kipwinger

Maybe, maybe not. It's true of the game against Chicago. Not true against Toronto (who dressed few of their top prospects). This tourney is also 4 games long. So while his performance is encouraging, IMO it isn't enough for me to conclude much about him as a player. It's obviously better than he play good than bad, but nothing about it makes him "special". Because if being a standout made him "special", then by that rationale Chase Pearson would also be "special". And he's clearly not. I'm not blaming Seider for playing the competition he's given, I just think he needs to play consistently better players before we have any idea how good he's going to be.

Nobody said you couldn't. Also, it seems perfectly reasonable to discussion the quality of competition the kid has faced up to this point in his career. It also seems reasonable to wonder what effect, if any, that will have on him once he's consistently facing NHL caliber talent (whether that be in training camp, the pre-season, the AHL, or the NHL). It seems equally relevant to ask whether a performance at a prospects tournament is the best evaluative tool when A) more than half of each team is full of free agent invitees (like Gregor McLeod) or late round picks (like Elmer Soderblom), or B) the competition is so weak that projected bottom of the roster guys like Chase Pearson are performing at insanely unsustainable rates. That's your 2nd oblique reference to Nazism today. You're on fire.

No, I'm telling you that Mortiz Seiders and Tim Stutzles are the exception in the DEL. While the Canadian Junior Hockey leagues regularly produce very high end draft eligible players. For that matter so do the Swedish and Finnish leagues. As a result it's easier to tell how good players coming out of those leagues are going to be. It's a little more of a crap shoot with the DEL, so I'm going to need to see more of Seider (like in the AHL) before I'm ready to conclude that he's going to be a 1D some day.

Let me illustrate my point. If you're Cam York, and every single day at practice you have to defend against Jack Hughes, and Cole Caufield, and Trevor Zegras, and Matthew Boldy, and Alex Turcotte then you're consistently playing against not just NHL caliber talent, but top of the 1st round NHL talent. If you're a top defender in the QMJHL you're facing a Veleno or Lafreniere or Comtois almost every game. The DEL has nothing comparable to that. I realize, as you've pointed out, that he played at the WC and looked pretty good. I agree. But that's only 5 games. When he performs like that over 75 games in the AHL I'll be a bigger believer in his "1D" upside. Until then I'll stick with what I've always thought about him, he's most likely to be a good NHL defender in the mold of a Colton Paryako.

Neither do you against pro-level competition, that's my point. Everybody thought Zadina was going to be an "elite" scorer prior to last season too, and now everybody seems to be a bit more measured. The AHL is a really good league. If Seider excels there then I'll be ready to talk about "top pair upside". But (through no fault of his own) he's never played at that level. He's never even played consistently against NHL caliber talent (past or future). No offense to the DEL, but it's not full of future NHLers, or past NHLers. So it's hard for me to figure how good he'll be until I've seen him against better players.

Here's another question, why not ignore me from the beginning? Again, I never addressed you, you addressed me to begin with. So if having this conversation is such an ordeal I'd suggest your use the ignore function. We'd probably both be better off for it.

No s***. I was starting a conversation with him because I like talking to him and generally respect his point of view. You've made it clear you don't like talking to me and don't respect my point of view, so I'm confused why you insist on talking to me? Do you even know why at this point?

Or else you'll jump into the conversation, and then pretend like I'm forcing you to listen to me?

Who do you mean by "us"? I don't ever talk to you about anything. You're the one that insinuated yourself into the discussion I was having with other people. So I'm not sure why you're acting so oppressed. Edit: Also, of course I'm going to talk about my thoughts on hockey. Who else should I be speaking for other than myself?

When have I ever addressed you about anything on this board? I had one converation with CRL, someone I talk to regularly, about not putting too much stock into this Tourney. He actually agreed with me BTW. Then I had another with Ely, who also agreed with me, and then you jumped in. So yeah, I'd "leave you be". Like I always do. Why? Because I don't care what you think about hockey.

Go ahead, nobody is stopping you. Matter of fact, I didn't address you or 91 at all. You both responded to discussions I was having with other people. So I'm not sure where you're getting this "Kip is busting our balls" attitude from?

Ok. Your assessment isn't what was being discussed here. 91 criticized me for thinking out center depth was more important than our defensemen. I was simply stating that having two decent centers in your entire organization, one of whom was still playing Canadian Junior Hockey a few months ago is a pretty shallow talent pool. Conversely our defense is deeper, but also more proven. Hronek just had a hell of a rookie season, and murdered the World Championships. Cholowski was good in the NHL, and very good in the AHL. McIsaac was the best defenseman in the Q (comparable to Veleno at center). Lindstrom played big minutes on a championship team in one of Europe's toughest leagues. And Kaski was the best defenseman in another of Europe's toughest leagues. At what point did my saying "Don't put too much stock in the Traverse City Prospects Tournament" become "I hate Seider" in your mind?

I already said I didn't. To reiterate, I was more interested in the media source providing the games than the games themselves. If you were streaming, for instance, I wanted to know where you were getting the stream from. Got it? I've already made clear that I'm not that interested in watching Mortiz Seider, Joe Veleno, and Filip Zadina beat up on 5th round picks and undrafted camp invitees.

Trading back only works if you're convinced the player will still be there. If Yzerman thought Seider would still be there, then that means he (and the other GMs in between) didn't have Seider ranked as highly as some other players. Not sure what's hard to follow about this.

Didn't you just criticize me for NOT having my own points of view and relying too much on people like Pronman? Now I'm being TOO individualistic in my assessments and should fall in line with LGW? Which is it? The reason why center is a bigger issue than defense, even before the draft, is because we have one good center in the NHL (Larkin), and one good prospect (Veleno). Whereas we had a ton of high quality defensive prospects, even before the draft. Hronek, Cholo, McIsaac, Lindstrom, Kaski, and Regula were all on the team already. So I was less concerned with our defensive depth.

I assume all most round picks have the raw physical tools to be good NHLers. I don't need to have that proven to me, I take it as a given. I also voiced concerns about Newhook playing in the BCHL FYI. As did plenty of other prognosticators. Might be the reason he went 16th overall when coming into the season (which he dominated) he was ranked in the top 5. I asked because I watch all games online and was curious if there was another place to watch aside from the ones I've typically used. Is that alright?

Never said he was a bad pick. Ever. I said I would have picked other guys. I also said we had a bad draft overall because we didn't address our biggest needs. Also said he was a reach at 6th, which the GM admitted when he said he wanted to trade back for him. In fact, I've only ever been complimentary to Mortiz Seider while also having a reasonable degree of skepticism given A) his concensus draft rankings, B) the second-tier competition he's played against, 3) the availability of potentially better players. I'm not sure what you're so bent out of shape about.

The minute Moritz Seider plays against good players and excels at it, we'll talk. He just hasn't done that yet. I'm happy to explain all the reasons why the Traverse City Prospects Tourney is a joke if you want though.

Instead of "imagining" how good I hope he is, I'll just wait until he plays meaningful hockey games against decent opponents and then draw conclusions. Guess that makes me old fashioned.

You sure showed me. I'll start studying tape immediately. No better way to evaluate a guy like Seider than by watching a subpar prospect's tournament in the middle of September.

I didn't "crap" on anybody, I gave my opinion on a prospect playing in a tournament this week. That opinion just happens to differ from the "he's awesome" crowd a bit. Also, I'm not being defensive. You addressed me first and I responded. That's what discussion boards are for. Below is my first post about Seider after he was drafted. I stand by it given that since then he's played no meaningful hockey games, and the ones he has played are against lesser competition. It's not confirmation bias if nothing substantial has changed since you last opined on something. "So, I was gone all weekend and am only now getting to review our draft. In short, it sucks. There are some decent players here, but we did nothing to address our biggest organizational weakness: our center depth. Prior to the draft our depth chart was Larkin, Veleno, and (maybe) AA. And it's exactly the same after the draft. The single most important position on any hockey team was completely ignored in a really important draft. We didn't have a really high end defensive prospect before the draft, we don't now. We consistently passed on skill players for guys with intangibles like "hockey sense" and "compete level". It wasn't a complete disaster. Seider will be a good defenseman, but not an elite one. Even if he turns into a Paryako, which is probably his ceiling, a guy like that doesn't significantly change the complexion of our defense or team. He's a good piece but probably not a great one at 6th. Very much the Michael Rasmussen of defensemen (and I'm a Rasmussen fan). Grewe has Tyler Bertuzzi upside, which is a good complimentary piece on a team full of good complimentary pieces. Maybe Tuomisto adds a little offense from the back end, but probably not any more than Cholo or Hronek or McIsaac. But we were a team without any real game changers prior to the draft, and we still are despite a really high pick in a draft with lots of guys with (supposedly) elite upside."

Ok, I'll play. I've said about 2,000 times that the kid may end up being a top pair defenseman but that the proof of concept is not the Traverse City Prospect Tourney. How is that confirmation bias?

Wait, you think I'm holding a grudge against an 18 year old because I don't think Yzerman shouldn't have gotten his current job? Lol. Ok dude. On your way out, just answer me this. If Seider tearing it up at the Traverse City Prospects tourney means he'll probably be a top pair defender, then what does Chase Pearson's 4 goals in 3 games at the same tourney mean? Is he our new 2nd line center now? Or should we maybe temper our optimism a bit?

Good for you. Anybody COULD be a top line player. Even late rounders like Datsyuk turn do it occasionally. That's as useless an observation as saying anyone COULD be a bust. Seider had modest production in a 2nd tier men's league last year, and now he's playing pretty well against a bunch of undrafted CHLers. Good for him, but that is not some indication that he's going to be a top pair defenseman one day. Do it in the AHL and then I'll be a little more optimistic. My point (if you're actually interested in it and not just being an argumentative ******) is that at the time of the Seider pick NOBODY had him going that high. None. And that's not just the Craig Buttons and Corey Pronmans either. That's NHL central scouting, that's our own GM (who said he wanted to trade back but couldn't find a taker). Conversely, two guys who were consistently ranked much higher had slid down the board and given my oft stated desire for a center with offensive upside that was my preference. Edit: Also just for reference's sake, Trevor Zegras had 7 assists in 5 games at the World Junior Championships a few months ago. That is a MUCH better tourney than this one. So using your logic, if Seider is a top guy after this tourney, than Zegras was a hall of famer after that one.

Might wanna read what I said at the time guy. Even then I said that Seider might well turn out to be a good defenseman, but that I'd rather have one of the two centers with "star" upside who were still on the board. Also, I'm more than happy to eat crow on prospects. Did it with Pulkkinen, Frk, Kindl and will do it again with Seider if need be. But I'm not ready to say the kid is a stud top pairing defenseman after performing well in a tournament which is a step down from the competition he played in the DEL. Let's see how he does against BETTER players than he did a year ago before we start licking our chops.