Prospect Info: 10th overall: Vancouver selects Vasili Podkolzin (RW, SKA St. Petersburg)

[CherryToke]

Podkolzin doesnt look like a slow moving tank though so he doesnt need to improve as much

And he looks much better on the PP

 

[thefeebster]

I agree with the Horvat comparison. It's actually by far the closest comparison. I'm not sure why people are even comparing him to other players after Horvat. They are virtually identical as Horvat when he was drafted save for Podz being a winger. Otherwise they play with the exact same style of play.

If he can improve his skating in the same way Horvat did... we have the steal of the draft. We may have already anyways.

He is literally nothing AT ALL like Virtanen.... he is what we are hoping Virtanen starts to play like.

Also Podz skating is not slow... it's just ugly. He pushes through with brute force. I think Horvat used to be the same way and once he fixed his stride his speed improved to almost elite levels.

I don't know, i don't really see Bo in Podkolzin's play on the ice. Perhaps on paper.

The Virtanen comparisons stem mainly from our conversations about why there is a disconnect in production and potential offensive issues. There are Virtanen-esque elements in Podkolzin's offensive game, but they are there to a lesser extent.

 

[F A N]

I don't know, i don't really see Bo in Podkolzin's play on the ice. Perhaps on paper.

I suppose it's their tendency/ability to drive to the net or bull their way to the net, 200 foot game, and heavy boots.

 

[thefeebster]

I suppose it's their tendency/ability to drive to the net or bull their way to the net, 200 foot game, and heavy boots.

Yes, on paper.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I was just looking at clips of Timo Meier... if this kid turns out In the realm of Meier....!!!....
I see A LOT of similarities right there..

The Meier comparison is more apt than the Horvat or Virtanen comparisons. Probably the best one to date.

---

I've been digging through video and numbers on this player. Doing the work I should have done pre-draft. As a result, my take on VAN's process behind the pick has changed. Where once I complimented VAN's shoot-for-the-moon efforts here, now, I question if this actually was the highest upside pick? Perhaps posters like @travis scott add to/critique what I'm about to say here:

Podkolzin's offensive IQ in transition and in the Ozone needs significant work. He makes mediocre/poor decisions with spacing and timing. He also lacks creativity in seeing the play develop. In a way, this explains his lack of production. He does everything else, but his offensive polish and creativity is limited. This goes beyond just his passing, which was the main critique.

As @thefeebster mentioned, Podkolzin's passing lacks creativity and deception. The Scouching analysis corroborates this with stats: On "normal" passes, he has the highest efficiency among forwards in the draft. On "creative passes" he ranks lowest for frequency, and is pedestrian in efficiency. He's also low-end in his high danger scoring chance rates.

Suspect production + limited offensive IQ and vision = A boom/bust pick. And the boom may have a lower ceiling than once initially thought.

 

[DL44]

The Meier comparison is more apt than the Horvat or Virtanen comparisons. Probably the best one to date.

---

I've been digging through video and numbers on this player. Doing the work I should have done pre-draft. As a result, my opinion on the thinking behind the pick has changed. Where once I complimented VAN's process here. Now, I question the traits in this player. Perhaps posters like @travis scott can shed some light here?

Podkolzin's offensive IQ in transition and in the Ozone needs significant work. He makes mediocre/poor decisions with spacing, pace and timing. He also lacks creativity in seeing the play develop. In a way, this explains his lack of production. He does everything else, but his offensive polish and creativity is limited. This goes beyond just his passing to be sure.

As @thefeebster mentioned, Podkolzin's passing lacks creativity and deception. The Scouching analysis corroborates this with stats: On "normal" passes, he has the highest efficiency among forwards in the draft. On "creative passes" he ranks lowest for frequency, and is pedestrian in efficiency. He's also low-end in his high danger scoring chance rates.

Suspect production + limited offensive IQ and vision = A boom/bust pick. The boom may have a lower ceiling than once initially thought.

That sucks.
Anything you liked?

 

[Bleach Clean]

That sucks.
Anything you liked?

The "he does everything else" should speak to your question. There are definitely aspects to like about this player: His heart, motor, defensive IQ, balance, strength, shot, stick handling, puck rushing. They are all admirable qualities. I even think his board play is pretty good. He's not just a rush player.

A multi-faceted talent that is limited in the key areas that would project 1st line NHL totals. Then again, Meier just put up 1st line numbers so...?

I can't imagine what the conversations behind the scenes must have been like... Polarizing player.



Edit: I will add that if Podkolzin was the reason the Canucks ended up keeping the pick and not trading it for Barrie, then I'm good with the selection. Whatever rationale they needed to use it works for me.

 

[sting101]

I hate investing in Russians. But Podkolzin made a lot of sense.

Could easily be a Tarasenko like move for this franchise.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I hate investing in Russians. But Podkolzin made a lot of sense.

Could easily be a Tarasenko like move for this franchise.

Easily? A Tarasenko level move would be hitting the lotto here, IMO.

I wish Podkolzin projected to be as good.

 

[settinguptheplay]

Easily? A Tarasenko level move would be hitting the lotto here, IMO.

I wish Podkolzin projected to be as good.

Ya I think Tarasenko level is a pipe dream. If he can be a 25-25 player with that motor I would consider it a win. If hopes are he becomes a PPG physical monster we are likely to be disappointed.

 

[bandwagonesque]

The "he does everything else" should speak to your question. There are definitely aspects to like about this player: His heart, motor, defensive IQ, balance, strength, shot, stick handling, puck rushing are all admirable qualities. I even think his board play is pretty good. He's not just a rush player.

A multi-faceted talent that is limited in the key areas that would project 1st line NHL totals. Then again, Meier just put up 1st line numbers so...?

I can't imagine what the conversations behind the scenes must have been like? Polarizing player.



Edit: I will add that if Podkolzin was the reason the Canucks ended up keeping the pick and not trading it for Barrie, then I'm good with the selection. Whatever rationale they needed to use it works for me.

There was never any evidence the 2019 pick was offered for Barrie or that the team considered moving it for him. That was an entirely fan-driven narrative. The reported offer included the 2020 pick, and negotiations apparently continued after the Canucks selected Podkolzin.

 

[lawrence]

I hate investing in Russians. But Podkolzin made a lot of sense.

Could easily be a Tarasenko like move for this franchise.

Different style players. Tarasenko is a sniper, Podkolzin is a Meir type. Crash and banger.

 

[Canucks1096]

I see Landeskog in Podkolzin

 

[VanJack]

I can actually remember when some posters on this board were wringing their hands about the Canucks picking Horvat ninth overall, while Valeri Nichushkin fell to the Stars at #10.

Now they could get him for nothing because Dallas is buying him out. You just never know with Russian players.

 

[sting101]

I can actually remember when some posters on this board were wringing their hands about the Canucks picking Horvat ninth overall, while Valeri Nichushkin fell to the Stars at #10.

Now they could get him for nothing because Dallas is buying him out. You just never know with Russian players.

yep and thats why we got Pod at 10.
Lots of developing to do.

Amazing how many high picks have crashed and burned. I like the emphasis on work rate by Brackett and the fellas

 

[Hansen]

I see Landeskog in Podkolzin

This is it for me too, Landeskog has become a far better offensive player than I ever expected him to be, and I don’t expect Pod to hit those kinds of numbers, but I think they bring a very similar style and element to the game which the canucks need badly

 

[valkynax]

I can actually remember when some posters on this board were wringing their hands about the Canucks picking Horvat ninth overall, while Valeri Nichushkin fell to the Stars at #10.

Now they could get him for nothing because Dallas is buying him out. You just never know with Russian players.

You know what? I bet that dumb ass Benning won't even consider claiming Nichushkin should the situation come to be.

Because those cap spaces ain't gonna waste themselves!

 

[F A N]

I've been digging through video and numbers on this player. Doing the work I should have done pre-draft. As a result, my opinion on the thinking behind the pick has changed. Where once I complimented VAN's process here. Now, I question the traits in this player. Perhaps posters like @travis scott can shed some light here?
.

You complimented the process here?

Anyhow, I find your post kind of odd. In the past you talked about "consensus BPA" based on the average of various draft guides/rankings that you never paid to read. Using the same analysis shouldn't you love the Podkolzin pick because he was the consensus BPA?

 

[elitepete]

The Meier comparison is more apt than the Horvat or Virtanen comparisons. Probably the best one to date.

---

I've been digging through video and numbers on this player. Doing the work I should have done pre-draft. As a result, my take on VAN's process behind the pick has changed. Where once I complimented VAN's shoot-for-the-moon efforts here, now, I question if this actually was the highest upside pick? Perhaps posters like @travis scott add to/critique what I'm about to say here:

Podkolzin's offensive IQ in transition and in the Ozone needs significant work. He makes mediocre/poor decisions with spacing and timing. He also lacks creativity in seeing the play develop. In a way, this explains his lack of production. He does everything else, but his offensive polish and creativity is limited. This goes beyond just his passing, which was the main critique.

As @thefeebster mentioned, Podkolzin's passing lacks creativity and deception. The Scouching analysis corroborates this with stats: On "normal" passes, he has the highest efficiency among forwards in the draft. On "creative passes" he ranks lowest for frequency, and is pedestrian in efficiency. He's also low-end in his high danger scoring chance rates.

Suspect production + limited offensive IQ and vision = A boom/bust pick. And the boom may have a lower ceiling than once initially thought.

I agree that his ceiling isn’t as high as people are saying.

His iq isn’t a weakness but it definitely isn’t his greatest strength either. If you compare it to other NHL players, I would say that it’s average. Because of this, I don’t ever see him being a huge scorer. He has a high floor (if he comes to north america), but his offensive ceiling is probably 65 points. The reason people like me are so high on him is because he is a modern style of power forward with elite skating.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I agree that his ceiling isn’t as high as people are saying.

His iq isn’t a weakness but it definitely isn’t his greatest strength either. If you compare it to other NHL players, I would say that it’s average. Because of this, I don’t ever see him being a huge scorer. He has a high floor (if he comes to north america), but his offensive ceiling is probably 65 points. The reason people like me are so high on him is because he is a modern style of power forward with elite skating.

Thank you for your insight.

Actually, I would say that he is not an elite skater. Clearly, he chops at the ice rather than glides upon it. Straight line speed is there though. Agility is lacking.

Overall, I understand the premise behind why you like him. The combination of traits he has are rare. Virtanen also has a rare tool set, but he lacks even average hockey IQ. That's why it might work with Podkolzin...

A few things if you would indulge me:

1. Did you think he was the BPA?
2. Did he belong in highest echelon of potential draftees?
3. Was there a drop off in talent after his selection?
4. Would you have preferred Zegras instead?
5. What teams ahead of the Canucks drafted an inferior player?

I'm critical of what VAN targeted here, but only because he lacks the highest offensive upside. That said, I understand when people refer to him as top5 talent overall. It's the combination that sets him apart.

 

[Tables of Stats]

I wonder if some of Podkolzin's 'low IQ' comes from playing on so teams with so many unique linemates? It seems fairly natural for a player to look a little selfish and stick to shooting or making a safe pass if they haven't had a lot of time to build chemistry with their linemates. This is likely doubly true for a 17-year-old playing his first pro season.

Also, putting his stats into context may help put things in perspective.

At the MHL level, had he played in 50 of his team's games instead of 12, he'd have finished with around 33 points which would have been good for 7th in team scoring as a rookie.

At the VHL level, had he played in 45 of his team's games, instead of 14, he'd have finished with around 16 points, good enough for 13th on the team again as a 17-year-old rookie.

The KHL level is too small a sample size to work from but getting at ice at all as a 17-year-old is pretty special. For context, only 53 17-year-olds have ever played a KHL game, only 39 of those played more than one game, and of them, only 20 recorded a point. Only 4 players who played 5 or less games recorded a single point and none of them scored more than that. I have zero concerns about his production at this level.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Is it fair to say the upside is Timo Meier (which would be amazing) and downside is Jannik Hansen with maybe a better shot? How do you say "honey badger" in Russian?

Id say post KHL visit Radulov with less skill and more bite.

Just a constant puck hound.

 

[Hodgy]

The Meier comparison is more apt than the Horvat or Virtanen comparisons. Probably the best one to date.

---

I've been digging through video and numbers on this player. Doing the work I should have done pre-draft. As a result, my take on VAN's process behind the pick has changed. Where once I complimented VAN's shoot-for-the-moon efforts here, now, I question if this actually was the highest upside pick? Perhaps posters like @travis scott add to/critique what I'm about to say here:

Podkolzin's offensive IQ in transition and in the Ozone needs significant work. He makes mediocre/poor decisions with spacing and timing. He also lacks creativity in seeing the play develop. In a way, this explains his lack of production. He does everything else, but his offensive polish and creativity is limited. This goes beyond just his passing, which was the main critique.

As @thefeebster mentioned, Podkolzin's passing lacks creativity and deception. The Scouching analysis corroborates this with stats: On "normal" passes, he has the highest efficiency among forwards in the draft. On "creative passes" he ranks lowest for frequency, and is pedestrian in efficiency. He's also low-end in his high danger scoring chance rates.

Suspect production + limited offensive IQ and vision = A boom/bust pick. And the boom may have a lower ceiling than once initially thought.

I have read and watched basically all the scouting reports I could find on him (except for some I did not pay for). Your report most strongly follows the Scoutching report and does not accurately represent the aggregate of the reports I read. This isn’t to say that you are wrong, only that you report is a minority perspective. I too have watched the Scoutching report and watched it rather early. This report is by far the most concerning; however; after reading and watching a lot of other reports, I realized that the Scoutching report’s conclusion regarding IQ is not widely held, and in fact, is almost never referenced outside of this report.

Again your report may turn out to be correct, I just want to ensure that a narrative regarding his IQ does not develop based on one scouting report and despite over a half a dozen others.

 

[CanaFan]

For those interested, this Dobber report back in March examines Podkolzin’s KHL / VHL / MHL games in more detail than I’ve seen elsewhere. Good read.

Prospect Deep Dive: Vasili Podkolzin

 

[Bleach Clean]

I have read and watched basically all the scouting reports I could find on him (except for some I did not pay for). Your report most strongly follows the Scoutching report and does not accurately represent the aggregate of the reports I read. This isn’t to say that you are wrong, only that you report is a minority perspective. I too have watched the Scoutching report and watched it rather early. This report is by far the most concerning; however; after reading and watching a lot of other reports, I realized that the Scoutching report’s conclusion regarding IQ is not widely held, and in fact, is almost never referenced outside of this report.

Again your report may turn out to be correct, I just want to ensure that a narrative regarding his IQ does not develop based on one scouting report and despite over a half a dozen others.

The videos I reference in my initial post are scouting reports, clips of his play and actual games. I've seen him play. In that sense, my take is not based upon one scouting report.

Granted, I do regard the Scouching report as the best one to date. It delves into the numbers that somewhat explain Podkolzin's lack of production. No other report does this. In that sense, it is definitely the minority. It's the only.

On Hockey IQ: I want to define what "conclusion regarding IQ is not widely held"? What rationale have other reports provided for his lack of production?