2019-20 Prospects Thread

[marcaractac 3,963]

On 8/16/2019 at 6:57 PM, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

How did you survive P Diddy's Vote or Die campaign?

They're not Americans are they?

NORTH AMERICANS YO

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 hours ago, ely s said:

What do you need the talentest player for if he only shows up every other game. I would then prefer a guy who is less talented but gives his all every shift and Mannheim wants team first players

Like I said, character is important, but that only gets a player so far. You need talent above all else. If I'm running a draft, I'm taking the homerun swing on the more skilled player every time. If the more skilled player also has great character (like Seider), that's a bonus.

I think we drafted Rasmussen based mostly on his "character", and that pick may turn out to be a dud, in comparison to other players that were available...

[mackel 681]

On 8/15/2019 at 3:11 AM, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Kip is like the smartest guy on here, and he served in the military so i love him.
But then he votes democrat and works for the feds in DC so I hate him.

KRS knows more about prospects than anyone on here, and likes a lot of my posts, so I love him.
But then he votes for Trudeau and is Canadian so I hate him.

Both of them need to get their s*** together IMO

New found respect for KIP and KRS!

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

3 hours ago, marcaractac said:

NORTH AMERICANS YO

My favorite example of Canadian/American relations was a few years ago when some ISIS dude said they were gonna start targeting Canada.

ISIS: threatens America
America: Oh no plz don't

ISIS: Burns American flag
American: *yawn*

ISIS: threatens Canada
American: YO WHAT THE ACTUAL f***??? WHAT THE HELL DID THEY EVER DO TO YOU?? SO MUCH AS TOUCH AMERICA'S HAT AND WE WILL TURN YOUR LAND INTO A ******* PARKING LOT

NA 4lyfe yo

2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Like I said, character is important, but that only gets a player so far. You need talent above all else. If I'm running a draft, I'm taking the homerun swing on the more skilled player every time. If the more skilled player also has great character (like Seider), that's a bonus.

I think we drafted Rasmussen based mostly on his "character", and that pick may turn out to be a dud, in comparison to other players that were available...

I highly value character. I'd much rather have a slightly less talented player over a guy like say Evander Kane everyday. But I agree with you, character is usually just a bonus, not something you target. If say you're stuck between drafting two different players talent wise, but one has better character, maybe that's the edge and you draft that one.  

1 hour ago, mackel said:

New found respect for KIP and KRS!

Et tu, Brute?

[ely s 457]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Like I said, character is important, but that only gets a player so far. You need talent above all else. If I'm running a draft, I'm taking the homerun swing on the more skilled player every time. If the more skilled player also has great character (like Seider), that's a bonus.

I think we drafted Rasmussen based mostly on his "character", and that pick may turn out to be a dud, in comparison to other players that were available...

I agree that you need talent, but talent only get´s you so far as well. you need both talent and character. In the NBA was a few years ago a really talented small white guy coming into the league. Behind the back passes and all sorts of highlight passes, etc. His coach than said to him " you showed me what you can, but now proof that you are competent" He was then traded later and played around 3 seasons in the NBA. Star potential with bad character...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 minute ago, ely s said:

I agree that you need talent, but talent only get´s you so far as well. you need both talent and character. In the NBA was a few years ago a really talented small white guy coming into the league. Behind the back passes and all sorts of highlight passes, etc. His coach than said to him " you showed me what you can, but now proof that you are competent" He was then traded later and played around 3 seasons in the NBA. Star potential with bad character...

And that player? Was Albert Einstein

[ely s 457]

44 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

And that player? Was Albert Einstein

I forgot his name but will figure it out...

[krsmith17 7,191]

4 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I highly value character. I'd much rather have a slightly less talented player over a guy like say Evander Kane everyday. But I agree with you, character is usually just a bonus, not something you target. If say you're stuck between drafting two different players talent wise, but one has better character, maybe that's the edge and you draft that one. 

Absolutely. All I'm saying is you take the most skilled player available, unless he's a complete meathead...

[Euro_Twins 4,476]

7 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

My favorite example of Canadian/American relations was a few years ago when some ISIS dude said they were gonna start targeting Canada.

ISIS: threatens America
America: Oh no plz don't

ISIS: Burns American flag
American: *yawn*

ISIS: threatens Canada
American: YO WHAT THE ACTUAL f***??? WHAT THE HELL DID THEY EVER DO TO YOU?? SO MUCH AS TOUCH AMERICA'S HAT AND WE WILL TURN YOUR LAND INTO A ******* PARKING LOT

NA 4lyfe yo

I highly value character. I'd much rather have a slightly less talented player over a guy like say Evander Kane everyday. But I agree with you, character is usually just a bonus, not something you target. If say you're stuck between drafting two different players talent wise, but one has better character, maybe that's the edge and you draft that one.  

Et tu, Brute?

Like, if one player listens to justin bieber and takashi 6ix9ine, you draft that one?

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

9 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

Like, if one player listens to justin bieber and takashi 6ix9ine, you draft that one?

No you cretin. More like this:

 

[Euro_Twins 4,476]

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

No you cretin. More like this:

 

This message is brought to you by the letters g, a, & y

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

This message is brought to you by the letters g, a, & y

Good Always Yes

Naturally, I always preach this message

[mackel 681]

9 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

My favorite example of Canadian/American relations was a few years ago when some ISIS dude said they were gonna start targeting Canada.

ISIS: threatens America
America: Oh no plz don't

ISIS: Burns American flag
American: *yawn*

ISIS: threatens Canada
American: YO WHAT THE ACTUAL f***??? WHAT THE HELL DID THEY EVER DO TO YOU?? SO MUCH AS TOUCH AMERICA'S HAT AND WE WILL TURN YOUR LAND INTO A ******* PARKING LOT

NA 4lyfe yo

I highly value character. I'd much rather have a slightly less talented player over a guy like say Evander Kane everyday. But I agree with you, character is usually just a bonus, not something you target. If say you're stuck between drafting two different players talent wise, but one has better character, maybe that's the edge and you draft that one.  

Et tu, Brute?

Nah just no love for RWs... generally they have low hockey IQs. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

10 hours ago, mackel said:

Nah just no love for RWs... generally they have low hockey IQs. 

Me as well

[krsmith17 7,191]

B...b...bu...but Zadina sucks defensively...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

12 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

B...b...bu...but Zadina sucks defensively...

An...an...an... and he porked my sister

If Regner said it it must be true.

Quote

Prides himself on playing a complete game

-17 - His minus-17 was the highest of the Griffins and placed Zadina in a multiple tie for seventh highest overall among AHL rookies.

Complete AF

Edited August 28, 2019 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[krsmith17 7,191]

11 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

An...an...an... and he porked my sister

If Regner said it it must be true.

Complete AF

If Regner was the only person that thought it, I'd probably take it with a grain of salt. But the fact that a LOT of people say it, and only a couple people, like yourself and mackel say he's a disaster defensively, based on one dumb stat, makes me believe that what I've seen may be closer to reality than what you claim to have seen from him...

No one is claiming that he will be a future Selke winner, but for a goal scorer, his defensive game is well above average, especially considering his age and development.

[mackel 681]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

If Regner was the only person that thought it, I'd probably take it with a grain of salt. But the fact that a LOT of people say it, and only a couple people, like yourself and mackel say he's a disaster defensively, based on one dumb stat, makes me believe that what I've seen may be closer to reality than what you claim to have seen from him...

No one is claiming that he will be a future Selke winner, but for a goal scorer, his defensive game is well above average, especially considering his age and development.

Seriously... I've only seen Detroit media and persons affiliated with the wings make these erroneous claims about his defence.  Which they will do to hype anything on the turd of a team we have and to try and preserve some of his perceived trade value.

If cherry picking and flying the zone are considered defensively sound plays now, the scoring will be up drastically league wide.

I love the line "but for a goal scorer, his defensive game is well above average"

It's so wrong on so many levels... BUT keep the faith dude...  cause last year their was little defense and few goals, and they usually came in the form of tack-on goals...  yay Zadina scored 2 goals in a 5-2 win and one was the 5th into an empty net...  HE'S THE MAN!

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

If Regner was the only person that thought it, I'd probably take it with a grain of salt. But the fact that a LOT of people say it, and only a couple people, like yourself and mackel say he's a disaster defensively, based on one dumb stat, makes me believe that what I've seen may be closer to reality than what you claim to have seen from him...

No one is claiming that he will be a future Selke winner, but for a goal scorer, his defensive game is well above average, especially considering his age and development.

We've done this already, but why not again

"People say" isn't a sound argument. People are wrong all the time. This team was wrong about every first round choice from 2005 through 2010. Every "expert" was wrong about Moritz Seider this year.

Art Regner is just a mouth piece for the team. He simply regurgitates everything he's told. And honestly there is nothing new in this article. He simply copy pasted/reworded the exact same description of Zadina from draft day and every draft profile; "Complete game".

Unlike Regner, I will lay out exactly why I don't believe Zadina plays a complete game, as I've done in our discussions a number of times before.

Pros: Compete level, back checks hard, good stick work, ability to cleanly steal a puck like Datsyuk is noticeable
Cons: Lost in his own zone, over-commits to attackers sometimes, positioning leaves holes open, lacking ability to read the play

I've never used +/- as the premise of my argument. I've used it as evidence of my conclusion.

Now, you can say "CRL, you're people too, you can be wrong in what you say too" which would be true. I also get things wrong all the time and will continue to. However, I just gave you a real breakdown of Zadina and the reasons behind why I think what I do. Regner just gave a drive-by side comment "complete game".... I almost expect to read "I think he shoots good too" I certainly wouldn't point to this article as sudden proof of Zadina's supposed abilities.

So my suggestion would be, either dispute my premises (pros/cons) or present new ones.

Instead if you'd like to counter with "He's new to the system, he's young, he will learn" I won't disagree either. I firmly believe players can grow and learn. But I also sit firmly in the camp of "I'll believe it when I see it" with prospects.

You've known me a good while. I don't normally get critical of prospects this early. With Smith, Mrazek, Jurco, etc etc I wasn't very critical till much later in their careers. But I also have never seen such a glaring, IMO, misread of a prospect till Zadina. If back in the day Pronman or Regner or whoever wrote "Mrazek really likes to stay in his net, plays a safe game like Luongo" I would've been calling that out as well, but it didn't happen.

I'm really hoping Zadina is going to have a much improved growth year this year, but for the time being I can only have a truly honest discussion on what I've seen. And that is, I don't see his D abilities lining up with what "people say" they are.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, mackel said:

Seriously... I've only seen Detroit media and persons affiliated with the wings make these erroneous claims about his defence.  Which they will do to hype anything on the turd of a team we have and to try and preserve some of his perceived trade value.

Yes, you have to take Detroit's media with a grain of salt on high level prospects. They're not going to say anything critical of a young high profile player like Zadina till the kid is like 23 or 25, unless he's a complete bust disaster. Guys like Regner mostly just repeat what the team tells them to say anyway. That's how they maintain those jobs/relationships.

Edited August 29, 2019 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

1 hour ago, mackel said:

Seriously... I've only seen Detroit media and persons affiliated with the wings make these erroneous claims about his defence.  Which they will do to hype anything on the turd of a team we have and to try and preserve some of his perceived trade value.

If cherry picking and flying the zone are considered defensively sound plays now, the scoring will be up drastically league wide.

I love the line "but for a goal scorer, his defensive game is well above average"

It's so wrong on so many levels... BUT keep the faith dude...  cause last year their was little defense and few goals, and they usually came in the form of tack-on goals...  yay Zadina scored 2 goals in a 5-2 win and one was the 5th into an empty net...  HE'S THE MAN!

He's not defensive stalwart and gets lost in his own zone sometimes, but this part of your post invalidates the rest for me as It just doesn't happen. 

I've seen his positioning in his own zone criticized and chalked up to the pace of the game that he hasn't adapted to yet. I've never seen, or witnessed, this cherry picking mentality you've repeatedly talked about. If you're gonna maintain your normal shtick of being down on Zadina every time he's brought up, at least do it right.

1 hour ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

We've done this already, but why not again

"People say" isn't a sound argument. People are wrong all the time. This team was wrong about every first round choice from 2005 through 2010. Every "expert" was wrong about Moritz Seider this year.

Art Regner is just a mouth piece for the team. He simply regurgitates everything he's told. And honestly there is nothing new in this article. He simply copy pasted/reworded the exact same description of Zadina from draft day and every draft profile; "Complete game".

Unlike Regner, I will lay out exactly why I don't believe Zadina plays a complete game, as I've done in our discussions a number of times before.

Pros: Compete level, back checks hard, good stick work, ability to cleanly steal a puck like Datsyuk is noticeable
Cons: Lost in his own zone, over-commits to attackers sometimes, positioning leaves holes open, lacking ability to read the play

I've never used +/- as the premise of my argument. I've used it as evidence of my conclusion.

Now, you can say "CRL, you're people too, you can be wrong in what you say too" which would be true. I also get things wrong all the time and will continue to. However, I just gave you a real breakdown of Zadina and the reasons behind why I think what I do. Regner just gave a drive-by side comment "complete game".... I almost expect to read "I think he shoots good too" I certainly wouldn't point to this article as sudden proof of Zadina's supposed abilities.

So my suggestion would be, either dispute my premises (pros/cons) or present new ones.

Instead if you'd like to counter with "He's new to the system, he's young, he will learn" I won't disagree either. I firmly believe players can grow and learn. But I also sit firmly in the camp of "I'll believe it when I see it" with prospects.

You've known me a good while. I don't normally get critical of prospects this early. With Smith, Mrazek, Jurco, etc etc I wasn't very critical till much later in their careers. But I also have never seen such a glaring, IMO, misread of a prospect till Zadina. If back in the day Pronman or Regner or whoever wrote "Mrazek really likes to stay in his net, plays a safe game like Luongo" I would've been calling that out as well, but it didn't happen.

I'm really hoping Zadina is going to have a much improved growth year this year, but for the time being I can only have a truly honest discussion on what I've seen. And that is, I don't see his D abilities lining up with what "people say" they are.

This guy gets it. That's a great summary of his defense right now IMO. 

Also, Art Regner is a giant turd ferguson.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Wheelchairsuperhero

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

7 minutes ago, Wheelchairsuperhero said:

He's not defensive stalwart and gets lost in his own zone sometimes, but this part of your post invalidates the rest for me as It just doesn't happen. 

I've seen his positioning in his own zone criticized and chalked up to the pace of the game that he hasn't adapted to yet. I've never seen, or witnessed, this cherry picking mentality you've repeatedly talked about. If you're gonna maintain your normal shtick of being down on Zadina every time he's brought up, at least do it right.

This guy gets it. That's a great summary of his defense right now IMO. 

Also, Art Regner is a turd ferguson and I hate listening to him open his face hole.

Well I appreciate the positive feedback. I agree that I wouldn't label him a cherry picker. I've genuinely enjoyed his compete level on the back check. But I'll watch his cherry picking going forward, I haven't noticed it yet.

Lol if this kid makes the team this year I'm going to be watching him like no other. Get ready for next level overly picky autistic analysis. I feel like this is the first time we've had a top prospect on this board and it feels weird.

 

[ely s 457]

32 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Well I appreciate the positive feedback. I agree that I wouldn't label him a cherry picker. I've genuinely enjoyed his compete level on the back check. But I'll watch his cherry picking going forward, I haven't noticed it yet.

Lol if this kid makes the team this year I'm going to be watching him like no other. Get ready for next level overly picky autistic analysis. I feel like this is the first time we've had a top prospect on this board and it feels weird.

 

it is the first time since a long time and I have the strange feeling a lot of people here are a bit hard on him. Just because he was a projected top 3 pick, doesn´t mean that he is coming in and tearing the league apart, it doesn´t mean he knows everything and does everything right. Of course in our situation it would have been nice to get this type of player and a lot of us were hoping he would be straight away, but how many top 10 picks are on an opening night roster right after the draft? Give him a bit more time to learn the nhl/pro game and I´m sure we will all get our reward.

[krsmith17 7,191]

4 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

We've done this already, but why not again

"People say" isn't a sound argument. People are wrong all the time. This team was wrong about every first round choice from 2005 through 2010. Every "expert" was wrong about Moritz Seider this year.

Art Regner is just a mouth piece for the team. He simply regurgitates everything he's told. And honestly there is nothing new in this article. He simply copy pasted/reworded the exact same description of Zadina from draft day and every draft profile; "Complete game".

Unlike Regner, I will lay out exactly why I don't believe Zadina plays a complete game, as I've done in our discussions a number of times before.

Pros: Compete level, back checks hard, good stick work, ability to cleanly steal a puck like Datsyuk is noticeable
Cons: Lost in his own zone, over-commits to attackers sometimes, positioning leaves holes open, lacking ability to read the play

I've never used +/- as the premise of my argument. I've used it as evidence of my conclusion.

Now, you can say "CRL, you're people too, you can be wrong in what you say too" which would be true. I also get things wrong all the time and will continue to. However, I just gave you a real breakdown of Zadina and the reasons behind why I think what I do. Regner just gave a drive-by side comment "complete game".... I almost expect to read "I think he shoots good too" I certainly wouldn't point to this article as sudden proof of Zadina's supposed abilities.

So my suggestion would be, either dispute my premises (pros/cons) or present new ones.

Instead if you'd like to counter with "He's new to the system, he's young, he will learn" I won't disagree either. I firmly believe players can grow and learn. But I also sit firmly in the camp of "I'll believe it when I see it" with prospects.

You've known me a good while. I don't normally get critical of prospects this early. With Smith, Mrazek, Jurco, etc etc I wasn't very critical till much later in their careers. But I also have never seen such a glaring, IMO, misread of a prospect till Zadina. If back in the day Pronman or Regner or whoever wrote "Mrazek really likes to stay in his net, plays a safe game like Luongo" I would've been calling that out as well, but it didn't happen.

I'm really hoping Zadina is going to have a much improved growth year this year, but for the time being I can only have a truly honest discussion on what I've seen. And that is, I don't see his D abilities lining up with what "people say" they are.

Yes, that's exactly what I would say. You are people too and you could just as easily, or in my opinion, more likely be wrong. Yes, for the most part, people within the organization are going to talk up their prospects, but they're not going to flat out lie about aspects of their game. If Draper says his defensive ability is strong for a scoring winger, I'd believe that over some random guy on the internet that says he sucks defensively, because reasons. Regner is an asshat, but like it or not, he does have an in with the Red Wings higher ups, and the fact that he is regurgitating what he hears from them, must be somewhat telling. We're only hearing these things from Detroit media, because fact is, they're the only ones that are watching these kids (Red Wings prospects) on a nightly basis. Who else do you want to hear an in depth analysis on him from?

Anyway, I don't necessarily disagree with your take on Zadina's game. At least you're being reasonable with your negative feedback. mackel is the one that is over the top with the unfounded negativity. I don't entirely disagree with your breakdown on Zadina, but I would say that one of his strengths (pro) is reading the play. It's certainly not a weakness (con). I would also chalk the other things up to him being young. He's never had to play much defense early in his career, because he relied so heavily on his offensive game. It's only been the last few years that he's been working on the defensive side of the game, and from what I've seen and heard, he's doing a pretty damn good job adapting. I completely agree with the "I'll believe it when I see it" with prospects approach, but for now (that's all we have to base anything on), he's trending in the right direction *in my opinion*...

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

8 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Well I appreciate the positive feedback. I agree that I wouldn't label him a cherry picker. I've genuinely enjoyed his compete level on the back check. But I'll watch his cherry picking going forward, I haven't noticed it yet.

Lol if this kid makes the team this year I'm going to be watching him like no other. Get ready for next level overly picky autistic analysis. I feel like this is the first time we've had a top prospect on this board and it feels weird.

 

This.  I think people forget how stoked they were on Smith for the first 2-3 years and only remember the disappointment in the last 3 years.  We've all become a bit jaded and wont back a guy until he is NHL bonafied.  I feel good about backing Zadina.  He has a huge skillset and passion for what he does.  He just needs time.  Kid is just 19-20 this season.  I wouldnt at all be surprised to see him alongside Larkin in a few weeks.  Mantha is on the block for a reason.