HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Rattie, Schwartz or Jaskin?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-06-2012, 02:23 PM
  #1
stlweir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Rattie, Schwartz or Jaskin?

How would you rate these three prospects for their future NHL production? I think they will all be productive NHLers.

stlweir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 02:47 PM
  #2
CarvinSigX
Registered User
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Illinois
Country: United States
Posts: 7,285
vCash: 2370
I listed them by their likelihood of becoming an effective NHLer and their absolute ceilings. I'm NOT saying they'll hit these numbers because they'll probably only hit around 75% of these projections, if that.

Schwartz - 25/45/70
Jaskin - 30/30/60
Rattie - 40/30/70

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 03:01 PM
  #3
SirPaste
Registered User
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 6,204
vCash: 50
Yea Id agree with Carv. I think Schwartz has the best chance to reach his potential and Rattie probably has the best chance to bust, not saying that he will just that it wouldnt totally shock me if he wasnt able to convert to the NHL game. Jaskin really intrigues me, he could be an absolute beast.

SirPaste is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 03:24 PM
  #4
MattyMo35
Moderator
Schwartz Be With You
 
MattyMo35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 6,001
vCash: 1598
I think Schwartz will definitely be an NHLer. He already thinks the game at such a high level, it's hard to imagine that he won't be effective player at the next level. I'd imagine he'll be capable of putting up 50 points per season in his prime.

Rattie has a ton of pure skill. While he's not on Schwartz's hockey IQ level, he's no slouch either. He definitely drives hard to the net, and doesn't appear to be afraid of going to the corners. His skating will improve, and that ridiculously fast release will be a significant asset. I'd say he will be a consistent 40-45 point scorer in his prime, probably with more goals than assists.

Jaskin is the wildcard. He has one advantage over the other two, his size. He already has an NHL frame. He will definitely have to adapt to the pro game if he's going to be successful. He won't be able to simply go through his opponents in the NHL. He's going to have to be more creative and drive to open spaces. His willingness to throw his body around is a good sign, but he can't rely on it to score. I think most likely , he's a Ryan Clowe lite type. Physical, fights when needed, but puts up quite a few points. On second thought, kind of like Stewart from last year. That's pretty much where I see him. 35-40 points, 100 PIMs per season. I think they will all be NHLers, but more role player types.

MattyMo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 06:22 PM
  #5
jessejames
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Carberry, MB, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 74
vCash: 500
Good question! But difficult to answer.

At this point I hardly want to hazard a guess as how each will turn out.

All three have the potential, I believe, to be stars, first-line players eventually. I don't think any of them are destined to be role players. I certainly don't foresee Rattie as such.

jessejames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 06:39 PM
  #6
ManyIdeas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 1,813
vCash: 1152
I prefer jaskin because a behemoth with puck protection skills and a good shot is my favorite style of play.

I get the feeling rattie and schwartz will probably have better careers, though. No matter how it turns out, I'm not going to complain about all of this depth being our problem

ManyIdeas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 09:09 PM
  #7
h22prelude93
Registered User
 
h22prelude93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St.Louis, Mo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,407
vCash: 500
I find it very difficult to compare these three. Two are more skill/finesse types while one is much more of a hard-driving power forward. Two seem to have more of a nose for the net while one seems to be more of a playmaker. They also all three come from vastly different hockey backgrounds(which makes it even harder to accurately compare them). I do see Schwartz as having the highest probability of success out of three. He's already had a taste of the NHL, and knows exactly what it's going to take to succeed there. However, I think Jaskin and Rattie may have the higher overall potential. I think Jaskin has the tools to be a VERY successful NHLer, but it's going to be up to him whether or not he takes his game to the next level. Rattie I see as being the most versartile of the three. His high compete level, hockey IQ, and ability to be in the right places at the right times is what I think will make him such a valuable player. Overall, I think all three will be very successful at the pro level, but again it's really hard to start making any real predictions until we get to see all three on the ice together.

