Jack DiBiase
Team Iceland Coach
- Nov 15, 2008
- 2,455
- 106
So, where would he be picked, if he was born a few weeks earlier and was 2015 eligible? Top-3? Even top-2?
C Auston Matthews - USNTDP, USHL (2016 Draft)
- Thread starter sigx15
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Well if he were eligible this year. He would have played NCAA hockey no? If that's the case I think he establishes himself at or above Eichel, considering he's putting up better numbers at the same age.
It could go either way though.
Jack DiBiase
Team Iceland Coach
- Nov 15, 2008
- 2,455
- 106
I don't think so. Eichel is 96 born so that's why he plays for NCAA while the other 97 born 2015 eligibles are still playing for the national team. I could be wrong though.
Does he remind anyone else of Malkin?
I could see him being a bit better than Eichel.
McDavid, Matthews, and Eichel this generations Crosby, Malkin, Toews. But hopefully Matthews doesn't end up on the Oilers too
Some elements of his game but he plays a tougher game than Malkin, Definately closer to a player like Toews. He could very well end up more valuable than Eichel.
Top 3 most 5 most definitely, top 3 is a good bet as well.
jacobhockey13
used to watch hockey, then joined HF Boards
Eichel is ahead. He just has an extra gear to his game and does things at such an incredibly rapid pace.
Matthews would be #3.
Matthews would be #3.
jacobhockey13
used to watch hockey, then joined HF Boards
Auston is 6'2" 194. Jack is 6'2" 194. I would agree though that Eichel has the edge in skating.
Eichel plays bigger I feel like too though. Probably just with how long his stick is but being able to handle the puck like eichel does with that long of a stick definitely gives him an advantage over matthews
He is more in Larkins category not even close to Eichel.
Don't let the stats fool you, 2 TOTALLY different styles of play. The #'s put up on the 1997 team are extremely over rated. A load of 5+ goal win with some at 10. basically , a lot of meaningless goals if there are such a thing.
If he goes to college, which I doubt, he will not put up #'s that Eichel did unless he ends up in Big 10 or lesser conference.
This is not a knock, Larkin is one heck of a player but Eichel is in another class.
Don't let the stats fool you, 2 TOTALLY different styles of play. The #'s put up on the 1997 team are extremely over rated. A load of 5+ goal win with some at 10. basically , a lot of meaningless goals if there are such a thing.
If he goes to college, which I doubt, he will not put up #'s that Eichel did unless he ends up in Big 10 or lesser conference.
This is not a knock, Larkin is one heck of a player but Eichel is in another class.
lawrence
Registered User
- May 19, 2012
- 16,700
- 7,617
there were some scouts that said if he was born in time for the 2015 draft he is on par with Jack Eichel. Which is quite unbelievable but probably top 3.
Jason MacIsaac
Registered User
Is this a joke? .93 PPG for Larkin with under 18 team. 1.93 PPG for Matthews. Regardless of the strength of the team.
I was very impressed by Matthews at the WJC, I think he's up there with Eichel, time will tell. I found that Matthews is very nifty.
who is his comparison? Might be a future Canuck.
Get in line after Toronto and Arizona.
lawrence
Registered User
- May 19, 2012
- 16,700
- 7,617
wasn't aware there is a line up, especially with the first 3 picks being drawn in a lottery.
nitpicking
Saw all of Matthews' games at U18 worlds. He is undeniably awesome, but there are a few negatives, which may or may not be relevant at all.
Most of their games weren't very close, but the following things were obvious during the championship game:
For a powerfully built guy who plays such a power forward, cycle type of game, he is just not very physical. He glaringly lacks a mean streak, and makes no attempt to intimidate opponents, despite being bigger and stronger than most of his competition. There were several spots during the championship game where he could have gotten in a defenseman's kitchen in front, or just finished a check (without putting his team at a disadvantage), and he elected not to. These were not all spots where he was tired at the end of a shift, either. In such an intense, closely contested game, I expected him to use his intimidating presence to his advantage a lot more. I guess you could call him unflappable, cool, calm, whatever, but he doesn't play with a physical edge from what I've seen.
He also struggled terribly at the faceoff dot. Small sample size, but I expected him to dominate in that area.
Again, just FWIW. I could be accused of nitpicking here, and he's no longer going to be one of the biggest players on the ice as he moves up, but these things were very noticeable.
Saw all of Matthews' games at U18 worlds. He is undeniably awesome, but there are a few negatives, which may or may not be relevant at all.
Most of their games weren't very close, but the following things were obvious during the championship game:
For a powerfully built guy who plays such a power forward, cycle type of game, he is just not very physical. He glaringly lacks a mean streak, and makes no attempt to intimidate opponents, despite being bigger and stronger than most of his competition. There were several spots during the championship game where he could have gotten in a defenseman's kitchen in front, or just finished a check (without putting his team at a disadvantage), and he elected not to. These were not all spots where he was tired at the end of a shift, either. In such an intense, closely contested game, I expected him to use his intimidating presence to his advantage a lot more. I guess you could call him unflappable, cool, calm, whatever, but he doesn't play with a physical edge from what I've seen.
He also struggled terribly at the faceoff dot. Small sample size, but I expected him to dominate in that area.
Again, just FWIW. I could be accused of nitpicking here, and he's no longer going to be one of the biggest players on the ice as he moves up, but these things were very noticeable.
stokes84
Registered User
Paxon
202? Stanley Cup Champions
Definitely. Eichel and Fasching together were great last year. Still, it's tough to judge results or even how guy look on the ice in a pre-draft year WJC. Mathews was impressive as a pre-draft year player. Less impressive than Eichel was last year, but still impressive. Next WJC Mathews should have the benefit of an even more experienced Larkin to take some of the pressure off him that was on Eichel this year. Next year's draft will be fun to follow with several high-end prospects and no McDavid to lock up 1st overall.
Sabre Dance
Make Hockey Fun Again
- Jul 27, 2006
- 12,641
- 2,410
Hard to really compare 2 great prospects. Eichel and Mathews should both be top players in the NHL.
sounds like some valid comparisons. I've read he is saying Anze Kopitar or Jonathan Toews about himself. Kopitar looks like a good one too because he clearly hasn't the physical edge like Benn...or maybe not yet..
If he was a couple days older, he'd be in this draft and would go 3rd IMO. He's a 1st overall quality player, but McDavid and Eichel are just too good. IMO Eichel's skating and one-on-one ability puts him over the top vs. Matthews, though they're otherwise quite close/similar in two respects. A season like Eichel just had is pretty much the absolute best case for Matthews next year, and I doubt he'll have one quite that good.
The Americans drafted over the last handful of years are going to be scary good to play against in the future (Eichel, Matthews and Galchenyuk, Seth Jones, Hanifin, etc.).
The Americans drafted over the last handful of years are going to be scary good to play against in the future (Eichel, Matthews and Galchenyuk, Seth Jones, Hanifin, etc.).
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Beanpot Boston University vs Harvard - TD Garden, BostonWagers: 4Staked: $656.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
