Boqvist

[marcaractac 3,960]

3 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Hey, I said I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. People in general are bad at risk assessment, certainly no surprise that you would be as well. (Although, you would have to be especially terrible if you still wouldn't want to take a top-5 talent in the 2nd round, unless there was some other contributing factor...)

You gave a list of like 18 people, going back to the 90s. Probably another handful since that was published. So maybe slightly more than 1/year. Hell, call it 2. Still a very small risk. There's a bigger chance of him (or any of the others) just being a bust than there is of future concussion issues.

I want Boqvist more than ever now.

Yeah, the LeftWinger meltdown alone would be worth it at this point

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

Its a contact sport. There are always kids with past concussions being drafted (some diagnosed, some not). Its worthy of consideration, but I wouldn't call Boqvist "damaged goods".

[LeftWinger 4,934]

This is funny. Now you guys want Holland to choose a concussion risk over others just to see my reaction? Wow!

...and @Buppy I did say that if for some unheard of reason he was available still at our pick in the 2nd, absolutely draft him. My only concern is if all 4 defensemen are available at 6 I'd hate to take the one with the health risk. I am not saying he is not as talented as the rest, hell offensively he is probably more electric than Dahlin. I am not tearing him down. They all bring something to the table that we need on D. My only thing is, if all four are what you need, you have to look at intangibles that will eliminate them. Need a RH'd D? Hughes out. Three remain, all equally talented. How do you dwindle it down to the one? You have to look at health history along with everything else.

Look back over the life of the draft thread, I've never advocated NOT drafting Boqvist. ONLY choosing the best and HEALTHIEST player available. My point about the doctors is, a lot of players that were cleared to play again by qualified doctors ended up being forced to retire/LTIR due to concussion symptoms. That's it. If Holland is told the player is healthy, then that is all he has to go by, medically, but he can, and should use his own judgement especially if there are 3 more equally talented players available. If he becomes a Red Wing and remains healthy for 20+ years, awesome! That is what I'd hope for. Don't get my point skewed.

That'd all I'm saying.

@marcaractac You bring nothing to this conversation with your trolling, which is against forum rules, so move along.

Edited May 2, 2018 by LeftWinger

[puckbags 863]

On 5/1/2018 at 1:51 PM, marcaractac said:

Any team interested in him will know anything and everything about his medical condition. Having had a concussion does not automatically mean risk. There is so much more to it. Hearing that word and automatically assuming risk is just being paranoid. Boqvist would be an amazing get for us or any other team that can't have Dahlin.

Of course it does. It's common knowledge that the more concussions you've had the higher the RISK of getting another one. That's CTE 101 

21 hours ago, Buppy said:

Hey, I said I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. People in general are bad at risk assessment, certainly no surprise that you would be as well. (Although, you would have to be especially terrible if you still wouldn't want to take a top-5 talent in the 2nd round, unless there was some other contributing factor...)

You gave a list of like 18 people, going back to the 90s. Probably another handful since that was published. So maybe slightly more than 1/year. Hell, call it 2. Still a very small risk. There's a bigger chance of him (or any of the others) just being a bust than there is of future concussion issues.

I want Boqvist more than ever now.

More than ever? He has concussion issues. You can still want him, hell I want him but I wouldn't take him at 6. 

[puckbags 863]

19 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Its a contact sport. There are always kids with past concussions being drafted (some diagnosed, some not). Its worthy of consideration, but I wouldn't call Boqvist "damaged goods".

Bruised goods? At this point I would rather draft a kid who just had knee surgery this spring than draft a young kid who has had more than 1 concussion. 

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, puckbags said:

Bruised goods? At this point I would rather draft a kid who just had knee surgery this spring than draft a young kid who has had more than 1 concussion. 

Nothing wrong with having concerns. It gives me pause too. What gives me confidence in Boqvist is the fact that every mock draft I have seen has him going anywhere from 3 to 7.  In fact, I don't even think I've seen it mentioned in those drafts either. I just don't think that would be the case if teams were really shying away from picking him because of concussion concerns. i certainly am no CTE expert, which is why I am putting the responsibility on those whose job it is too judge/decide/determine the seriousness of his condition. I won't allow my lack of knowledge in that field to cause me to become overly concerned with it when those in the know don't seem to be. I just don't know enough to say "don't draft him, he's damaged goods". Its entirely possible the nay-sayers turn out to be right. Its entirely possible he drops in the draft because of it. I don't know. What i won't do is judge a player based on "expertise" i don't have.

[LeftWinger 4,934]

I am not judging him, I am simply saying that you have to factor everything in when drafting this high. If he and Bouchard are there, they are equally as good, have equal potential and equally ranked, then something like past concussion issues must factor into your decision on who to pick. For my money, I pick the one with no concussion history. We all feel that we will be a lottery team again next season, but you never know and you may not see a #6 pick again in a long time. FWIW if any of the other 3 top d-men had this history,I would factor that in on them as well. If they all had history and Boqvist didn't, I draft Boqvist.