-Probability of Success-
Schwartz
Rattie
Jaskin

-Physicality-
Jaskin
Schwartz
Rattie

-Hockey IQ, Defensive Awareness-
Rattie
Schwartz
Jaskin

-Offensive Potential-
Jaskin
Schwartz/Rattie

h22prelude93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 10:21 PM
  #8
Crumblin Erb Brooks
Registered User
 
Crumblin Erb Brooks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Grenyarnia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by h22prelude93 View Post
I find it very difficult to compare these three. Two are more skill/finesse types while one is much more of a hard-driving power forward. Two seem to have more of a nose for the net while one seems to be more of a playmaker. They also all three come from vastly different hockey backgrounds(which makes it even harder to accurately compare them). I do see Schwartz as having the highest probability of success out of three. He's already had a taste of the NHL, and knows exactly what it's going to take to succeed there. However, I think Jaskin and Rattie may have the higher overall potential. I think Jaskin has the tools to be a VERY successful NHLer, but it's going to be up to him whether or not he takes his game to the next level. Rattie I see as being the most versartile of the three. His high compete level, hockey IQ, and ability to be in the right places at the right times is what I think will make him such a valuable player. Overall, I think all three will be very successful at the pro level, but again it's really hard to start making any real predictions until we get to see all three on the ice together.

-Probability of Success-
Schwartz
Rattie
Jaskin

-Physicality-
Jaskin
Schwartz
Rattie

-Hockey IQ, Defensive Awareness-
Rattie
Schwartz
Jaskin

-Offensive Potential-
Jaskin
Schwartz/Rattie
Really, you think Jaskin has higher offensive potential than Schwartz and Rattie? Both of those guys have done nothing but put up points in their respective junior leagues. Schwartz has slowed down his pace this year, but I really think Jaskin has the lowest scoring ceiling of the bunch.

Interesting trio though. I will say that I think Schwartz is closer to Rattie and Jaskin than Tarasenko in terms of overall potential. Schwartz definitely has some weaknesses to work on, his skating is pretty average for a guy his size and his defense probably needs some work. Not saying he wont be a scorer in the NHL, but he needs some time to work out the kinks. IMO Tarasenko is a s slam dunk, Schwartz isnt. Neither is Rattie or Jaskin.

Crumblin Erb Brooks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 10:37 PM
  #9
h22prelude93
Registered User
 
h22prelude93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St.Louis, Mo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumblin Erb Brooks View Post
Really, you think Jaskin has higher offensive potential than Schwartz and Rattie? Both of those guys have done nothing but put up points in their respective junior leagues. Schwartz has slowed down his pace this year, but I really think Jaskin has the lowest scoring ceiling of the bunch.
Key word there being potential. Notice I also ranked Jaskin's likeliness of reaching that potential lower than the other two. IMO, he is very much a boom or bust type prospect. JMHO

h22prelude93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 12:40 AM
  #10
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by h22prelude93 View Post
Key word there being potential. Notice I also ranked Jaskin's likeliness of reaching that potential lower than the other two. IMO, he is very much a boom or bust type prospect. JMHO
That doesn't make any sense to me. He can hit, fight, and has a two-way game. Arguably a better two-way game than either of the other two. It seems like you're trying too hard to differentiate the three and pigeon-holing them as a result.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 02:13 AM
  #11
h22prelude93
Registered User
 
h22prelude93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St.Louis, Mo
Country: United States
Posts: 1,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrokh View Post
That doesn't make any sense to me. He can hit, fight, and has a two-way game. Arguably a better two-way game than either of the other two. It seems like you're trying too hard to differentiate the three and pigeon-holing them as a result.
Perhaps I did categorize them too much, but it seems next to impossible to compare all three at this point without seeing what they look like next to one another at the pro level. Even Rattie and Schwartz seem similar at first glance, but really they are very different players. I'm not so sure that Jaskin is as defensively responsible as you claim, but if that's the case then I'm glad hear it. Anyone who reads these forums know I have been a huge advocate of the kid since day one. That said, I can't let my man crush get in the way of evaluating him as a player. I think he will succeed, but I think his success will depend a lot more on his mental side than his physical. And the more I think about it the "boom or bust" comment really was irrational, but I do stand by my word that I think Jaskin has the higher potential of the three.

