Confirmed with Link: Brady Tkachuk - The decider: signs 3 year ELC

[Micklebot]

I don't consider Hoffman more skilled than Stone. Hockey IQ is a skill, and the most important one. more skilled means better hockey player,

I think the fact that some people would consider Hoffman as a more skilled player leave room to cut Dorion some slack on that comment, no?

The important think here isn't what you consider the meaning to be, but rather what Dorion does. If he's saying he'd take a guy like Stone who may not have the physical traits that Hoffman does (shot, and skating) then that's fine.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

A kid like Tkachuk will almost always look good right away. Hitting, making noise, being all over the ice, rustling jimmies, etc.

But frankly, I don't care who "wins" the Calder in preseason, or who looks best as a teenager. It's who will have the better career that counts.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I think the fact that some people would consider Hoffman as a more skilled player leave room to cut Dorion some slack on that comment, no?

The important think here isn't what you consider the meaning to be, but rather what Dorion does. If he's saying he'd take a guy like Stone who may not have the physical traits that Hoffman does (shot, and skating) then that's fine.

It's dishonest. With their logic you can argue that Hoffman is more skilled than Gretzky because Hoffman is faster and has a better shot.

In no universe is Hoffman a more skilled player than Stone or Gretzky.

 

[Micklebot]

It's dishonest. With their logic you can argue that Hoffman is more skilled than Gretzky because Hoffman is faster and has a better shot.

In no universe is Hoffman a more skilled player than Stone or Gretzky.

You can absolutely argue there were more skilled players than Gretzky that weren't as good... people did it all the time when he played. When people talk about skilled, they typically mean the measurable things like passing shooting skating, stick handling ect. Hockey sense or IQ is used to talk about the ability to read plays and anticipate what will happen.

If you combine the two into one, you have more skilled just meaning better which just makes to word less meaningfully.

For example, Kovalev was one of the most skilled player to ever play the game, but couldn't put it all together in a way where he could overtake Sakic in terms of overall play. One guy was more high end skill, the other was a better overall player.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

You can absolutely argue there were more skilled players than Gretzky that weren't as good... people did it all the time when he played. When people talk about skilled, they typically mean the measurable things like passing shooting skating, stick handling ect. Hockey sense or IQ is used to talk about the ability to read plays and anticipate what will happen.

If you combine the two into one, you have more skilled just meaning better which just makes to word less meaningfully.

For example, Kovalev was one of the most skilled player to ever play the game, but couldn't put it all together in a way where he could overtake Sakic in terms of overall play. One guy was more high end skill, the other was a better overall player.

Can we dare say one had more grit and determination?

 

[JungleBeat]

What you see is what you get with Tkachuk. He’s not a raw prospect whatsoever.

 

[harrisb]

Can we dare say one had more grit and determination?

Character matters

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

What you see is what you get with Tkachuk. He’s not a raw prospect whatsoever.

I think he is still raw in terms of what he's going to be when he gets stronger.. it will help his possession game, his shot and it will amplify what we are already seeing

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Character matters

no question about it

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

You can absolutely argue there were more skilled players than Gretzky that weren't as good... people did it all the time when he played. When people talk about skilled, they typically mean the measurable things like passing shooting skating, stick handling ect. Hockey sense or IQ is used to talk about the ability to read plays and anticipate what will happen.

If you combine the two into one, you have more skilled just meaning better which just makes to word less meaningfully.

For example, Kovalev was one of the most skilled player to ever play the game, but couldn't put it all together in a way where he could overtake Sakic in terms of overall play. One guy was more high end skill, the other was a better overall player.

So Hockey IQ is less a skill and more "character, intagibles, and leadership" based?

Kovalev didn't have the vision and hockey IQ to be as good as Sakic. He lacked in those skills, and he had better skills in other areas but he still didn't have the overall skill of Sakic because in my opinion, Hockey IQ, vision and passing are much more important skills than deking or shooting.

Sakic was more skilled than Kovalev and Stone is more skilled than Hoffman. And lots of players in 2018 and 2019 are more skilled than Brady.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

What you see is what you get with Tkachuk. He’s not a raw prospect whatsoever.

He’s very raw offensively and physically. What you see is definitely not what you get. He has a ton of room to grow.

As far as skill, this is also a strange argument...When people say skill they are talking about shooting, passing, deking, speed. Kovalev is much more skilled than alfredsson yet alfredsson is the better player. Nail yakupov is example A of why skill isn’t always the difference maker . Luckily for sens, Tkachuk Is very skilled

 

[NyQuil]

The opinions from Tkachuk dissenters are very very strange. He’s very raw offensively and physically. What you see is definitely not what you get. He has a ton of room to grow.

As far as skill, this is also a strange argument...When people say skill they are talking about shooting, passing, deking, speed. Kovalev is much more skilled than alfredsson yet alfredsson is the better player

Alfredsson was also a very skilled player.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

Alfredsson was also a very skilled player.

He was. But there were far more skilled players in the game, and alfredssson came out ahead of many because of his character and commitment to defense

 

[Boud]

He was. But there were far more skilled players in the game, and alfredssson came out ahead of many because of his character and commitment to defense

I think they call it talent.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

He was. But there were far more skilled players in the game, and alfredssson came out ahead of many because of his character and commitment to defense

Alfredsson was better and more skilled than Kovalev because he read and understood the game better. Skill isn't just who can score the most flashy goal.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

That is not what people are referencing when they refer to skill. Ask any scout this question.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

That is not what people are referencing when they refer to skill. Ask any scout this question.

what is hockey iq than if not a skill?

saying Alfredsson was better at hockey than kovalev because of "character" is hilarious.

people who think that Kovalev was the most skilled player ever but just didn't try are out to lunch. Kovalev just didn't have the processing power to read the game and see what was going to happen 2 steps ahead. Things that guys like Alfredsson, Stone, Sakic excel at.

 

[JungleBeat]

Alfredsson was better and more skilled than Kovalev because he read and understood the game better. Skill isn't just who can score the most flashy goal.

I don’t know about that. Hockey iq is not quantifiable.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

It’s work ethic which stems from character . Kovalev had no work ethic. To ne, there’s no question Kovalev was more skilled, but if you differ on the definition of skill then that’s ok. Just a difference of opinion.

 

[L'Aveuglette]

1- You're still perpetuating the myth that character is the only reason Tkachuk was picked high. Main reason
2- Nobody cares about what's happening in front office. Players only care about the dressing room and the ice. Wrong
3- You're thinking a top 3 pick is likely. It isn't. Wrong
4- You're assuming 4-8 next draft would be comparable to Tkachuk. It isn't. Wrong
5- You're ignoring other reasons not to keep the pick.

Which ones?

Try again.

 

[L'Aveuglette]

A few good preseason games and Tkachuk is the second coming of Mark Messier.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I don’t know about that. Hockey iq is not quantifiable.

It's observable. you don't need data to see that boro doesn't have much going on between his head.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

It’s work ethic which stems from character . Kovalev had no work ethic. To ne, there’s no question Kovalev was more skilled, but if you differ on the definition of skill then that’s ok. Just a difference of opinion.

​

Kovalev was very skilled but lacked offensive and defensive intelligence. While Alfredsson was always thinking.

It's not a character thing. look at Lazar, generational character, but dumb as hell.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

It’s easy to distinguish who has low hockey sense between average to fringe NHL players like Ceci,Lazar and Borowiecki. But it’s a whole different ball game when it comes to ELITE players.

Any elite player like Kovalev, Alfredsson etc have hockey sense and it becomes subjective when you’re saying Kovalev lacked hockey iq.

no it's easy. Star players with elite hockey IQ consistently make the right decisions with the puck. They know when to make the simple play and they know when to make the risky play. They understand the game so their great decision making is consistent. See: Alfredsson, Stone, Karlsson

Star players who have relatively limited hockey IQ are prone to making terrible judgements with the puck. They are routinely turning the puck over or tring to do much when the simple play would have not only been safer but also more dangerous in setting up a goal. See: Brent Burns, Kovalev

 

[JungleBeat]

no it's easy. Star players with elite hockey IQ consistently make the right decisions with the puck. They know when to make the simple play and they know when to make the risky play. They understand the game so their great decision making is consistent. See: Alfredsson, Stone, Karlsson

Star players who have relatively limited hockey IQ are prone to making terrible judgements with the puck. They are routinely turning the puck over or tring to do much when the simple play would have not only been safer but also more dangerous in setting up a goal. See: Brent Burns, Kovalev

High risk plays =/= low hockey sense IMO. When you have greats tools you have to put them to work. Kovalev lacked heart and was all about himself. If he had no offensive intelligence I highly doubt that he’d score 1000+ points in the NHL.

Not sure any elite player in the NHL right now has low hockey sense. Save for Burns like you mentioned but that guy is the most unique player in the NHL moving from D to F and his style may be viewed as low hockey iq and I disagree on that.

Ovechkin maybe? But even then getting open for goals is a skill of its own.