Okay, might never get this out of Craig, what about Ristolainen doesn't make him a top 15 pick?
He isn't a Button type of player.
Button, if you look from his previously list (he even tells people in his videos he has a preference), likes the slick type of defensemen or defenseman with huge size (6-5+)
Ristolainen brings an impressive package and a toolset many will like, but it isn't Button's taste.
That is why he didn't have Siemens in his top 30 in 2011, not particularly huge and not slick. That is why he had Murray lower than others, who brings an impressive safe package but not as offensively slick as Rielly.
I would prefer to see Ristolainen higher but that is my type of defenseman, not his.
What I like about Button, is that he actually watches all these players play.
His lists are based off his thoughts, not a consensus of other lists. I like the off the board rankings because it shows a different perspective. Nobody can really argue with him, these are this thoughts and nobody is right or wrong.
I really like Petan, I think he's going to go in the first round. His skill can't be matched in this draft besides maybe Drouin. Size is a concern, but look how well Conacher has adjusted to the NHL.
Depending on where the Sens finish, I think their guy might be Mantha. He's a big skillful RW that we could use. The only D I could see Murray taking is Pulock. He probably won't take Zadorov and I'm not sure if he likes Nurse.
What I like about Button, is that he actually watches all these players play.
His lists are based off his thoughts, not a consensus of other lists. I like the off the board rankings because it shows a different perspective. Nobody can really argue with him, these are this thoughts and nobody is right or wrong.
What I like about Button, is that he actually watches all these players play.
His lists are based off his thoughts, not a consensus of other lists. I like the off the board rankings because it shows a different perspective. Nobody can really argue with him, these are this thoughts and nobody is right or wrong.
I really like Petan, I think he's going to go in the first round. His skill can't be matched in this draft besides maybe Drouin. Size is a concern, but look how well Conacher has adjusted to the NHL.
Depending on where the Sens finish, I think their guy might be Mantha. He's a big skillful RW that we could use. The only D I could see Murray taking is Pulock. He probably won't take Zadorov and I'm not sure if he likes Nurse.
I like Petan but there's some hyperbole here. For one, Mackinnon is more skilled than Petan.
I wonder why Anthony Mantha is never higher on these lists. He's a big body (6'4") and has crazy numbers this year (almost one goal per game).
Anybody here has seen him enough to explain what his weaknesses might be and why he can't make it to Top 15? I have the feeling he might be playing too far (Val-d'Or) and is falling under the radar because of that.
I wonder why Anthony Mantha is never higher on these lists. He's a big body (6'4") and has crazy numbers this year (almost one goal per game).
Anybody here has seen him enough to explain what his weaknesses might be and why he can't make it to Top 15? I have the feeling he might be playing too far (Val-d'Or) and is falling under the radar because of that.
He doesn't put in 60 minutes of hockey often. He'll score 3 goals in a period, and then fail to really exist the rest of the game.
He's also accused of floating in his own zone, and not putting a full effort into defense.
I really like him, and he's probably one of the better pure scorers i. The draft.
I wonder why Anthony Mantha is never higher on these lists. He's a big body (6'4") and has crazy numbers this year (almost one goal per game).
Anybody here has seen him enough to explain what his weaknesses might be and why he can't make it to Top 15? I have the feeling he might be playing too far (Val-d'Or) and is falling under the radar because of that.
It's not because of location ... He's been in almost every top 20 list the last couple of months ... Scouts know he's there, they'll go see him ...
It's mostly work ethic and two-way issues with him not being a top 10-15 pick IMO... A 40 goal-scorer with that frame would certainly be in the top 10 without those areas of concern in the defensive end.
He doesn't put in 60 minutes of hockey often. He'll score 3 goals in a period, and then fail to really exist the rest of the game.
He's also accused of floating in his own zone, and not putting a full effort into defense.
I really like him, and he's probably one of the better pure scorers i. The draft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HalifaxDucks
It's not because of location ... He's been in almost every top 20 list the last couple of months ... Scouts know he's there, they'll go see him ...
It's mostly work ethic and two-way issues with him not being a top 10-15 pick IMO... A 40 goal-scorer with that frame would certainly be in the top 10 without those areas of concern in the defensive end.
Thank you for these updates.
So who could he be compared to? A future James Neal or Rick Nash maybe, at best?
Lehkonen 16th?
Ristolainen 20th? Did he step on Button's cat? Christ!
I'm not really taking a stance on Lehkonen's position, but I will say that those that only saw him play in the U20's will have Lehkonen considerably lower than those that have scouted him playing in the SM-liiga. He was not very impressive in the U20's, while he has been very good in the SM-liiga. That seems to be a trend, that draft eligible players, even if they play very well in their own league, have a hard time transferring their game to the U20's (Barkov, Lehkonen both have been playing very well in the finnish league, not so impressive in the WJC, vs. Granlund, Salomäki who both haven't been producing all that well in the finnish league, were both clearly better than Barkov or Lehkonen).
That said, I don't see how in anyone's books Lehkonen could be a better prospect than Ristolainen. Ristolainen has a body very well built for a physical two-way defenseman, and he skates very well. Also he has plenty of upside. Lehkonen on the other hand, while having all the puck skills and IQ and skating etc, lacks badly in the physical aspect of the game, and is very small. Lehkonen has a mountain to climb to reach the NHL level, while Ristolainen isn't all that far off.
