Bedard, Michkov, or Celebrini: Who would you build around?

Who would you build your team around?


  • Total voters
    158

bleedgreen

Registered User
Dec 8, 2003
25,217
43,688
colorado
Visit site
I’m normally against small sample sizes and recency bias but I’m leaning towards Celebrini. I actually wasn’t that high on him (as an elite NHL’er) watching him in college. He was clearly the cream of the crop there but I wasnt sure how he’d do in the NHL. It’s so hard to judge when they’re in that kind of league. I’m impressed but when doing the comparison I’m trying to think long term. I think Bedard is a sniper and will be a scorer, I think Michkov will be a high end winger like Kaprizov. I think Celebrini could be the best center and therefore will control the play the most. I like his skating and playmaking sense which I think may outdo Bedard in the end. The OP’s question is who do you build a team around? Michkov is out for me as a wing as I’d always build a team down the middle so it’s between Bedard and Celebrini….Im taking Celebrini as of today. Absolutely could be wrong as all of them are barely defined as players, even Bedard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ignatius

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,784
17,311
Victoria
Between Bedard and Michkov, really close, Michkov by a hair, but Celebrini is clearly #3 for me.

still think bedard and Michkov are in a different tier

Yeah, this is it for me. Don’t know how Celebrini is leading. Maybe he’s in the same tier. I don’t think so, but it’s not so impossible. What I don’t agree with is him leading this poll. He’s third.

Gotta know puck. There is no reason at all to have Celebrini in a clear lower tier. I think Macklin goes on to have the most overall impact for his team, even if Bedard/Michkov have higher-end point totals.

Celebrini is a complete player. His two-way habits are already top notch. Some of the private data has him near the top of the league (already!) in puck battles won %, rush chances, and zone entries/exits for his team. This is phenomenal. He was already the best player in college hockey at age 17. That is a much more significant accomplishment than what Bedard produced in junior.
 

Pavel Buchnevich

"Pavel Buchnevich The Fake"
Dec 8, 2013
60,155
26,867
New York
Gotta know puck. There is no reason at all to have Celebrini in a clear lower tier. I think Macklin goes on to have the most overall impact for his team, even if Bedard/Michkov have higher-end point totals.

Celebrini is a complete player. His two-way habits are already top notch. Some of the private data has him near the top of the league (already!) in puck battles won %, rush chances, and zone entries/exits for his team. This is phenomenal. He was already the best player in college hockey at age 17. That is a much more significant accomplishment than what Bedard produced in junior.
So what about the public analytics that have his two-way play as rather putrid?
 

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
26,628
16,587
Vancouver
So what about the public analytics that have his two-way play as rather putrid?

They’re not putrid

IMG_8273.png


Bedard’s last year were putrid

IMG_8274.png


Some relative numbers aren’t great but it’s also one of those things where it’s tough to get a proper read on a poor team and even if you’re doing things well, others guys might not be and the variance in small numbers doesn’t always account for that.

Micro stats like puck battles are also one of those things where the overall defensive game might not be there yet but they show that the building blocks are there for it. Matthews was pretty similar as a rookie where you could tell he was going to be a strong defensive player but the underlying numbers didn’t quite back it up until a few years later. I’d argue Celebrini looks like the most complete rookie forward to enter the league since Matthews.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhiskeyYerTheDevils

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,784
17,311
Victoria
So what about the public analytics that have his two-way play as rather putrid?
I thought you didn't like or believe in "analytics"?

He's on a bad team. The raw xG% is going to be bad. Also his numbers are considerably worse when on the ice with Cody Ceci. That's probably doing a lot of work there.

When he's on the ice with Walman or Liljegren (someone that has some modicum of puck-moving capacity), he's above breakeven. That's impressive for the Sharks.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad