Prospect Info: 2018 NHL Draft / Pick #9 - Vitali Kravtsov (RW) - Part V

[lucky13]

Anyone using this should be banned for a week.

It’s true in a sense... but not entirely... it’s just that if you have played at a somewhat highly competitive level your more likely to know/understand certain aspects that someone who is just a fan of the game doesn’t see or picked up on... now that being said if someone hasn’t played they can still learn these things...
It’s almost like the difference of learning by doing compared to learning by reading...
At the same time some people do use the ole “ if you played the game” line as a backhanded way of being a jerk... nobody likes that guy...

Kravtsov’s release is so lethal and sneaky added to his shot placement that when he hits his prime .... we’ve got a keeper

 

[Richard Banger]

Anyone using this should be banned for a week.

While I've noticed that this sentence is a trigger for most on HF. There is some truth to it. You can't understand the small things of the game unless you play. Like what goes on in players heads during a game. Granted you don't need to play to understand hockey or understand how to build a team.

 

[Synergy27]

It’s true in a sense... but not entirely... it’s just that if you have played at a somewhat highly competitive level your more likely to know/understand certain aspects that someone who is just a fan of the game doesn’t see or picked up on... now that being said if someone hasn’t played they can still learn these things...
It’s almost like the difference of learning by doing compared to learning by reading...
At the same time some people do use the ole “ if you played the game” line as a backhanded way of being a jerk... nobody likes that guy...

Kravtsov’s release is so lethal and sneaky added to his shot placement that when he hits his prime .... we’ve got a keeper

This. You can have a deep understanding of the game without having played it but there are absolutely aspects of everything that can only be truly understood by experiencing them. I don’t know why that thought is controversial in any way.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

While I've noticed that this sentence is a trigger for most on HF. There is some truth to it. You can't understand the small things of the game unless you play. Like what goes on in players heads during a game. Granted you don't need to play to understand hockey or understand how to build a team.

No one here ever really has an intelligent discussion predicated on their playing days. So when it is used it's always a lazy way to try to qualify someone's opinion as incontrovertible. This happened more with Hank and our pre-eminent panel of "Expert former goalies" than with anyone else.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

While I've noticed that this sentence is a trigger for most on HF. There is some truth to it. You can't understand the small things of the game unless you play. Like what goes on in players heads during a game. Granted you don't need to play to understand hockey or understand how to build a team.

Does it count that I payed rugby at a professional level?

 

[Richard Banger]

Does it count that I payed rugby at a professional level?

When your giving a analysis on rugby hell yeah. Hockey? Ehhhh not so much

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

When your giving a analysis on rugby hell yeah. Hockey? Ehhhh not so much

And playing hockey at age 8 makes people an expert on what goes on in the NHL? I just don’t understand how that works. That’s why the “do you even play hockey?” Argument is Pejorative Slured

 

[SnowblindNYR]

And playing hockey at age 8 makes people an expert on what goes on in the NHL? I just don’t understand how that works. That’s why the “do you even play hockey?” Argument is ******ed

Do you even play, bro?

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Do you even play, bro?

I don’t want to turn this into a whole debate but playing pro in a different sport probably teaches you more than playing hockey at a recreational level. Which is why I think the argument is dumb. People who play in a beer league think they know what goes on in an NHL locker room

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I don’t want to turn this into a whole debate but playing pro in a different sport probably teaches you more than playing hockey at a recreational level. Which is why I think the argument is dumb. People who play in a beer league think they know what goes on in an NHL locker room

There's one poster here that's extremely opinionated and thinks that his opinion is the only one that matters because he plays in the beer league. His opinion is so unreasonably biased towards one player that it's absolutely hilarious how highly he thinks of it.

 

[Richard Banger]

And playing hockey at age 8 makes people an expert on what goes on in the NHL? I just don’t understand how that works. That’s why the “do you even play hockey?” Argument is ******ed

Well I'm not saying people at age 8 make them a expert. But playing college junior or minor league hockey does give them some more insight to the game compared to the average fan.

But I also think the do you even play hockey question has to be asked in only a few scenarios. It shouldn't be a go to phrase to win conversations. Rather I think it should be asked from a teaching standpoint rather than a argumentative.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Yes, this is why Ted Williams was the greatest hitting coach of all time.

Wait...

 

[Synergy27]

I don’t want to turn this into a whole debate but playing pro in a different sport probably teaches you more than playing hockey at a recreational level. Which is why I think the argument is dumb. People who play in a beer league think they know what goes on in an NHL locker room

You’re neglecting to acknowledge that there are multiple people here who played hockey at a pretty high level, college and beyond. I rarely use the argument, but when I do it has nothing to do with the locker room. It has to do with the nuances of the game that aren’t apparent from the stands.

 

[Synergy27]

No one here ever really has an intelligent discussion predicated on their playing days. So when it is used it's always a lazy way to try to qualify someone's opinion as incontrovertible. This happened more with Hank and our pre-eminent panel of "Expert former goalies" than with anyone else.

I started this tangent I think, and I think I brought the “do you even play” thing up in a reasonable way that had nothing to do with refuting someone else’s opinion.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Your neglecting to acknowledge that there are multiple people here who played hockey at a pretty high level, college and beyond. I rarely use the argument, but when I do it has nothing to do with the locker room. It has to do with the nuances of the game that aren’t apparent from the stands.

