Bertuzzipunch
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2020
- 658
- 526
I would lose my **** tbhI would be ecstatic if we got Clarke.
I would lose my **** tbhI would be ecstatic if we got Clarke.
Right now, I firmly have Powers ahead.Still not the biggest fan of Powers, I'd have Clarke ahead.
Surprised Bobby Mac's consensus list has Edvinsson so high, considering he's viewed as a "boom or bust" prospect.
Eklund at 7 is music to my ears.
I had the opportunity to watch his Big Ten semifinal performance, so I'll offer a few observations:
He's a smart defenceman. I can understand the appeal. His gap control is quite good, and he closes the distance on the opponent at his own blue line well, using both his stick and body. In the corners and behind the net, he is mobile enough to shift along with the opposing puck carrier and calmly position himself between the carrier and the puck to eventually get possession back. He's big, but he doesn't lumber around. The Minnesota players had a tough time getting around him, primarily because he tracked them well, kept his legs moving, and had an active stick. There was only one play in his 25+ minutes of ice time when he sort of got turned around and lost his place.
Offensively, he didn't show a ton of puck-rushing, but he made a few smart pinches in the offensive zone and joined the rush through the neutral zone a few times. On one carry attempt from his own zone, the opposing forward had a step on him at the Michigan blue line; Power dropped it back to the trailing teammate behind him before the opponent could strip it away. He decided not to attempt to out-skate the opponent, whereas others might have gambled.
One of his standout qualities, besides his poise and positional maturity, is that he is a crisp, clean passer. Outlet passes were quick and snappy, and everything was tape-to-tape, including long-distance passes. His puck distribution at the point in the offensive zone, thus, was very controlled and effective. Fast, precise movement of the puck. He also walked the line a little bit, and came down the left half-wall a couple of times looking for cross-seam pass opportunities.
When he had the puck in his own zone, he never held on to it for too long. He moved it quickly, either chipping it along the boards to the nearest player, or if he was behind the net with pressure deep in the zone, clearing it up the boards and out of the d-zone.
He wasn't all that physical. He's not the type who goes for the body check and gets taken out of the play. Rather, he used his size to pin the opponent and to gain body position. He used his stick a lot to increase his reach. I noticed, a few times when he was looking to make a play, that he would cradle the puck really quickly and in a very controlled fashion.
An NHL team would be extremely happy to have this player. Smart, rangy defending along with high-end passing. He has a very pro-level skill set already.
Just a question:
If Kent Johnson adds 30 pounds, can he be the best centre in this draft?
Seems to me he is the player with the better skillset of the Michigan forwards, kind of a Pettersson vs Horvat debate.
Just a question:
If Kent Johnson adds 30 pounds, can he be the best centre in this draft?
Seems to me he is the player with the better skillset of the Michigan forwards, kind of a Pettersson vs Horvat debate.
Played center for a few games with Beniers gone at World Juniors
wasnt great, he struggled in that role.
Seems more comfortable at wing.
Read a report that he might project more as a winger than centre in the NHL. On Bob's list he's sitting where we're likely to pick and I'd go after him over Eklund. He'd be a great fit with either Bo or Petey down the road being a bit more of a distributor. Also a line with him and Pete would be filthy
Love Eklund such a smart player.Would not go after him over eklund. Personal preference, Kent johnson is interesting, alot of skill, usually i favor highly skilled players, but I just dont see enough of a motor or speed in his game especially compared to someone like eklund.
I have berniers 1 and eklund 2.
Eklund would also look excellent on any teams wing. His numbers playing in a men's league i think someone said is the best since backstrom's draft year. Without looking maybe even eclipsed him.
Right now, I firmly have Powers ahead.
Just watching some video of these two from this year -- Powers with Michigan and Clarke with Nove Zamsky --, and the way I would describe Power is that he is quite sound and stable defensively with high-end outlets and quick distribution, whereas Clarke plays an aggressive positional style and is more prone to making mistakes. I think Powers brings the calmness that the Canucks need along with crisp, fast puck movement up the ice and at the point in the o-zone. He uses his big frame to contain the opponent, both in transition and at the end boards, and he doesn't waste time with the puck and risk getting caught.
There's more risk with Clarke, who likes to jump up into the neutral zone more often, sometimes risking a potential turnover and chance the other way, and whose passing is solid but maybe not on Powers' level based on what I've seen so far.
I wrote an analysis of Powers' most recent game over in the Prospects section:
sounds like powers woudl actually be a great partner for Hughes
Clarke is playing his way into the lottery and out of Canucks' reach. Realistically we're battling the Flames for the 10 spot.