[krsmith17 7,191]

44 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

I would avoid this guy if I were drafting.  Adam Almqvist part 2.

Boqvist is going to be a huge miss.  Dobson is the steal of this draft.  Right handed Duncan Keith.  It wouldn't surprise me at all to see us take Boqvist and the Hawks get Dobson.   Kenny doesn't know what he is doing.

If Boqvist is Almqvist 2.0 and Dobson is Keith 2.0, what are Bouchard and Hughes?

[puckbags 863]

13 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Nothing wrong with having concerns. It gives me pause too. What gives me confidence in Boqvist is the fact that every mock draft I have seen has him going anywhere from 3 to 7.  In fact, I don't even think I've seen it mentioned in those drafts either. I just don't think that would be the case if teams were really shying away from picking him because of concussion concerns. i certainly am no CTE expert, which is why I am putting the responsibility on those whose job it is too judge/decide/determine the seriousness of his condition. I won't allow my lack of knowledge in that field to cause me to become overly concerned with it when those in the know don't seem to be. I just don't know enough to say "don't draft him, he's damaged goods". Its entirely possible the nay-sayers turn out to be right. Its entirely possible he drops in the draft because of it. I don't know. What i won't do is judge a player based on "expertise" i don't have.

You don't have to be an expert these days to know that an 18 year old kid who has had 2 concussions is now considered high risk to get more. It's open knowledge for everyone. Stop sounding like Roger Goodell. I don't claim to be an expert by any means. Hell I coach minor hockey but we are required to take concussion courses before the season starts and all the information is laid out right there for us. Even with 9 and 10 year old kids we don't mess around with it.  If we think they rang their bell we keep them off the ice, they go to the clinic and if a doctor even remotely thinks the kid has symptoms hes out a minimum 2 weeks and then reassessed.  For the sake of Boqvist I obviously hope he doesn't have concussions issues and wherever he plays whether it's Detroit or somewhere else I hope he has a long healthy career.  That being said I take Hughes or Bouchard over him at this point. 

[Dabura 12,206]

Let's be honest: most 17-year-old hockey players have probably been sidelined with or (unknowingly) played through at least one concussion.

[krsmith17 7,191]

44 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Bouchard is Shattenkirk 2 and Hughes is Carlsson 2.  Both are nice additions, but not Norris considerable.  Dobson has a stamina/conditioning level that will allow him to log 25-28 minutes as a top pairing D every night.  The other 2 don't.  The Wings are having an extremely difficult time with fitness levels since Datsyuk and Lidstrom departed.  That won't be an issue with Dobson.  I value him more for that reason.

I thought you were onto something when I seen Shattenkirk and Carlson, but then realized you mixed them up... I see Bouchard as a Carlson / Pietrangelo and Hughes as a Shattenkirk / Krug.

I think you're vastly overrating Dobson, but then again, I'm only going on what I've read and a few highlights I've seen. You've clearly talked to scouts, coaches, and the players themselves to have that much information on them.

I still take Bouchard over Dobson, despite all of your inside information on stamina, conditioning and what not...

[LeftWinger 4,934]

...and concussion history is not.

[krsmith17 7,191]

25 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

There is a reason Dobson has gone from late 1st round projection to middle first round to top 10 pick in the span of 12 mos.  He's shown a maturity and dependability level that us scouts greatly value.  NHL ready is what I'm looking for in a top 10 pick.

There's also a reason virtually every amateur scout has Bouchard ranked ahead of Dobson...

Maybe Dobson did shoot up the rankings from a late 1st to a top 10 pick because "he's shown a maturity and dependibility level"... or maybe he just peaked at the right time... If anything, a player that shoots up that high, that quickly should be a bit of a red flag. Is this kid for real? Or did he just have a really strong year on a very good Titans team?

Look, I'm not trying to take anything away from Dobson. I think he'll be a damn good player, and I'd love to draft a kid from the Maritimes, but not ahead of Bouchard. If Bouchard is gone at 6, I'd definitely consider Dobson, but even then, I think I'd try to trade back a few spots in hopes that he'd still be there in the 8-10 range (good chance).

[Dabura 12,206]

2 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Bouchard is Shattenkirk 2 and Hughes is Carlsson 2.

If anything, Bouchard is "Carlson 2" and Hughes is "Shattenkirk 2" (as @krsmith17 said).

2 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Dobson has a stamina/conditioning level that will allow him to log 25-28 minutes as a top pairing D every night.  The other 2 don't.

This is literally one of the things people love about Bouchard. He's a workhorse.

Hughes has a year of college hockey under his belt. College hockey is tougher than junior, especialy if we're talking about a rookie defenseman. Despite this, Hughes played big minutes for the Wolverines and had an outstanding rookie campaign. Conditioning is not a concern with him. Even if it were a concern, his skating is so effortlessly good and every NHL organization's development program is so on top of things that it wouldn't worry me at all.

[krsmith17 7,191]

9 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

I'm not saying those guys are bad players.  I have them slotted in my rankings right behind Dobson, in fact.

Care to share your full rankings list? I'd love to see it...

[marcaractac 3,960]

3 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Bouchard is Shattenkirk 2 and Hughes is Carlsson 2.  Both are nice additions, but not Norris considerable.  Dobson has a stamina/conditioning level that will allow him to log 25-28 minutes as a top pairing D every night.  The other 2 don't.  The Wings are having an extremely difficult time with fitness levels since Datsyuk and Lidstrom departed.  That won't be an issue with Dobson.  I value him more for that reason.

So you know more than scouts, is what you're saying?

All hail the rankings of Jonas!

[krsmith17 7,191]

4 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

So you know more than scouts, is what you're saying?

All hail the rankings of Jonas!

No. He's saying he is a scout. Probably the top Amateur Scout in North America...

[Dabura 12,206]

28 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

I'm not saying those guys are bad players.  I have them slotted in my rankings right behind Dobson, in fact.

Oh, I know. Just saying. Conditioning isn't an issue with any of them. At least, as far as I'm aware.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

If Holland drafts Boqvist while there's HEALTHIER D-men on the board I will LOSE MY ******* MIND

[Buppy 1,720]

19 hours ago, puckbags said:

Of course it does. It's common knowledge that the more concussions you've had the higher the RISK of getting another one. That's CTE 101 

More than ever? He has concussion issues. You can still want him, hell I want him but I wouldn't take him at 6. 

19 hours ago, puckbags said:

Bruised goods? At this point I would rather draft a kid who just had knee surgery this spring than draft a young kid who has had more than 1 concussion. 

4 hours ago, puckbags said:

You don't have to be an expert these days to know that an 18 year old kid who has had 2 concussions is now considered high risk to get more. It's open knowledge for everyone. 

More than ever because now in addition to having probably the highest skill he adds the benefit of making a crazy person go berserk, which is fun to watch.

I don't care if you ( or anyone) want to rank one of the others ahead of him. I've been vacillating quite a bit myself. I don't even really have a problem with considering the concussions as something of a tie-breaker. 

However, again. The data (what there is available at least) just doesn't seem to support the idea that having a concussion history is some major career risk. Higher than really low is still really low.

[mackel 674]

3 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Bouchard is Shattenkirk 2 and Hughes is Carlsson 2.  Both are nice additions, but not Norris considerable.  Dobson has a stamina/conditioning level that will allow him to log 25-28 minutes as a top pairing D every night.  The other 2 don't.  The Wings are having an extremely difficult time with fitness levels since Datsyuk and Lidstrom departed.  That won't be an issue with Dobson.  I value him more for that reason.

I think Bouchard projects better defensively than Shattenkirk.  Also I don't think he's as soft as puppy poo like Shatty. 

[mackel 674]

12 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

If Holland drafts Boqvist while there's HEALTHIER D-men on the board I will LOSE MY ******* MIND

This is how I feel about Hughes... remove "health" and replace with "Michigan"

[Dabura 12,206]

4 minutes ago, mackel said:

This is how I feel about Hughes... remove "health" and replace with "Michigan"

If we pick Hughes, it won't be "because Michigan." It'll be because he's a fantastic prospect. I mean, yeah, playing in the Wings' backyard means the Wings have had a lot of time to thoroughly scout him. But you could say the same thing about anyone who's come up through the USNTDP. (And it's not like the Larkin pick hasn't worked out for us.)

Hell, Hughes isn't even from Michigan.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 minutes ago, mackel said:

This is how I feel about Hughes... remove "health" and replace with "Michigan"

Players from Michigan are the worst, and if Holland selects Hughes it will only be because of the Michigan connection, and not because he is better in anyway. He's probably in fact worse than the other options.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

38 minutes ago, Dabura said:

If we pick Hughes, it won't be "because Michigan." It'll be because he's a fantastic prospect. I mean, yeah, playing in the Wings' backyard means the Wings have had a lot of time to thoroughly scout him. But you could say the same thing about anyone who's come up through the USNTDP. (And it's not like the Larkin pick hasn't worked out for us.)

Hell, Hughes isn't even from Michigan.

Let me tell you why you're wrong...

Holland gives special treatment to Michigan boys. The only reason Hughes is ranked this high is because he's from Michigan. Michigan boys are always overrated in the draft by all teams. Stupid Michigan. Holland would rather have a Michigan team than a good team.

What we need is more Western Canadians on this team. Specifically, boys from BC or Alberta. Men from these regions are genetically predisposed to playing a gritty more physical style of hockey, which I'm sure Mackel would agree, we need.