How high is high enough for it to be relevant?

 

[Synergy27]

How high is high enough for it to be relevant?

Subjective of course, but I’d probably set the bar at competitive high school. Any league where you have legitimate coaching with some semblance of a system.

I really don’t understand why this is controversial though. Think about baseball. Are you saying that getting in the box against a 90mph slider doesn’t give you a different and more valid perspective on hitting?

 

[Synergy27]

Yes, this is why Ted Williams was the greatest hitting coach of all time.

Wait...

I brought up baseball before I saw this post. Having perspective and insight doesn’t necessarily equate to being a good teacher/coach. But conversely, are there hitting coaches who have never hit? Do you think there should be?

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

How high is high enough for it to be relevant?

I mean, @Amazing Kreiderman, you're paying no attention to the phenomenal value that playing high-level hockey has brought to Dubas, Chayka, and our own Gorton as NHL execs.

 

[Rangers in 7]

And playing hockey at age 8 makes people an expert on what goes on in the NHL? I just don’t understand how that works. That’s why the “do you even play hockey?” Argument is ******ed

Not to be an ass but I’ve played hockey from the age of 3 till now...I’m 29....I’ve played junior hockey, college hockey....there is something to be said when it comes to watching the game, it’s not the be all end all but there are certainly many aspects to the argument that playing the game at a competitive level helps

 

[Synergy27]

Not to be an ass but I’ve played hockey from the age of 3 till now...I’m 29....I’ve played junior hockey, college hockey....there is something to be said when it comes to watching the game, it’s not the be all end all but there are certainly many aspects to the argument that playing the game at a competitive level helps

You gotta take hockey out of it. It’s a more generalized idea. There are certain things that only experience can teach you. Learning something by reading a book is different than learning something by watching a video is different than learning something by doing it over and over again.

 

[Synergy27]

I mean, @Amazing Kreiderman, you're paying no attention to the phenomenal value that playing high-level hockey has brought to Dubas, Chayka, and our own Gorton as NHL execs.

This is an interesting point, but I don’t think it’s completely relevant. The argument isn’t that you had to have played to be able to build/manage a winning team. The argument is that you had to have played to really understand certain detailed aspects of the game that aren’t readily apparent by just watching.

In this case, I brought up my take on why Kravtsov is such a good shooter and why I’m not super concerned that his patented five hole shot isn’t going to translate to the NHL. You don’t necessarily have to understand the intricacies of why Kravtsov is a good goal scorer in order to just know he’s a good one and that it’s good for him to be on your team.

 

[Stasis]

And playing hockey at age 8 makes people an expert on what goes on in the NHL? I just don’t understand how that works. That’s why the “do you even play hockey?” Argument is ******ed

LTTP but I live this constantly with a friend of mine. He played from like age 9 to 13 or something, at a decent level for that age, but still. He's so completely lost when it comes to watching games or playing EA NHL. Just Friday I had to explain to him the trapezoid rule for goalies. He had no idea. How the F do you watch hockey for your whole life (he's no die-hard but he's definitely seen a lot of games and a ton live here in Montreal) and not know THAT rule? Let alone all the times he's wrong about offsides or icing and we have to debate it every single time because "I played, you didn't, you don't understand". It's overwhelmingly tedious, to a point where because of how it was this past Friday I've decided I'm just not discussing/watching/playing hockey with him ever again. He basically parrots whatever local media is saying, and this being Montreal means it's mostly f'n terrible. He doesn't understand ANYTHING about the business side of it, or player skillsets etc. But he played when he was 12 at a school and I only played street hockey or pond hockey periodically at a later age so he's default right until proven wrong. THAT type of person can, with all due respect (none), go F themselves.

That said, there are certainly people who play actively and have for a long time who will know a bunch of little things I won't, and I respect them and their input when it's delivered correctly. Absolutely.

 

[Richard Banger]

I mean, @Amazing Kreiderman, you're paying no attention to the phenomenal value that playing high-level hockey has brought to Dubas, Chayka, and our own Gorton as NHL execs.

Funny because I think Gorton is the only good GM mentioned above.

Also I said you don't need to play hockey at a competitive level to build a team. I think playing helps on the analysis side of the game.

 

[Omark]

I have played hockey (like every guy in Finland has) and nowadays i do KHL hockey sport betting for a living - aside with poker. I would say playing hockey does give you few (unnecessary) details about the game but overall even studying statistics or math in general gives better understanding for the game. It gives you ability to separate things that are based on coincidence and things that actually makes difference to expected outcome. For hockey betting it's absolutely zero benefit to have backround in playing hockey. Math backround is a huge benefit.

Betting is about the skill to evaluate teams' strenghts and create accurate evaluations for each game. It's not a best measure for hockey knowledge but still I like to bring it up because that "if you haven't played the game you don't understand" argument is so bad.

In general, the more you follow hockey related stuff the more you understand the game. I have huge respect for the most active users here and I know for a fact that many of you are more advanced in terms of hockey knowledge/understanding than most of TV pro analysts.

 

[Ghost of jas]

So, Kravtsov looks like he's going to be a pretty special player, amirite?