Just to let you know Tallackson wasnt a 1st rounder but is a solid prospect. From what I have heard Vanek is coachable and is a gamebreaker I dont think hes the next Brendl at all he has the desire to score 30 in a season while Brendl has the talent to net 30 he has the heart of a 10 goal scorer.
I don't know, but I'm just gonna guess here that you're a kings fan who was hoping to God that Vanek would still be available for your team at the draft. But when he wasn't and LA wasted their 3 picks, you went ahead and changed your whole view on Vanek. Remarks you have made such as "Brendl say wha?" and "I smell a Brendl a reaking" are not only retarded statements, but they have no backing.
whoa whoa whoa, now i know i'm late on this and all, but now we (kings) wasted 3 picks? brown was picked where he was expected to be picked up and is doing a hell of a job at camp rgith now. tambellini was picked up where he shoulda been (there were 2-3 other teams trying to trade up to get him). and boyle... i have to say i was one of the fans who was really PISSED bout picking him up w/ our 27 pick, but after seeing him, i think he shoulda gone higher. he's big and can skate, good work ethic, and has a great drive to the net. u can barely stop him when he moves. his agility not that great now, hands not that great now, but he's barely a freshman in BU or BC, i frogot. anyways, i belive he's a few year investment who will reap much rewards.
and please about vanek, i never wanted him in the first place. at the sme time, i knew he would not drop far enough for us to pick him up. my top feasible choices were katsisyn (i knew someone was going to pick him up), brown, and then jessiman. fortunately, we got one of those guys.
IMHO, the vanek/brendl comparison's should stop at the fact they both scored alot of goals. There is a big difference between the NCAA Div. 1 hockey and the WHL. The WHL is stuffed with players between 17-20, while the NCAA has alot of 20-24 year olds. The NCAA has alot more hitting, alot more defensive style teams (i.e. the Spartans and Cornell) while the WHL is a very offensive league. The NCAA is a much better proving ground for NHL prospects while the WHL is much less reliable. All that being said, i don't think any brendl/Vanek comparisons can be made until Vanek pulls the Sabres jersey on and has a full NHL season under his belt.
I think this "debate" exemplifies how we've become conditioned to "boring" hockey at the NHL level. Too many people expect every player that comes down the pike to be the perfect two-way threat. Guess what? Those players are few and in between. Just because a player isn't Selke worthy on defense, or doesn't hit like Mike Peca doesn't mean he won't get involved or back check. Vanek is getting a bad rap by certain posters in this thread. He's got some things to learn about defense, but all young players do. What can't be taught are his offensive skills, and those are top notch. I don't see why he can't be a player at the NHL level.
What a load of hogwash
WHL is the toughest league period, NCAA doesn't even allow fighting. I think the competition in WHL is tougher then in college.
The WHL developes more prospects for sure, more top end prospects, and developes prospects for the pro style game. It certainly is tougher than the NCAA if you're talking about fighting and I believe in physical play as well. I do think the overall quality of competition between the NCAA d-1 and WHL is similar, mainly because NCAA players can be older than 20. Take a look at a guy like Comrie who averaged 1.5 pts per game the year before he went to the WHL. In the WHL he averaged over 2 points a game because he was 20 at the time and played against mostly younger competition in the WHL.
u people are all way off on Vanek. He came to NA to play hockey. He could have been lazy and dominated in Austria or wherever he wanted to play in Europe. He has dedication and a good work ethic. He plays a simple game, not a lazy game. He sees the ice and knows where and who is on the ice with him. Lemieux and Gretzky did the same thing. You wonder what in the world the guys were thinking and then the puck is in the net. Vanek is no Lemieux or Gretzky but he is as comfortable out there. He is not a hard working grinder. His back checking is suspect or, if you ever watched the man play over a course of a season, you would notice he intercepts a lot of passes because he can read plays. He uses his intellegence to see what is going on, then reacts. And he can do it on the fly. He may not look fast but i have yet to see him get caught from behind. And he does play in front of the net not affraid of contact at all, he does prefer to play in space. He does like to lean into guys and carry them to the net with him. Call him lazy or a bust if you want. But the kid IS a hard worker that is coachable, and most importantly he is having fun, He has said he is happy to be in college and be in MN. Hockey is not a chore for him, it is a time for him to go out and prove himself, And he wants to be the best.
And who ever said he dominates a bad league. The WCHA and college hockey is way underratted. In the last few years you have. Leopold, Hale, Martin, Taffe, Pohl, Heatley, Reinprect, Roche, Senja all who are very close to making NHL rosters, Then Ballard, Sutter, Parise, Stuart, Tallackson are all first rounders. Thats just a few from the WCHA.
Excellent post MN_Gopher! I'd add one thing though....Vanek is very good at protecting the puck with his body as well.
Originally Posted by JasonMacIsaac
I mean toughness, Brendl lasted in the WHL (toughest junior development league out there with biggest players) Vanek is in a league where Midgets roam the rinks.
Midgets like 6'7 Brian Boyle and 6'5 Stephen Baby??? or do you mean "midgets" like Rob Blake, Ken Dryden, Joe Nieuwendyk etc??? Just curious
Funny, you state that you are a New Jersey Devils fan, yet they are one of the NHL teams that has drafted ALOT from the NCAA ranks. I guess those Devils scouts really have either no clue about their job or no clue about drafting tough players (insert sarcasm here). Funny, everytime I saw Matt DeMarchi play, he was one tough customer to play against. Furthermore he's a former NCAA player who just happens to be in the Devils organisation. Amazing isn't it?
I don't really care one way or the other if you like Vanek or don't like Vanek. I'm just curious to know where you're getting this stuff about his poor work ethic/attitude. I saw nearly every game Minnesota played last season (post-season included) and I never found Vanek to have that poor work ethic/attitude you keep bringing up. Does he have areas of his game where there's room for improvement? Yes. But then again, that can be said for many other "prospects" whether they be from the NCAA, Canadian Major Juniors or Europe. There are VERY few players who make immediate impacts in their rookie NHL season, regardless of where they are "ranked". Two former NCAA players that have done that that come to mind are Paul Kariya and Dany Heatley.
If the NCAA didn't develop quality players, we wouldn't be seeing all 30 teams scouting the league and scouting it as much as they do.
So because the NCAA does not allow fighting it is a weak league. Have you seen, Commadore, Hale, DeMarchi, now Stuart hit just a few from the WCHA? Fighting does not make you tough. It makes it possible for the Derrick Boogaards of the world to play a high level of Hockey.
What a ohrrible post, Nieuwendyk, Blake????? Your going back 15 plus years to find those guys, that means absolutly nothing.
All those picks NJ had in the draft were american eh, Brylin, Elias, Sykora, Niedermayer...
Sure you have a couple like Guerin, Rolston, and Gomez.
The league is still full of midgets, you can pick the biggest guy in the league and so can I with the WHL but overall college hockey is the place for small guys to go. WHL is more physical and a tougher more NHL place to develop your players.
I don't need to go back 15 years. I just used those players as examples. You want more recent players? How about Dany Heatley? Shawn Horcoff? Eric Cole? Shall I go on???
I just DARE you to go up to someone like Matt Greene and tell him to his face that he's "weak" and a "midget".
You say it's a weaker league because it doesn't allow fighting. So what?! Fighting or not fighting doesn't make them less desirable to scout, as evidence by the sheer number of players who get drafted from the NCAA and the influx of players who HAVE played in the NCAA ranks (graduating or not) who have made it to the NHL.
BTW, what makes you think that because NCAA doesn't allow fighting that it isn't a tough place to develop players? Have you actually ASKED any of the current NHLers who HAVE played in the NCAA or asked any of the current NCAA players or coaches how NOT so tough it is (as you seem to think) in the NCAA? or did you just decide this on your own?
I don't know how anyone could say college hockey is tougher or more physical than junior hockey. That was such a ridiculous statement I don't even know why I bothered to post. It's not about fighting. It's about physical play. The NCAA is not and will never be as rough and tumble as the Dub, period. Even CIAU is a rougher league.
I'll give you that. I've seen several exhibition games at the start of the NCAA season between those teams and CIAU teams, and they're almost always some of the most penalty filled games I see all year. Hacking, slashing, tripping, butting, cheap shots, stickwork, the CIAU teams do it all. Oh, whoops, that's not what you meant.