I'm not really taking a stance on Lehkonen's position, but I will say that those that only saw him play in the U20's will have Lehkonen considerably lower than those that have scouted him playing in the SM-liiga. He was not very impressive in the U20's, while he has been very good in the SM-liiga. That seems to be a trend, that draft eligible players, even if they play very well in their own league, have a hard time transferring their game to the U20's (Barkov, Lehkonen both have been playing very well in the finnish league, not so impressive in the WJC, vs. Granlund, Salomäki who both haven't been producing all that well in the finnish league, were both clearly better than Barkov or Lehkonen).
That said, I don't see how in anyone's books Lehkonen could be a better prospect than Ristolainen. Ristolainen has a body very well built for a physical two-way defenseman, and he skates very well. Also he has plenty of upside. Lehkonen on the other hand, while having all the puck skills and IQ and skating etc, lacks badly in the physical aspect of the game, and is very small. Lehkonen has a mountain to climb to reach the NHL level, while Ristolainen isn't all that far off.
He's not that small. Around the same height as Teräväinen, needs to put on weight/muscle (at 68ish kg right now). 10 kilos more should already be enough for the international level. Plenty of time to work on that thanks to the new CBA.
I'm not really taking a stance on Lehkonen's position, but I will say that those that only saw him play in the U20's will have Lehkonen considerably lower than those that have scouted him playing in the SM-liiga. He was not very impressive in the U20's, while he has been very good in the SM-liiga. That seems to be a trend, that draft eligible players, even if they play very well in their own league, have a hard time transferring their game to the U20's (Barkov, Lehkonen both have been playing very well in the finnish league, not so impressive in the WJC, vs. Granlund, Salomäki who both haven't been producing all that well in the finnish league, were both clearly better than Barkov or Lehkonen).
That said, I don't see how in anyone's books Lehkonen could be a better prospect than Ristolainen. Ristolainen has a body very well built for a physical two-way defenseman, and he skates very well. Also he has plenty of upside. Lehkonen on the other hand, while having all the puck skills and IQ and skating etc, lacks badly in the physical aspect of the game, and is very small. Lehkonen has a mountain to climb to reach the NHL level, while Ristolainen isn't all that far off.
Salomäki was one of the biggest disappointments for me at the tournament. He wasn't better than Barkov. Alot of stupid penalties in offensive zone, not smart plays had much better tournament in last year at Alberta. We have to remember that Lehkonen is physically undeveloped and not much experience on U20 while Salomäki and Granlund are both returnees. Last year Teräväinen wasn't even chosen into WJC but was drafted in the first round. WJC is just an small sample. The rest of the season is the thing which matters the most. Playoffs and maybe U18 WC.
Another Mantha factor is he's the oldest player in the draft. If he was born a few hours earlier, he's eligible last year.
He's one month older than Mr Jones, and his age isn't hurting his stock....
Mantha's problem is well documented....floats and seems disinterested at times, but scoring goals is the hardest thing in the game to do, so he'll be going high...cusp of top 10.
Comment From Marc
I'm quite curious about Rasmus Ristolainen. 20th on your list, often around 7th or 8th on other lists (including McKenzie's recent rankings).Is there something critical that you find is lacking in his game? Or is this draft just that deep?
1:05
Craig Button: First, I think this draft is deep. Second, there is a lot of emphasis on the number beside the player and I try to ensure that I have players in their proper grouping. For example, on my list I have a grouping of players that I see as quite similar in potential from 8 to 20 or so. Rasmus is in that group and if somebody said to me, 'he really should be 8 or 9 or 12, I would see that argument and not raise much of a fuss. As for Rasmus specifically, I see an NHL player who will play a long time and the range of player comparable I have for him is Brent Seabrook to Derek Morris and some teams may see something better or something not quite as good but that is where I am at this time on him.
No doubt Fucale is the best goalie available, that said don't know if he's a top 10 talent in this draft or not.
I agree that he's the best goalie in the draft, and should be a 1st round pick (15-20).. but even with my Mooseheads-bias, he just isn't a top-10 player.
If this was last year, I'd take him over Subban 10/10.. next year, i'm not sure who the top goalie is.. Storm Phaneuf? I'd take Fucale over him too.. best goalie prospect since Price, and I think he'll turn out similar.
The success rate for forwards and defensemen, in the draft, is pretty remarkable when compared to the likes of the NBA draft and the MLB draft. Goalie prospects, even the most heralded, are still very much a crap shoot. Add in the fact that this might be the best draft in a decade, and I just don't see a team taking Fucale in the first round. I could see him going 31st overall, though.
I think a lot of people are 'sleeping' on Eric Comrie....I'm not sure there is a big gap at all between he and Fucale.
Comrie is really good. Haven't seen enough of either to claim who is better, and goalies are incredibly hard to scout (IMO) but I think both guys are really good.
I like that Fucale is getting the recognition. I think he's going to be a stud and I hope the Leafs can nab him this draft if no high-potential C's are on the board.
Not many teams are going to reach for a goalie at 10 IMO, given the depth of the draft and general lack of need for goalies in the NHL.