h22prelude93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 04:59 AM
  #12
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by h22prelude93 View Post
Perhaps I did categorize them too much, but it seems next to impossible to compare all three at this point without seeing what they look like next to one another at the pro level. Even Rattie and Schwartz seem similar at first glance, but really they are very different players. I'm not so sure that Jaskin is as defensively responsible as you claim, but if that's the case then I'm glad hear it. Anyone who reads these forums know I have been a huge advocate of the kid since day one. That said, I can't let my man crush get in the way of evaluating him as a player. I think he will succeed, but I think his success will depend a lot more on his mental side than his physical. And the more I think about it the "boom or bust" comment really was irrational, but I do stand by my word that I think Jaskin has the higher potential of the three.
I do agree that it's nearly impossible to compare them. They're just different and each one took a completely different development path. They also have completely different strengths other than strong hockey IQ for each of them.

That's why I can totally buy that Jaskin has the highest potential as well as the lowest chance to hit that ceiling. However, I would also say that lower chance of hitting your ceiling doesn't mean a higher chance of busting. I think that's a common mistake people make when trying to simplify a prospect in their minds.

As for the whole discussion, I think it's easy to stick with old scouting reports and what these guys looked like just ONE year ago. Rattie, for example, isn't large, but he's not small. He's a couple inches taller than Schwartz, for sure. Look at him stand next to Seth Jones, who everyone has listed at 6'4". I don't think Rattie is four inches shorter. It's more likely that Jones is a bit shorter, but Rattie is right at six feet tall. Hell, people think Perron is on the small side, but he's clearly taller than Jackman when they stand next to each other. Again, it's probably that Jax is more like 5'11", but that only goes towards my point: Rattie might need to add five to ten pounds, but he's not going to be a small NHLer, just that size won't be an advantage. Far too often, I see both him and Schwartz lumped together as small-but-skilled, and I think that categorization is more laziness than anything.

Along the same line, both Rattie and Jaskin have noticeably improved their speed and overall skating. Enough for it to be a plus in the NHL? I'm not sure; but what excites me about both guys is that they have improved in exactly the areas that needed work. Oshie is an example of a guy with great hands, good vision, and is a very good athlete, but his speed plateaued very early. Damn good player, but the only way he'll get to the next level is if he suddenly improves his speed or really clicks with his linemates. Players who surprise you and end up hitting their unlikely ceilings are the ones who are able to keep improving instead of plateauing. Not saying that's Rattie or Jaskin, but I have more than blind fandom to give me hope about them.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 05:51 AM
  #13
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,013
vCash: 500
You all may not like my opinion. Based on the history of prospects with the Blues....I'm having a hard time deciding, if Schwartz or Rattie will be able to translate to the pro game. I hope they both prove me wrong, but I'm afraid we may have a Doug Palazzari in Schwartz. Rattie is kind of the same way. They are small and neither possesses breakaway speed. We will have to see, if they have the moxy, mettle, and heart for the next level. Are they strong enough on their stick for the next level? Do they have Perron and McDonald's strong stick skills? I think that if Rattie or Schwartz are not put on the top 2 lines, then they will have to be in the AHL. Given both of their defensive reputations, they both will have to put up numbers or they will not be in the NHL very long. May be tough for both to make it on the Blues roster given their roster make up already.

From what I've seen of Jaskin since crossing the pond, he has passed them both as an NHL prospect. He has top line potential, but could also bang on the 3rd line working his way up to the top two lines. Size, speed, and skill are an NHL recipe. Like Tarasenko, the Blues will find a place for him to play when the time comes.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:30 AM
  #14
MattyMo35
Moderator
Schwartz Be With You
 
MattyMo35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 6,001
vCash: 1598
I think we are jumping on the Jaskin bandwagon pretty quick right now. I think he will have a harder time adjusting to the pro game than Rattie and Schwartz. He has the size advantage, obviously, but he won't be able to rely entirely on being the biggest guy on the ice in the NHL. Schwartz and Rattie are used to being on the smaller side(but as Rumrokh said, Rattie isn't extremely small) and having to use their creativity to get a shot off. Jaskin's going to have to develop some creativity and awareness on the offensive side to truly make an impact. He's playing well, but he is a man among boys in the Q. I think he will have significant trouble in the AHL next season(assuming we sign him, which I don't see why we wouldn't).

MattyMo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:50 PM
  #15
Robb_K
Registered User
 
Robb_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NordHolandNethrlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
You all may not like my opinion. Based on the history of prospects with the Blues....I'm having a hard time deciding, if Schwartz or Rattie will be able to translate to the pro game. I hope they both prove me wrong, but I'm afraid we may have a Doug Palazzari in Schwartz. Rattie is kind of the same way. They are small and neither possesses breakaway speed. We will have to see, if they have the moxy, mettle, and heart for the next level. Are they strong enough on their stick for the next level? Do they have Perron and McDonald's strong stick skills? I think that if Rattie or Schwartz are not put on the top 2 lines, then they will have to be in the AHL. Given both of their defensive reputations, they both will have to put up numbers or they will not be in the NHL very long. May be tough for both to make it on the Blues roster given their roster make up already.

From what I've seen of Jaskin since crossing the pond, he has passed them both as an NHL prospect. He has top line potential, but could also bang on the 3rd line working his way up to the top two lines. Size, speed, and skill are an NHL recipe. Like Tarasenko, the Blues will find a place for him to play when the time comes.
Rattie is listed at 6 feet tall. He has gained some weight as recently as last summer, and is now in the low-mid 170s. I fully expect him to be 6 ft. tall, 185 to 190 lb when he starts playing in The NHL. With good luck, he'll already have that bulk when he starts his first pro season (AHL?). Despite not being a superfast skater, he has a good chance of his offensive game translating well to The NHL because of his offensive sense (offensive positioning and play anticipation) and his good shoot with quick release. He knows where to be and when, and gets there quickly, and has a good hard shot that he gets off quickly. He passes decently, too. He should be able to score in The NHL. In his prime he should be 6 ft. tall and wigh 190 to 195. That is NOT a small size that would hinder an NHL winger. Schwartz is 5 ft. 9 in. 190. HIS size hurts him a bit. But he should be effective in The NHL because of his anticipation of plays, knowing where to be and when, good passing ability, and seeing the ice well. He should be a VERY GOOD set-up man. Jaskin may or may not turn into a high-producing power forward. He must improve several aspects of his game.

Really, I look for Rattie to be a regular 30-goal scorer in The NHL, and 50-60 sniper, Schwartz to be a 20-25 goal 50-65 point set-up man, and Jaskin anywhere from not becoming an NHL regular forward, to being a 55-60 point 25-30 goal scoring power forward.

It will be interesting to watch them develop (although there's a reasonable one of them gets trade off as part of the package for a veteran #2 defenceman.

Robb_K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 02:07 PM
  #16
WildcatMapleLeafs28
Registered User
 
WildcatMapleLeafs28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyMo35 View Post
I think we are jumping on the Jaskin bandwagon pretty quick right now. I think he will have a harder time adjusting to the pro game than Rattie and Schwartz. He has the size advantage, obviously, but he won't be able to rely entirely on being the biggest guy on the ice in the NHL. Schwartz and Rattie are used to being on the smaller side(but as Rumrokh said, Rattie isn't extremely small) and having to use their creativity to get a shot off. Jaskin's going to have to develop some creativity and awareness on the offensive side to truly make an impact. He's playing well, but he is a man among boys in the Q. I think he will have significant trouble in the AHL next season(assuming we sign him, which I don't see why we wouldn't).
Out of the three, Jaskin will most likely have the easiest time adjusting. He has already played two seasons against men in the Czech pro league and is dominant in the CHL.He's physically and mentally mature. With his unique blend of skill,size and IQ, he'll be a solid contributer right away in the AHL and graduate after a little bit of seasoning.

As far as developing creativity and awareness , you're wrong. Im not sure you've seen him play because his hockey IQ, awareness and creativity is great. You could place to 16 year old rookies on his line and they'd be racking up points no problem. He not only makes people around him look good, he makes them look like stars. Jaskin can do it all , when you see him play you'll have a hard time picking out a flaw. He will be very successful at the AHL level next season , without a doubt.

WildcatMapleLeafs28 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 02:41 PM
  #17
MattyMo35
Moderator
Schwartz Be With You
 
MattyMo35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 6,001
vCash: 1598
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildcatMapleLeafs28 View Post
Out of the three, Jaskin will most likely have the easiest time adjusting. He has already played two seasons against men in the Czech pro league and is dominant in the CHL.He's physically and mentally mature. With his unique blend of skill,size and IQ, he'll be a solid contributer right away in the AHL and graduate after a little bit of seasoning.

As far as developing creativity and awareness , you're wrong. Im not sure you've seen him play because his hockey IQ, awareness and creativity is great. You could place to 16 year old rookies on his line and they'd be racking up points no problem. He not only makes people around him look good, he makes them look like stars. Jaskin can do it all , when you see him play you'll have a hard time picking out a flaw. He will be very successful at the AHL level next season , without a doubt.
I've seen him play. Probably not nearly as much as you have. However, when I've seen him, he has been absolutely dominant. There is no question about that. He uses his size to his advantage, and that's a great thing because there's nothing more frustrating than big guys that play like they're small. However, what I think he lacks is that next level creativity that will allow him to play in all situations. He seems to be a guy that thrives off being physical and powering his way around the ice. I have ABSOLUTELY no problem with that. I just think he will have a tough time doing that in the NHL when he's not the biggest guy on the ice. That's my concern. I hope you are right that he will instantly dominate the AHL, but I have my concerns.

MattyMo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 08:09 PM
  #18
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,013
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robb_K View Post
Rattie is listed at 6 feet tall. He has gained some weight as recently as last summer, and is now in the low-mid 170s. I fully expect him to be 6 ft. tall, 185 to 190 lb when he starts playing in The NHL. With good luck, he'll already have that bulk when he starts his first pro season (AHL?). Despite not being a superfast skater, he has a good chance of his offensive game translating well to The NHL because of his offensive sense (offensive positioning and play anticipation) and his good shoot with quick release. He knows where to be and when, and gets there quickly, and has a good hard shot that he gets off quickly. He passes decently, too. He should be able to score in The NHL. In his prime he should be 6 ft. tall and wigh 190 to 195. That is NOT a small size that would hinder an NHL winger. Schwartz is 5 ft. 9 in. 190. HIS size hurts him a bit. But he should be effective in The NHL because of his anticipation of plays, knowing where to be and when, good passing ability, and seeing the ice well. He should be a VERY GOOD set-up man. Jaskin may or may not turn into a high-producing power forward. He must improve several aspects of his game.

Really, I look for Rattie to be a regular 30-goal scorer in The NHL, and 50-60 sniper, Schwartz to be a 20-25 goal 50-65 point set-up man, and Jaskin anywhere from not becoming an NHL regular forward, to being a 55-60 point 25-30 goal scoring power forward.

It will be interesting to watch them develop (although there's a reasonable one of them gets trade off as part of the package for a veteran #2 defenceman.
Rattie reminds me of a former Blue Tony Currie. He put up some numbers and was a former Portland Winter Hawk. His game just didn't quite translate to the next level. Liabilities outweighed his ability to score. He had at least one 20 goal season, if I remember right. Very similar.

Jaden Schwartz reminds me of Michel Mongeau. First game I watched, I just noticed the similarities. Mongeau put up some gawdy numbers, but not quite at the next level. Not strong enough on his stick for the NHL. I hope I'm wrong. Just what I see, as a fair assessment.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 09:01 PM
  #19
Alklha
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,602
vCash: 500
The only one I would worry about sticking in the NHL is Rattie, he seems very much a boom or bust type player. Jaškin can basically play anywhere, and is decent in all areas so should stick in some role; personally I think he'll end up a second liner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
Jaden Schwartz reminds me of Michel Mongeau. First game I watched, I just noticed the similarities. Mongeau put up some gawdy numbers, but not quite at the next level. Not strong enough on his stick for the NHL. I hope I'm wrong. Just what I see, as a fair assessment.
I can't say that I've seen enough of him to make a fair assessment, but Hitchcock has spoken 3 or 4 times about the fact he feels Schwartz is very strong on his stick. In the interview with him just after our season finished, the way he spoke was as though he expected Schwartz to be on the Blues team at the start of October.

AHL numbers are obviously a bit disappointing, but nothing to read into. The less time he spends with Peoria the better.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:20 PM
  #20
rumrokh
I Bleed Blue
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
Jaden Schwartz reminds me of Michel Mongeau. First game I watched, I just noticed the similarities. Mongeau put up some gawdy numbers, but not quite at the next level. Not strong enough on his stick for the NHL. I hope I'm wrong. Just what I see, as a fair assessment.
Strange, considering Schwartz battled very well in his NHL games. His first goal, for example, came from some excellent digging in the corner and winning the puck from larger guys. That's just one example, but is not atypical - he's a battler.

If Schwartz fails at the NHL level, I don't think it will be due to not being "strong enough on his stick," but a combination of lacking size and speed, making him easier to defend, regardless of how strong he is on his stick.

We're not talking Sejna, for a recent example, who lacked size, lacked speed badly, AND lacked the willingness/ability to dig and take a hit. Sejna and Mongeau didn't debut in the NHL until their mid-20's. 25 in Mongeau's case. They were already completely developed as players and there was a reason they hadn't hit the NHL before. Schwartz has a lot more to prove, but he's already shown he can hold his own in the NHL at 19. Calling your assessment "fair" doesn't make it fair.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 02:06 AM
  #21
frostyflo
#peskyblues
 
frostyflo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,802
vCash: 500
you guys keep talking about how Jaskin dominates all the way on the ice. thats the problem I have.
how can he handle games where he isn't dominating anything? he could be Stewart2010/11 or could become Stewart2011/12 when he isn't strong enough mentally, nobody knows and thats why I think Schwartz is the most sure bet and after all the excitement for the juniors is gone (and maybe Dags and/or Stewart too) and we finally get NHL hockey back we all shall be glad to watch Jaden develope as a great player in the Bluenote

but I honestly have to say i haven't seen enough from them all, you guys know much more about them for sure

and some other poster here mentioned Schwartz and Rattie are some top6 or bust guys,
that might be true but with the depth we have for years to come on the wing we are able to run 3 scoring lines for a good amount of time. right now AMac is also protected to be on the 3rd line, right ;-)

frostyflo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 02:38 AM
  #22
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 5,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by frostyflo View Post
you guys keep talking about how Jaskin dominates all the way on the ice. thats the problem I have.
how can he handle games where he isn't dominating anything? he could be Stewart2010/11 or could become Stewart2011/12 when he isn't strong enough mentally, nobody knows
and thats why I think Schwartz is the most sure bet and after all the excitement for the juniors is gone (and maybe Dags and/or Stewart too) and we finally get NHL hockey back we all shall be glad to watch Jaden develope as a great player in the Bluenote

but I honestly have to say i haven't seen enough from them all, you guys know much more about them for sure

and some other poster here mentioned Schwartz and Rattie are some top6 or bust guys,
that might be true but with the depth we have for years to come on the wing we are able to run 3 scoring lines for a good amount of time. right now AMac is also protected to be on the 3rd line, right ;-)
I think that you could look at how he did last year, as he wasn't dominating. I personally watched none of his games, so I can't speak to his effort, but that would be where to look

bluesfan94 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 04:31 AM
  #23
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,013
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrokh View Post
Strange, considering Schwartz battled very well in his NHL games. His first goal, for example, came from some excellent digging in the corner and winning the puck from larger guys. That's just one example, but is not atypical - he's a battler.

