2019 Draft

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

18 minutes ago, mackel said:

Worth noting that when he learned to play defence the Wings won cups.  

Worth noting he was scoring 30+ despite the poor +/- when he started off on awful teams and when we got better his stats got better 

The 5 people who got more goals for the griffins than zadina are career ahlers, that was zadina’s first year and Time playing with men as a teenager so to write him off already is ridiculous 

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

33 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

This shouldn't have to be said, but a 35 pt AHL =/= a 35 pt NHL player

The translation factor for the AHL to NHL was 0.47 as of 2017. That would put Zadina roughly at 17 pts in 59 NHL games, or about 23 pts in a full NHL season.

If only the game were played on paper... 

I'm not saying he would have. I'm saying he could have. 

35 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

This shouldn't have to be said, but a 35 pt AHL =/= a 35 pt NHL player

The translation factor for the AHL to NHL was 0.47 as of 2017. That would put Zadina roughly at 17 pts in 59 NHL games, or about 23 pts in a full NHL season.

I certainly think Cholowski's NHL +/- is a cause for concern. That roughly tells me he's a rookie Dman who's not ready for defense at the NHL level yet.
I also think Zadina's AHL +/- is a cause for concern. That roughly tells me he's a rookie winger who was not ready for defense at the AHL level yet.

The takeaway point being that Zadina is struggling to master the AHL, while his fellow classmates are already having successful NHL rookie seasons.

Zadina was overhyped. Never shoulda been ranked 3, or even top 5. He's a 5-10 level prospect.

The bold makes me wonder why the hell I'm arguing with you. You've already said you don't think he's going to be a bust, and being a drafted 5-10 level prospect, is FAR from a bust. The "Zadina is going to be a bust" bulls*** is the only reason any of this s*** started. Regardless, looking at +/- for a 18/19 year old rookie is dumb in my opinion.

24 minutes ago, mackel said:

+/- isn't a perfect stat to be sure... but its imperfections apply equally across a team over a large sample size.  Ie. He was by far the worst.

I feel he will be a bust because he is a one dimensional player.  Part of that is that he lacks defensive acumen. 

You know who else is "one dimensional"? Patrik Laine... Elite scoring isn't a bad dimension to have. And don't take that as me saying that Zadina will be as good as Laine (although I think he could be), just that I'm completely fine with wingers being "one dimensional", as long as they're producing and not a liability defensively (which I'm sure Zadina won't be)...

[mackel 681]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

If only the game were played on paper... 

I'm not saying he would have. I'm saying he could have. 

The bold makes me wonder why the hell I'm arguing with you. You've already said you don't think he's going to be a bust, and being a drafted 5-10 level prospect, is FAR from a bust. The "Zadina is going to be a bust" bulls*** is the only reason any of this s*** started. Regardless, looking at +/- for a 18/19 year old rookie is dumb in my opinion.

You know who else is "one dimensional"? Patrik Laine... Elite scoring isn't a bad dimension to have. And don't take that as me saying that Zadina will be as good as Laine (although I think he could be), just that I'm completely fine with wingers being "one dimensional", as long as they're producing and not a liability defensively (which I'm sure Zadina won't be)...

Let's revisit this in 2-3 years when one side of the other will be proven correct...  nobody is convincing anyone of anything at this point.

[krsmith17 7,191]

26 minutes ago, mackel said:

Let's revisit this in 2-3 years when one side of the other will be proven correct...  nobody is convincing anyone of anything at this point.

First thing you've said that I agree with...  Just f***ing with ya. I agree. See where he is in a few years...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

 

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

If only the game were played on paper... 

I'm not saying he would have. I'm saying he could have.

Paper?... I mean, the translation factor is a pretty reliable metric. Pretty much every player takes a production hit going from the AHL to NHL.

Anthony Mantha
2016/17: GRR: 10 pts in 10 GP ------> DET: 36 pts in 60 GP ------> From 100% scoring rate to 60%

Tyler Bertuzzi
2017/18: GRR: 14 pts in 16 GP ------> DET: 24 pts in 48 GP ------> From 88% scoring rate to 50%

Andreas Athanasiou
2015/16: GRR: 16 pts in 26 GP ------> DET: 14 pts in 37 GP ------> From 62% scoring rate to 38%

Christopher Ehn
2018/19: GRR: 7 pts in 17 GP --------> DET: 9 pts in 60 GP -------> From 42% scoring rate to 15%

Filip Zadina
2018/19: GRR: 35 pts in 59 GP ------> DET: 3 pts in 9 GP ---------> From 60% scoring rate to 33%

These 5 forwards would have an average translation factor of just north of 0.5, which is higher than the 2017 average, but that makes sense considering there's 4 very talented offensive players in that lot. As a general rule, take what a player produced in the AHL, half it, and that's about what a player's NHL production would be in the same year.

