Toggle sidebar

Avs Mock Draft 1st Round Pick Poll

Status
Not open for further replies.
henchman21

henchman21

Mr. Meeseeks
Feb 24, 2012
61,507
53,750
There are 5 players here. This poll will run for 4 hours, unless there is a clear winner early. After that, the selection will be made.
 
Zandar said:
If it was all about size it would be Tuch. Surprised no Schmaltz.
Click to expand...

There are still a lot of good names out there. I cut a couple of my favorites to narrow the list. :nod:

Feel free to vote other, and post the name. The votes will still count.
 
If we actually have a shot at Tuch he is hands down the best option. He sounds like the most complete player in the draft, should be ready for this level immediately (size, IQ, maturity), and is exactly what we need for Duchene's line. He is the biggest player of that quality. Plays very physical. RW, which is something we are quite low on. Point per game player (top 10 in the US). Top 5 US goal scorer. Great skater. Great character/leader. Good hands. Mature. Extremely high IQ. Protects the puck and "great on the cycle". Good defender in all 3 zones. Scouting reports make this guy seem like he has everything. THis is my favorite:

"This combination of skill, maturity, hockey IQ, hands, speed, patience, and size makes the Boston College-bound prospect one of the most complete players in this year's draft class - not to mention coveted by 30 teams in a league called the NHL.

He plays the power-forward role, but he will be much more than that. He plays the playmaker, he plays the sniper, he plays the agitator - he logs big minutes because his coaches trust him so much. He leads the way into battle, and when he gets on his horse... you don't want to be skating in his way."


But if he is set on going to BC then i would go a different direction. I just feel like he would be the best option as far as an immediate needs go and would draft him expecting him to take over that top RW spot quite quickly (similar to MacK). While we could use a D man right away, i doubt those guys will be ready for top4 minutes next year. But if he is going to BC and wont be an immediate help anyways, might as well and go with our biggest overall need- Dmen. In which case i would go with Sanheim. Both he and McKeown would be great additions as Dmen (two way top 4 potential), but Sanheim's height/length gives him the nod over McKeown to me.
 
I went with Sanheim. First of all he's a lefty, McKeown is a righty so think about that, if that matters to you. Also, Sanheim had a really strong second half while McKeown had a bit of a stagnant year. Sanheim is bigger, 6'4 205 vs 6'1 195 for McKeown. From what I read it seems like Sanheim has a bit more upside while there are questions about McKeown's hockey IQ.
 
Tigervixxen said:
I went with Sanheim. First of all he's a lefty, McKeown is a righty so think about that, if that matters to you. Also, Sanheim had a really strong second half while McKeown had a bit of a stagnant year. Sanheim is bigger, 6'4 205 vs 6'1 195 for McKeown. From what I read it seems like Sanheim has a bit more upside while there are questions about McKeown's hockey IQ.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that at all. IQ is McKeown's biggest strength, and it easily competes for the best among defensemen in this draft (IMO it is clearly the best). A rough comparision (not ideal IMO, but relatable here) a right shot Bigras with a better shot and a bit less physical.
 
It's not my opinion because I've never seen these guys play but I've certainly read that about McKeown. How would you compare/contrast McKeown and Sanheim? It's pretty close to me between the two. From what I read Sanheim has more upside, some people put him on par with Fleury.
 
McKeown, but Tuch would be good here as well.
Value + Need for both guys.

McKeown just seems like the better player to me. Could really solidify the RH Side of the Organization
 
I have a feeling this thread will confuse a lot of people.

Everything I've read about McKeown has him all over the board. I've seen him ranked in the 20's and also in the 50's.

I'd probably pick Sanheim of those 5.
 
Tigervixxen said:
It's not my opinion because I've never seen these guys play but I've certainly read that about McKeown. How would you compare/contrast McKeown and Sanheim? It's pretty close to me between the two. From what I read Sanheim has more upside, some people put him on par with Fleury.
Click to expand...

I have never read that anywhere about McKeown, I have always read the opposite. I have seen both play multiple times live and much more on tape, neither are worry about how they think the game, but McKeown is the smarter player.

McKeown is smarter, a better skater, has a bomb of a shot, and rushes the puck better (maybe slightly better hands), better defensive stick, logged more difficult minutes throughout his junior career (Sanheim has been developed slower on purpose and more recently got the tough minutes. McKeown was fed them in his rookie year).

Sanheim has a better frame, skates well for his size, slightly better first pass, a bit more physical and stronger, stronger development curve (meaning he has consistently taken strong leaps in development vs McKeown who has taken slow, but steady steps). That development curve causes people to really project and say, "If he took this leap this year, what about next year?" That is a dangerous way of thinking IMO, development curves are not straight lines... there are plenty of ups and downs. Admittedly, I am more cautious on late risers. IMO a few pan out very well (Skinner is a prime example), most do not.

IMO they are very close. I like McKeown's overall game a bit more and think that he has a tad more upside (his combo of IQ, skating, size - he will be 6'1" or 6'2" 210+ when he fills out, and shot are pretty rare), but both likely top out at #3 defenders and a safe bets to be at least #4s.
 
Last edited:
The Mars Volchenkov said:
I have a feeling this thread will confuse a lot of people.

Everything I've read about McKeown has him all over the board. I've seen him ranked in the 20's and also in the 50's.

I'd probably pick Sanheim of those 5.
Click to expand...

Yeah haha, I was just waiting for the first poster to come here saying he frantically searched for the news of an Elliott trade.
 
The Mars Volchenkov said:
I have a feeling this thread will confuse a lot of people.

Everything I've read about McKeown has him all over the board. I've seen him ranked in the 20's and also in the 50's.

I'd probably pick Sanheim of those 5.
Click to expand...

I bet, but it wouldn't let me add a poll to the other thread... so I did this.
 
I appreciate you writing that up Hench. Just to prove I'm not crazy, this is from the Black Book on McKeown.

Sometimes he doesn’t identify passing options skating through the neutral zone, and will live or die on that play based on whether or not he can beat the opponent. In the offensive zone his questionable puck play continued where once again he would make some impressive passes to create scoring chances, but then would not be able to identify simple passing options that sent the puck down the ice. He has a good shot from the point when he gets it through, but will sometimes try to force his shot into screens he won’t be able to get it through. He plays in all game situations, and the extra spotlight on him has really brought us to question his hockey sense. Roland needs to refine his consistency, and decision making concerns in order to start to progress into the player he once showed the potential to be.
Click to expand...
 
Tigervixxen said:
I appreciate you writing that up Hench. Just to prove I'm not crazy, this is from the Black Book on McKeown.
Click to expand...

I have not read the black book this year yet... McKeown is more of rush the puck sort of defensemen. He seems to avoid making the first pass a lot. I can see where that critique comes from. I don't see any question to his hockey IQ though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom