As long as he's average defensively and puts up points, I'll be OK with it. But he really needs to contribute offensively if that's the case. I never expected him to be a top-pairing D though.
It's a little frustrating that Vatanen can put up 2 points, and still make me want to for the overall game.
Vatanen definitely wasn't very good defensively today, but I've seen a lot of his games and I can comfortably say that his normal defensive effort is better than this. Offensively he did many good things though.
I didn't think he was that bad at all. I don't mean any offense but it almost seems like you guys are trying to find reasons to critique him so you don't become a hype slave. Sure he didn't have a strong game but I wouldn't say he was facepalm worthy.
Vatanen definitely wasn't very good defensively today, but I've seen a lot of his games and I can comfortably say that his normal defensive effort is better than this. Offensively he did many good things though.
He did, but a bit too sparingly today for my taste. Really, he had a couple of good shifts in the 2nd period, and was a factor on the PP. Offensively, I didn't feel he was dangerous from start to finish, or was good on the breakout start to finish. For me, that's not good enough, especially with the defensive effort we saw. If this is just one of those games, I can accept that, but he really needs to show he can be more effective when he isn't on the PP, or when he has the puck with time and space.
He did, but a bit too sparingly today for my taste. Really, he had a couple of good shifts in the 2nd period, and was a factor on the PP. Offensively, I didn't feel he was dangerous from start to finish, or was good on the breakout start to finish. For me, that's not good enough, especially with the defensive effort we saw. If this is just one of those games, I can accept that, but he really needs to show he can be more effective when he isn't on the PP, or when he has the puck with time and space.
I'd say that tonight was his weakest game of the season. He's been pretty reliable on the offensive end for most of the season.
I didn't think he was that bad at all. I don't mean any offense but it almost seems like you guys are trying to find reasons to critique him so you don't become a hype slave. Sure he didn't have a strong game but I wouldn't say he was facepalm worthy.
He was completely ineffective in the D zone, and flat out bad at times. That, on top of a couple of ugly turnovers. To be fair to Vatanen, like heks said, I thought he was worse defensively than in the previous games. Not great, and that's probably unrealistic, but not this bad.
Offensively, he just didn't give a consistent offensive effort. He was good in spurts, which I think would qualify this as a bad game in that area too, since in the games I've seen previously he's been better in that regards. When you combine the D, with the inconsistent offense, how is that anything but a bad game?
The offensive speed of the game is to Sami's styling, but it seems like he's not used to the pressure and quickness of the defensive side yet. Is it really that surprising to see a player have to acclimate oneself in a development league?
I'd say that tonight was his weakest game of the season. He's been pretty reliable on the offensive end for most of the season.
Yeah. I'm just saying it was a rough game for him. On the whole, I've been impressed with his offense. I'm pretty excited about seeing what he'll be able to do on the PP when he takes the next step. Even tonight, on an off night, he's a big factor on the PP.
The offensive speed of the game is to Sami's styling, but it seems like he's not used to the pressure and quickness of the defensive side yet. Is it really that surprising to see a player have to acclimate oneself in a development league?
I don't think that anyone is writing him off for having a weak game.
Seems like Vatanen should be benched. Watching a few games eating popcorn in the stands might give him the wake-up call to start playing not floating around.
Seems like Vatanen should be benched. Watching a few games eating popcorn in the stands might give him the wake-up call to start playing not floating around.
Everyone has bad games, it's not that big of a deal. Hell, I remember a large chunk of the beginning of the season, in '08-09 and '09-10, when Scotty Nieds was downright awful at times.
Not to mention, we don't need Vatanen to become an all around #1 stud, I've been one of his biggest proponents, and even I never expected that. He'll be a 2nd pairing guy, who needs a physical, defensively responsible counterpart. I think he'll always be average defensively, but I think we'll also see some 60pt seasons out of him.
Definitely the worst player of the Admirals though. And although that is debatable, he doesn't look like the best player of a pro league at the moment. Sorry Heksagon, I know you like Vatanen as a prospect but if he doesn't get his **** together he won't become an NHL player.
It seems like every time a Finnish prospect has a sub-par game, there is some overreacting going on after. First in the Barkov thread there were posts saying he's in a "slump" after one or two pointless games and will fall like a rock in the draft, and now this. Sorry, I just find it to be amusing. Patience is the key.
Definitely the worst player of the Admirals though. And although that is debatable, he doesn't look like the best player of a pro league at the moment. Sorry Heksagon, I know you like Vatanen as a prospect but if he doesn't get his **** together he won't become an NHL player.
I didn't think he was that bad at all. I don't mean any offense but it almost seems like you guys are trying to find reasons to critique him so you don't become a hype slave. Sure he didn't have a strong game but I wouldn't say he was facepalm worthy.
"Hype slave" is a good term, and anti-hype slavery is definitely something to be kept in mind when reading critiques. There is also the tendency of overusing hyperbole when evaluating a player's performance in order to make a post seem more interesting, or make the poster seem more knowledgeable.
for the overall game.