Is Zadina the magical unicorn that can somehow score more in a higher league than he can in a lesser? I highly doubt it.

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

The bold makes me wonder why the hell I'm arguing with you. You've already said you don't think he's going to be a bust, and being a drafted 5-10 level prospect, is FAR from a bust. The "Zadina is going to be a bust" bulls*** is the only reason any of this s*** started. Regardless, looking at +/- for a 18/19 year old rookie is dumb in my opinion.

No, I don't think Zadina will bust, but I'm going to be extremely disappointed if he tops out at Tatar/Hudler level

Again, I agree +/- is inconsequential most of the time, but being -17 on a playoff team and having one of the worst +/- league wide is saying something. I don't know if there's a fire yet, but there's definitely smoke. And I'm not going to ignore how players perform just because they're rookies, just like I wouldn't ignore Kronwall's declining production because he's old, or Hicketts play because he's small.

 

 

 

Edited May 20, 2019 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

Just for the fun of it , likely no chance of it happening but what are the chances blackhawks want to take local kid turcotte and the chances of him being there at 6 if they don’t take him?

say we trade up to #3 and take byram and hawks go to #6 and get turcotte and what would be the cost? Likely #35 but can we get away with dealing the islanders pick instead?

 

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Paper?... I mean, the translation factor is a pretty reliable metric. Pretty much every player takes a production hit going from the AHL to NHL.

I'm well aware of the league translation factor. I do notice that you said "pretty much", every player though... So you can't just plug that number in and assume Zadina would have scored 17 points in Detroit? Or that Kotkaniemi would have scored 74 points in Laval? The games would have to be played...

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

As a general rule, take what a player produced in the AHL, half it, and that's about what a player's NHL production would be in the same year.

Yes, it is a general rule. No, it does not apply to every single player.

Mika Zibanejad put up 11 points in 23 games in the AHL (0.48 points per game), and then 20 points in 42 games in the NHL (0.48 points per game).

Filip Forsberg put up 34 points in 47 games in the AHL (0.72 points per game). He then went on to have back to back seasons in the NHL where he put up 0.76 and 0.77 points per game.

That's just two examples. I'm sure there are many others.

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Is Zadina the magical unicorn that can somehow score more in a higher league than he can in a lesser? I highly doubt it.

No, Zadina is not a magical unicorn. And no, he wouldn't have had to score more in a higher league. I said it was possible that Zadina could have put up similar numbers as Kotkaniemi if he had played a full season in the NHL. Kotkaniemi was on a 35 point pace. Zadina was on a 49 point pace. So it would have been a lower pace, not higher.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm well aware of the league translation factor. I do notice that you said "pretty much", every player though... So you can't just plug that number in and assume Zadina would have scored 17 points in Detroit? Or that Kotkaniemi would have scored 74 points in Laval? The games would have to be played...

Well yeah duh. All the translation factor is is a rough way to compare production league to league.

Unfortunately hockey abstract didn't publish the data set. Otherwise we'd have a nice bell curve distribution spread where we could find the standard deviations per each confidence interval. If we had that we could say something like: "With 90% certainty Zadina would have scored somewhere in the range of 12 and 22 points during a full 2018/19 NHL season". The translation factor is more or less a laymen's way of applying that bell curve. So instead of a range of 12-22 and a confidence interval, we get... "something around 17"

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Yes, it is a general rule. No, it does not apply to every single player.

Mika Zibanejad put up 11 points in 23 games in the AHL (0.48 points per game), and then 20 points in 42 games in the NHL (0.48 points per game).

Filip Forsberg put up 34 points in 47 games in the AHL (0.72 points per game). He then went on to have back to back seasons in the NHL where he put up 0.76 and 0.77 points per game.

That's just two examples. I'm sure there are many others.

Well of course, that's how statistics work. There are outliers at either end of the bell curve. Jan Mursak and Teemu Pulkkinen were both pretty dominant in the AHL, but that production translated almost zero into the NHL. They would be at the opposite end of the curve from Forsberg and Zibenajad. That's just two examples. I'm sure there are many others.

The real bulk of players are hovering around that 0.47 number though. That's why hockey abstract arrived at that number. And with the amount of data points in that set it's more than likely a pretty reliable metric. Outliers will exist in any data set, but they only account for a very small number. Pulkkinen and Forsberg both aren't normal.

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

No, Zadina is not a magical unicorn. And no, he wouldn't have had to score more in a higher league. I said it was possible that Zadina could have put up similar numbers as Kotkaniemi if he had played a full season in the NHL. Kotkaniemi was on a 35 point pace. Zadina was on a 49 point pace. So it would have been a lower pace, not higher.

You said maybe he could score 25, 35, or 45 pts in the NHL this year about a page back. I think 25 is fairly accurate, 35 is pushing it, and 45 is unrealistic.

If we go off Zadina's 9 game NHL sample he was on pace for 27 pts this year. However, he was also on pace to be -45 on the season.

Again, I'm not happy about his defensive acumen, especially after he was described as a 200 ft winger. I think it's one of the primary reasons he never got called up for a significant amount of time like his draft mates did.

 

Edited May 21, 2019 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[krsmith17 7,191]

9 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

You said maybe he could score 25, 35, or 45 pts in the NHL this year about a page back. I think 25 is fairly accurate, 35 is pushing it, and 45 is unrealistic.

Which is true. In my opinion, it is very possible that he could have. Also, using the same metric, Zadina would have scored 23 points over a full NHL season, not 17. Not far off 25, and could have pretty easily scored a few extra points which would be closing in on the 35 point pace that Kotkaniemi was on. Regardless, none of this indicates that Kotkaniemi is better or will be better than Zadina. 

Anyway, I'm done with this. I think it's ridiculous to call Zadina a bust (mackel) at this point, or even a disappointment because of "lack of defensive acumen" or "+/-"...

Like mackel said, let's wait and see. I'm confident that Zadina will be at the very least a very good top six scorer, and I'd bet on him being a borderline elite top line sniper.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

21 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Which is true. In my opinion, it is very possible that he could have. Also, using the same metric, Zadina would have scored 23 points over a full NHL season, not 17.

Yeah... that's exactly what I said:

7 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

This shouldn't have to be said, but a 35 pt AHL =/= a 35 pt NHL player

The translation factor for the AHL to NHL was 0.47 as of 2017. That would put Zadina roughly at 17 pts in 59 NHL games, or about 23 pts in a full NHL season.

 

23 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Regardless, none of this indicates that Kotkaniemi is better or will be better than Zadina.

Kotkaniemi literally is better than Zadina right now. One scored 34 pts as a full time NHLer, the other scored 35 pts as a fulltime AHLer. Of course that can change in the future, I'm not denying that.

Would you rather discuss Rasmussen? He projected to score only about 35 pts in the AHL this year. Granted he only averaged a very limited 16 shifts a game in the NHL this year. Kids a big ol busterooni

[krsmith17 7,191]

44 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Kotkaniemi literally is better than Zadina right now. One scored 34 pts as a full time NHLer, the other scored 35 pts as a fulltime AHLer. Of course that can change in the future, I'm not denying that.

No, Kotkaniemi is not "literally better" than Zadina right now. He produced more points. If given the choice, I'd still take Zadina over Kotkaniemi.

47 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Would you rather discuss Rasmussen? He projected to score only about 35 pts in the AHL this year. Granted he only averaged a very limited 16 shifts a game in the NHL this year. Kids a big ol busterooni

Disagree on this too. I think Zadina has a higher floor and ceiling than Rasmussen, but I highly doubt either will be a bust, and it's way too early to give up on either.

[Dabura 12,207]

19 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I pretty much agree with your assessment. I don't nearly see the type of player I expected from Zadina so far. I'm willing to change my mind if he grows, but I'm awfully suspicious at this point, as this player was supposed to be ahead of the curve. I don't think he is at all right now.

He played in the AHL as an 18-year-old, putting up 35 points in 59 games. Not sure how that doesn't qualify as "ahead of the curve."

19 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

However I agree with Mackel that he looks one dimensional. He was advertised as a competent two way winger. That couldn't be farther from the truth. His defense is 100% not up to par. He looked like a Pulkkinen out there.

I disagree. He looked fine for a teenager. Had a rough start to his pro career, but by the end of the season I was fine with the way he was playing. He needs to work on some things, but so does everyone at 19 years old.

I had serious concerns about Pulkkinen's game. I don't have the same concerns about Zadina's game. I was pleased with the way he played in his short stint with the Wings. He got better and better and by the end of the stint he looked like he belonged. Was making stuff happen, wasn't missing defensive assignments any more than any other Wing was. There were a couple games where I was laughing maniacally at some of the stuff he was doing.

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

Zadina was only level 29 last year.  He is now level 31 and picked up Shanahan's Shinpads.

  + 15 strength

+ 5 Stamina

He will be good next year.

[Dabura 12,207]

8 hours ago, mackel said:

I feel he will be a bust because he is a one dimensional player.  Part of that is that he lacks defensive acumen. 

You guys keep saying stuff and I'm over here thinking to myself, "I definitely watched him in the QMJHL and I definitely watched him in the AHL and I definitely watched him with the Wings and I'm pretty sure you guys are just HFBoardsing."

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

No, Kotkaniemi is not "literally better" than Zadina right now. He produced more points. If given the choice, I'd still take Zadina over Kotkaniemi.

No one asked who you'd take given the choice. Kotkaniemi amassed NHL points. Zadina amassed AHL points. Kotkaniemi was a higehr draft pick. Zadina was a lower one. One is literally higher than the other. Your personal opinion has no bearing. Kotkaniemi has way more value as a player at the current moment.

3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Disagree on this too. I think Zadina has a higher floor and ceiling than Rasmussen, but I highly doubt either will be a bust, and it's way too early to give up on either.

Meh I think Zadina probably could've been taken at 9 just like Rasmussen

2 hours ago, Dabura said:

He played in the AHL as an 18-year-old, putting up 35 points in 59 games. Not sure how that doesn't qualify as "ahead of the curve."

He was 18 this season for all of less than two months. He's one of the oldest players in his draft class, which is the reason he's even in the AHL in the first place. His younger class mates drafted in the top 5 are already on their NHL teams contributing in middle six roles. Our boy is also in a middle six role... in the AHL, and is -17 on a playoff team.

3 hours ago, Dabura said:

I disagree. He looked fine for a teenager. Had a rough start to his pro career, but by the end of the season I was fine with the way he was playing. He needs to work on some things, but so does everyone at 19 years old.

I agree he needs to work on some things, but I am not pleased by the amount he still needs to work on. He was advertised as a probable #3 pick who could step right on to a team and perform offensively and defensively. He was certainly not capable of either in his first year. I'm ok with this fact, but I'm certainly not thrilled by it.

3 hours ago, Dabura said:

I had serious concerns about Pulkkinen's game. I don't have the same concerns about Zadina's game. I was pleased with the way he played in his short stint with the Wings. He got better and better and by the end of the stint he looked like he belonged. Was making stuff happen, wasn't missing defensive assignments any more than any other Wing was. There were a couple games where I was laughing maniacally at some of the stuff he was doing.

I think Zadina's offensive abilities are astute. But he was also on pace for -45 in his 9 game NHL debut. From what I've seen he's closer to Hudler than Hossa.

2 hours ago, Dabura said:

You guys keep saying stuff and I'm over here thinking to myself, "I definitely watched him in the QMJHL and I definitely watched him in the AHL and I definitely watched him with the Wings and I'm pretty sure you guys are just HFBoardsing."

I mean allow me to be frank and forthright, but I think this whole line of thinking is BS and counterproductive. Accusing people of trolling and calling folks dumb for having a dissenting opinion serves no one. I have been pretty forthright in this thread, and have presented a multitude of evidence and reasoning to back my opinion. Most of the counter argument still seems to boil down to "he young, you dumb troll". He is young, I'm not doubting he could be the next Kucherov at 21. But right now I believe I have legit concerns. Just like I had concerns about Mrazek and Smith. If ya'll wanna bury  your heads and create an echo chamber where Zadina can do no wrong by all means go for it. Ill be in a separate thread critically analyzing the player on a real-time basis. My opinion of the player adapts with his performance. I think we should treat most players this way.

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

edit: nevermind, over it

Edited May 21, 2019 by Wheelchairsuperhero

[krsmith17 7,191]

18 minutes ago, Wheelchairsuperhero said:

You know you and mackel are not on the same wavelength here, right? I know you want to defend him because you think he's being bullied by popular opinion, but in reality one of you presents reasonable arguments and the other just makes definite claims (far too early) with zero context to support them. 

I agree, CRL and mackel are on completely different levels. However, CRL did start out a lot closer to that same level (trolling joking or not). The ONLY reason any of this started was because people were calling Zadina a bust at 18/19 years old. We started debating where Zadina projects to be in the future (bust or not), and is now all that matters is where he is now (what he did this season).

Most think Zadina had a good season given his age and level of experience. CRL and mackel think Zadina had a bad season because of his poor +/-... Most think Zadina has a bright future. CRL is "not doubting he could be the next Kucherov at 21". mackel still thinks he will be a bust...

[Dabura 12,207]

9 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

He's one of the oldest players in his draft class, which is the reason he's even in the AHL in the first place.

He's in the AHL because he was on loan from a Euro team.

9 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

His younger class mates drafted in the top 5 are already on their NHL teams contributing in middle six roles. Our boy is also in a middle six role... in the AHL, and is -17 on a playoff team.

So, when you say Zadina's "not at all ahead of the curve," what you really mean is the players picked ahead of him are farther along. Which, I mean, sure. Yes. (Excluding Hayton.)

I dunno, you do you, but I feel it's dishonest to go on about this kid like he's already a big disappointment and there's red flags all over the place.

9 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I mean allow me to be frank and forthright, but I think this whole line of thinking is BS and counterproductive. Accusing people of trolling and calling folks dumb for having a dissenting opinion serves no one. I have been pretty forthright in this thread, and have presented a multitude of evidence and reasoning to back my opinion. Most of the counter argument still seems to boil down to "he young, you dumb troll". He is young, I'm not doubting he could be the next Kucherov at 21. But right now I believe I have legit concerns. Just like I had concerns about Mrazek and Smith. If ya'll wanna bury  your heads and create an echo chamber where Zadina can do no wrong by all means go for it. Ill be in a separate thread critically analyzing the player on a real-time basis. My opinion of the player adapts with his performance. I think we should treat most players this way.

I haven't seen anyone present a compelling argument for Zadina being "not at all ahead of the curve" and a one-dimensional Pulkkinen retread. You literally said the notion that Zadina is a competent two-way winger couldn't be farther from the truth. That's a bold statement, one that doesn't line up with what I've seen and what most people have said about him.

"But muh -17 rating."

His pro career started out rough, like I said. But, for some reason, it feels like only three or four people here actually watched this player really closely this season and saw a player who got more comfortable as the season went on and ended up looking really good as a Wing (if only in a ridiculously small sample size).

"He didn't do s*** in his nine games with the Wings," Mackel might say. But he did. He wasn't solid on every single shift, but man did he show some serious promise. Even production-wise it was promising: 3 points through 9 games, as a teenaged rookie, and he very easily could've potted a few more points.

Look, I'm prepared for Zadina to be a bust...and I'm also prepared for him to become an elite NHLer. The reason I'm not hating on him is because I genuinely don't see any reason to be down on him. Am I disappointed that he didn't go straight to the NHL this season and put himself in the Calder conversation? Sure. I thought he was more NHL-ready than he actually was and that kind of stings. Am I going to gnash my teeth about it? No. I'm really not. I don't get why people are so down on him, especially when I get the distinct impression that the people who are most vocally down on him haven't actually seen much of him.

Dude was picked 6th overall. I might be kinda-sorta-maybe-slightly troubled if we'd taken him 3rd overall, but we didn't. We took him right about where he probably should've been taken. Should we have taken Hughes or Bouchard instead? I dunno, maybe. I think that could be a worthwhile discussion in a few years.

Edited May 21, 2019 by Dabura

[Dabura 12,207]

17 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Is Zadina the magical unicorn that can somehow score more in a higher league than he can in a lesser? I highly doubt it.

Honestly, I think there's something to the idea that he could be one of those players. I've said as much a few times this season. The NHL is much tougher than the AHL, but what I saw from him in the AHL was a player who's really good at creating...but was playing with a lot of career AHLers who don't process the game the way he does. I still would've liked to have seen him put up more points, of course. But, yeah.

[Dabura 12,207]

tl;dr y'all is poobrains

[mackel 681]

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I agree, CRL and mackel are on completely different levels. However, CRL did start out a lot closer to that same level (trolling joking or not). The ONLY reason any of this started was because people were calling Zadina a bust at 18/19 years old. We started debating where Zadina projects to be in the future (bust or not), and is now all that matters is where he is now (what he did this season).

Most think Zadina had a good season given his age and level of experience. CRL and mackel think Zadina had a bad season because of his poor +/-... Most think Zadina has a bright future. CRL is "not doubting he could be the next Kucherov at 21". mackel still thinks he will be a bust...

50% likelyhood of being a run of the mill NHL winger. Bust relative to hype and expectations.

30% likelyhood of being a complete bust ie. out of the league by his late 20s with no significant accomplishments.

20% likelyhood of being "the next Kucherov at 21"

I hope this clears things up so people don't feel the need to comment on my behalf @krsmith17.

12 hours ago, Dabura said:

You guys keep saying stuff and I'm over here thinking to myself, "I definitely watched him in the QMJHL and I definitely watched him in the AHL and I definitely watched him with the Wings and I'm pretty sure you guys are just HFBoardsing."

I have no idea what that means.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

 

2 hours ago, Dabura said:

So, when you say Zadina's "not at all ahead of the curve," what you really mean is the players picked ahead of him are farther along. Which, I mean, sure. Yes. (Excluding Hayton.)

I dunno, you do you, but I feel it's dishonest to go on about this kid like he's already a big disappointment and there's red flags all over the place.

To be clear, I had him, and others did as well, penciled in at #3

Then he dropped into our laps at #6 and much rejoicing was had... I still think of him as the #3 though. Same thing with Veleno. I don't really have #30 expectations for Veleno, I have 10-15 expectations of him. With Zadina I have Top3/Top5 expectations. So yeah I'm disappointed that the guy I had ranked above his classmates had a mediocre season in the AHL while his classmates are contributing in the NHL.

I'm beginning to think we have more of a 5-10 prospect like Rasmussen on our hands with Zadina, and not so much a Top3/Top5 guy. But again, that's my reflection on his first season. I will certainly change my mind if he explodes next season, or in a few seasons. I don't like to buy too much into the hype and just assume guys will explode.

2 hours ago, Dabura said:

I haven't seen anyone present a compelling argument for Zadina being "not at all ahead of the curve" and a one-dimensional Pulkkinen retread. You literally said the notion that Zadina is a competent two-way winger couldn't be farther from the truth. That's a bold statement, one that doesn't line up with what I've seen and what most people have said about him.

"But muh -17 rating."

His pro career started out rough, like I said. But, for some reason, it feels like only three or four people here have actually watched this player really closely this season and have seen a player who got more comfortable as the season went on and ended up looking really good as a Wing (if only in a ridiculously small sample size).

Something nice about Zadina: I like how Zadina back checks. He's certainly not lazy, and he has the ability to pilfer pucks like Datsyuk when he wants to.

Something not-nice about Zadina: "muh -17" seriously. The only counter I've heard to this is "he young" "+/- stupid". I agree he's young, but he's also a top3/top5 ranked pick who was advertised as having no defensive faults to his game. I have higher expectations of him than say a 19/20 3rd round pick.  And I agree +/- is not often a very reliable stat, but it's not completely valueless either. The context of his -17 is what matters. This was a playoff team he was -17 on, that's not good. The next closest guy on the team was -7, that's not good. Most of his line-mates were positive, that's not good. During his small sample size in the NHL he was on pace to have a -45 NHL season, that's not good. Of 1257 AHL players he was top 35 in the league for worst +/-, that's not good.

At some point my flags start going up, and I'm certainly not going to bury my head in the sand about it.

2 hours ago, Dabura said:

Look, I'm prepared for Zadina to be a bust...and I'm also prepared for him to become an elite NHLer. The reason I'm not hating on him is because I genuinely don't see any reason to be down on him. Am I disappointed that he didn't go straight to the NHL this season and put himself in the Calder conversation? Sure. I thought he was more NHL-ready than he actually was and that kind of stings. Am I going to gnash my teeth about it? No. I'm really not. I don't get why people are so down on him, especially when I get the distinct impression that the people who are most vocally down on him haven't actually seen much of him.

Dude was picked 6th overall. I might be kinda-sorta-maybe-slightly troubled if we'd taken him 3rd overall, but we didn't. We took him right about where he probably should've been taken. Should we have taken Hughes or Bouchard instead? I dunno, maybe. I think that could be a worthwhile discussion in a few years.

It is my right as an LGW reboot account to trash any player I want and concern troll the board.