If Schwartz fails at the NHL level, I don't think it will be due to not being "strong enough on his stick," but a combination of lacking size and speed, making him easier to defend, regardless of how strong he is on his stick.

We're not talking Sejna, for a recent example, who lacked size, lacked speed badly, AND lacked the willingness/ability to dig and take a hit. Sejna and Mongeau didn't debut in the NHL until their mid-20's. 25 in Mongeau's case. They were already completely developed as players and there was a reason they hadn't hit the NHL before. Schwartz has a lot more to prove, but he's already shown he can hold his own in the NHL at 19. Calling your assessment "fair" doesn't make it fair.
No reason to get defensive. I want him to turn out to be a stud too. Just watching him from the on set how he has played, a buddy of mine also made mention that his play reminded him of Michel Mongeau. He was a very skilled player. Hopefully, he can develop the rest of his game away from the puck and not be tabbed a power play/offensive specialist. I want him to turn into a Andy McDonald or the tiny Cliff Ronning too.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 04:38 AM
  #24
Robb_K
Registered User
 
Robb_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NordHolandNethrlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,383
vCash: 500
Schwartz's play looked good to me on The NHL level. he needs to get stronger and learn to play defence, and use his body better. But that can be said about just about every first year NHL forward. He may disappoint the fans who expect him to be a perennial 65 point scorer in The NHL. But I doubt that he'll fail to become a regular NHL Top 6 forward.

Robb_K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 01:55 PM
  #25
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
The whole thing with Schwartz is his extremely advanced hockey IQ. It's better than the other two by a fair margin. Not saying the other two don't have it; it's just Schwartz' defining characteristic. It's what separates him from the pack, and it's what separates good from great NHLers. Not saying Schwartz will be a great NHLer. In fact, he might not succeed at all. But if he succeeds, it's because of this aspect. His adjustment is all in the physicality and ability to handle defensive responsibilities. If he becomes at least adequate in these areas, he'll be a productive NHLer, possibly even a great player.

Rattie has good hockey IQ and an insane shot. He's also 6' and will eventually fill out. I could see him being a streaky winger at the NHL level. Put him on the right line and he'll produce. But he probably won't be his line's linchpin at the next level. I do think he's ultra competitive and like his chances to make it. Have a great feel about his attitude. Almost Perron-like.

Jaskin is more curious to me. It's obvious that he can dominate smaller and (mostly) younger players in the Q. When he played with men he didn't do this, but he's still in the middle of developing and kids aren't supposed to dominate men so it's no shame. Still, despite being larger than the average player, he won't ever have that pure physical edge in the NHL against so many towering defensemen (defensive corps are getting bigger and bigger by the year). Confidence is the key. If he can taste success level by level, he'll stick. If he stalls out when he hits a higher league with bigger players I could see him not making an NHL impact at all.

All in all, three very different players who rely on entirely different strengths. Schwartz that special hockey IQ, Rattie that special snap-laser-accurate shot, and Jaskin through a physical edge that allows him puck possession time to make something happen. Each of these strengths is clearly elite among their age group peers, but each has potential issues that could prevent those skills from translating at the next level. If one of these guys turns out to be as good as we hope, it'll be a boon to the Blues. If it's two guys, given the core and a player like Pietrangelo being a career anchor that'll always get the team into the playoffs, the Blues will be perennial threats. If they all three develop (definite longshot), we are looking at a possible multi-Cup cycle of Blues hockey. I don't even mean if they all develop and stay with the Blues – we might not have that much room on the wings but I trust Armstrong to shuffle his organizational assets to turn one or more of these guys into something impactful in trade.

PocketNines 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 11:28 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.