-off in the second half of his draft year could have been related to something other than his "attitude" or "compete level".. but they didn't, he fell, and now he's Chicago's best prospect.

Why would Pittsburgh take a Dman at #8 when they have Morrow, Harrington and Despres in the system and had just acquired Dumoulin? Who knows? I don't give a **** why Teravainen dropped to us, I'm just glad he did.

There's a saying that goes with the NHL draft: "All it takes is one team to like one player more". That's why you have guys like Fowler go from top-5 pick to mid-1st pick. It's why you have Teravainen fall to #18 and why you have Forsberg fall to #11.
Fowler's a great example. He is a superstar in the making and drafted 12th overall. You dont have to be drafted in the top 5 to be an elite player. What kind of logic is that?

BBSeabs27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:50 PM
  #40
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
And in the years before this one it was our trend to take bigger guys. You have to go back and forth between skill, size, potential, BPA, team needs, etc. year over year. When it comes down to it though, you simply, each pick, need to take the guy you like best.

If TT turns out like Kane then we are blessed, trade one of them if you think our top 6 is too small, that's a GREAT problem to have if we have two players like that.

If we run Toews and TT down the middle then we have a big center like McNeill to run our 3rd line, not a big deal.

Not sure what you're trying to get at here. TT's ceiling is very high and was by far the best player available, I'd have taken him easily over your boy Hertl.
No kidding.. in fact, I thought SJ would take Teuvo just before the Hawks picked. I was going out of my mind when I knew Chicago would take one of Teravainen or Maatta.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 01:52 PM
  #41
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Maatta is way overhyped. He'll be good but there are plenty of other D man I'd have taken over him.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:04 PM
  #42
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
Maatta is way overhyped. He'll be good but there are plenty of other D man I'd have taken over him.
At #18? Who? I've seen alot of Maatta.. I don't think he'll be a great offensive Dman.. but I think he'll be a consistent 30ish point Dman, who plays very good defensively. A quality #3 on a good team.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:06 PM
  #43
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
I would've liked Skjei or Finn over him but that's just me. Maatta is good but I just don't think he'll be anything more than an average second pairing guy whereas I think those two could be good second pairing guys.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:09 PM
  #44
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagicSlap View Post
I would've liked Skjei or Finn over him but that's just me. Maatta is good but I just don't think he'll be anything more than an average second pairing guy whereas I think those two could be good second pairing guys.
I like Finn.. but he seems very simular to Maatta, with Maatta being the better skater. Skjei has been critized for doing nothing very well, outside of his skating, which is outstanding.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:13 PM
  #45
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Eh, just preference I guess, I just like them more than Maatta.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:32 PM
  #46
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,352
vCash: 500
Complaints about size are useless when you haven't even seen the guy play. Especially for a player as young as Teuvo.

I think Disgruntled said it best, there's no such thing as too many top six forwards. If everything pans out with Teuvo, his size will be the least of our worries.

As for the rest of the picks, I like Calnan, Brown, and Whitney, but otherwise feel nothing about the rest of them. Most of that is probably due to unfamiliarity, and will probably start to change at prospect camp.

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:40 PM
  #47
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,690
vCash: 10592
The funny thing about Whitney is I was the only person here I saw that ever said anything about him before the draft and now everybody loves him. Which is fine, I don't care, I just wonder why nobody else would even suggest drafting him.

coldsteelonice84 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:49 PM
  #48
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
The funny thing about Whitney is I was the only person here I saw that ever said anything about him before the draft and now everybody loves him. Which is fine, I don't care, I just wonder why nobody else would even suggest drafting him.
Congratulations, your favorite pick ended up in the 7th round after being rated the 2nd best goalie prospect in North America.

For where he was taken, Whitney was a great pick, but I wouldn't have chosen him over some of the other goalies in this draft, and clearly a lot of teams wouldn't either.

Save this kind of masturbatory hipster post for when he actually does something worthwhile.

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 02:53 PM
  #49
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,690
vCash: 10592
You're totally off the mark. Nobody said a WORD, not even, "if he's around in the 7th round, sure, take a shot at him" I could give two ***** if he wins 8 Vezinas, I mean, hopefully they are with the Hawks of course but what I hate is when people don't have anything positive to say about a move until the Hawks make it. Then all of a sudden, "Great ****ing move!"

coldsteelonice84 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 03:00 PM
  #50
giza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 184
vCash: 500
Post Draft thoughts

TT is a major talent. Kane will be gone soon enough. I doubt their paths will cross on the ice FOR the Hawks in an NHL game. Me like!

Fournier is the weakest part of this draft. Looks like Kelley had a hard on for him. I would have taken Dalton Thrower or Severnson before this kid. A Christian Laflamme type of reach.

Calnan might be a bit of a reach in the 3rd, but his combine results and style of play make him a worthy pick, ultimately.

Other than the big goalie, the rest of the group does nothing for me. I would have probably take a flier on Valeri Vasilyev in the later rounds as my offensive D man and taken one of the 2 tougher D guys mentioned above in the 2nd. There is some potential upside, so I give it a B.

giza is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:42 AM.

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.