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

Honestly, I think there's something to the idea that he could be one of those players. I've said as much a few times this season. The NHL is much tougher than the AHL, but what I saw from him in the AHL was a player who's really good at creating...but was playing with a lot of career AHLers who don't process the game the way he does. I still would've liked to have seen him put up more points, of course. But, yeah.

I just will never buy this sort of excuse. He's good at creating offense... but he didn't create a lot of offense. His linemates weren't good enough... but many outscored him. Is it his linemates fault because they process the pro game differently? Or does Zadina need to better adapt to the pro game? The team put good AHLers around him. That should be a plus not a minus to Zadina's play.

Edited May 21, 2019 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Also Pronman's ranking are out on the Athletic. This guy ranks his prospects purely on what he believes to be their absolute ceiling.

1. Hughes
2. Kakko
3. Turcotte
4. Byram
5. Caufield
6. Zegras
7. Cozens
8. Boldy
9. Broberg
10. Dach

Is Podkolzin the most volatile prospect? One minute he's top 5 in the minds of the hockey world, the next he's approaching a high 2nd rounder.

[Dabura 12,207]

29 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

To be clear, I had him, and others did as well, penciled in at #3

Then he dropped into our laps at #6 and much rejoicing was had... I still think of him as the #3 though. Same thing with Veleno. I don't really have #30 expectations for Veleno, I have 10-15 expectations of him. With Zadina I have Top3/Top5 expectations. So yeah I'm disappointed that the guy I had ranked above his classmates had a mediocre season in the AHL while his classmates are contributing in the NHL.

I'm beginning to think we have more of a 5-10 prospect like Rasmussen on our hands with Zadina, and not so much a Top3/Top5 guy. But again, that's my reflection on his first season. I will certainly change my mind if he explodes next season, or in a few seasons. I don't like to buy too much into the hype and just assume guys will explode.

Fair.

29 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Something not-nice about Zadina: "muh -17" seriously. The only counter I've heard to this is "he young" "+/- stupid".

My counterargument isn't that he's young and +/- is stupid. It's that he had a rough transition from the QMJHL to the AHL. He got shredded early on, but he made some adjustments and grew as a player and improved as the season went on. I think holding up the -17 as a serious red flag about his two-way prowess is misguided/dishonest. We've seen some young Wings' +/- ratings fluctuate wildly over the past few years. Did anyone expect Bertuzzi to finish this season at +11?

I feel like we're just abandoning what we all know about the ins and outs and ups and downs of development. I feel like we're getting nerdy and leaning too heavily on numbers. I might be more swayed if I felt like people had really watched him this season -- often and very closely.

There was a breakaway goal he scored late in the season. I vaguely remember a few of us talking about it on LGW.com. If memory serves, Mackel said Zadina was cherry-picking and that this is exactly the sort of thing he won't get away with at the NHL level. In fact, he was not cherry-picking. He didn't fly the zone early. He didn't start running until he saw that his team had full possession of the puck in their zone and that he'd be able to catch the men at the point flat-footed. He played it exactly the way he should've played it.

Subtle things like that. I like that about him. If someone wants to put together a highlights package that shows all the ways Zadina is terrible defensively, I'd gladly watch it.

29 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I just will never buy this sort of excuse.

It's not an excuse. And there's nothing I'd need to excuse, as I feel he produced pretty well for a teenaged AHL rookie. He spent a lot of time with mostly career AHLers (the Griffins' top six was basically career AHLers and Zadina) and I think it's possible that playing with more talented, more "skillsy" players might've resulted in better production, even if he was playing against much tougher competition (AHL versus NHL).

What are we even debating here? This is all so dumb.

Edited May 21, 2019 by Dabura

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

11 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Also Pronman's ranking are out on the Athletic. This guy ranks his prospects purely on what he believes to be their absolute ceiling.

1. Hughes
2. Kakko
3. Turcotte
4. Byram
5. Caufield
6. Zegras
7. Cozens
8. Boldy
9. Broberg
10. Dach

Is Podkolzin the most volatile prospect? One minute he's top 5 in the minds of the hockey world, the next he's approaching a high 2nd rounder.

I still think teams are weary of him cause he’s staying in Russia two years and still the chance he might just end up going back to Russia early in his career or never  coming I guess? I don’t think it’s something that would scare off Stevie and I think we’re in a position we can afford to wait 2 years for him