D Evan Bouchard - London Knights, OHL (2018, 10th, EDM)

[MarkusNaslund19]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

Man, thank you so much for that vid. You know your stuff and I would grab a beer with you anytime and chat hockey.

To play devil's advocate, from the bit of your video that I watched (and it's late so I only watched the first few minutes but I can't wait to watch it when I get a chance). It seemed like a lot of his poor defence could be attributable to a couple of things.

1. Getting caught in between (i.e. not sure which decision to make, and so making neither which is ultimately the worst of the three options).

2. A feeling that he should always be doing 'something'. So defensively he wasn't waiting for the game to come to him, but would rush into stupid positions.

I wonder if both of these can't be attributable to playing for a bad team with teammates whom he cannot trust.

I played hockey for a long time (played rep levels and have followed the game extremely closely for 25 years, but can't say I was a pro or anything), and I know that I play my worst when I'm on a bad team where I don't trust my teammates. It begins to make you doubt your own intuition so you end up trying to anticipate how your teammates will f*** up so that you can make up for it.

It also leads you to get caught in between really often because you can't play instinctively but are always thinking.

It would also account for him frequently trying to take on the world when he gets the puck.

All of this said, as a Canucks fan Bouchard is not the guy I want (I prefer any of Hughes, Dobson, Wahlstrom, or Tkachuk), but I would be curious to hear your thoughts. I have watched just a few minutes of Bouchard so I'm not really challenging your assertion so much as curious to hear your response to the questions I am posing.

Cheers.

 

[Michael Farkas]

We definitely don't agree on this player, but I just wanted to say how much I appreciate and respect you putting in this kind of work.

One comment if I may: I think you should make more videos like these for sure, but when you do, try to keep your commentary a little more neutral. It sounds like you're being funny a bit, and I get that, but considering the humor is at the kid's expense... I dunno. Food for thought.

But on the topic of the video, I wonder if some of the things you observe as issues in this video are actually Bouchard playing London's slightly different system. There's an article on TheAthletic that I can go find, but it's a comparison of Bouchard and Dobson, and it makes the point that it is not London's system for Bouchard to be the first guy back. London uses a forward for that most of the time. Edit: Brown: A data-driven comparison of Evan Bouchard and Noah...

Thoughts on that? In a more general sense, could some of these problems be related to how London plays?

Edit: more questions/comments below

I definitely did notice some of the things you did. I was driven absolutely insane by the 1 on 4/5 rushes, which he has done a lot more times than we saw in the video.

A question I have for you is this: an awful lot of what you talk about in the video could be categorized under either "doing the little things" or "defensive play", and I think those two things are often considered things that players learn as they develop. What makes you conclude that Bouchard is hopeless (in those areas)? I mean, could Bouchard improve if he had a coach like you telling him about the things you talk about in the video? Or do you think he's been told that, but it just didn't take? You say at one point in the video that you don't think Bouchard is very good at learning.

You knew this question was coming: why doesn't anybody else see Bouchard as being as fatally bad in this department as you do? As your video rightly points out, he's made some pretty egregious errors. Why do you think other scouts aren't bothered by this? Or are they?

In order (if I may):

- Thanks for watching, I appreciate it.

- Feedback noted. This was not intended to be a full scope of him, this was intended to focus on a few main things. Those main things I consider to be negatives, so therefore it came out like it did. You guys have all the highlight paks already...you know what his best looks like, you don't need me for that. It's like I always say, if you watch the Draft, every single of these kids is gonna turn out and be a star...just not reality. And while this won't just justify my position, he's getting off pretty easy compared to how I've heard some scouts talk about players but again, two wrongs don't make a right. If Mr. and Mrs. Bouchard happen to come across that video, I'm sorry if it's a little too rough.

- I did not read that article. I'd be curious to know what kind of detail it actually goes into. Just covering for a wandering point man that has a green light isn't a system, that's just fundamental hockey - or piece thereof. Bouchard doesn't play fundamental hockey, so that's why I take exception. Unique things like how Wilkes-Barre/Scranton (AHL) plays where d-men have the green light to be first on the forecheck regularly, that's unique, that's noteworthy...having watched Bouchard and Regula in separate games, there's nothing especially unique about London's system that would have second guess what I'm watching. But that doesn't mean I catch everything...so I'd never turn down information...

- Good question. Yes, little things: skate/stick positioning those can be picked up. So, hold on, let me start over. There's three main components to the developmental defensive arc really: hockey sense/anticipation, urgency/desire, experience. The problem is so many people will just go "oh, he's a young d-man, he'll learn" as if everyone develops at the same rate and has the same propensity and same ceiling. That's not how it works.

Good example: young Cam Fowler (staying in the OHL), he was kind of a mess defensively, early on in Anaheim...still kind of a mess. His errors were "experience" errors...they weren't hockey sense errors, they weren't desire errors. He just literally ("literally") didn't know how to do it. Box out principles, skate/stick stuff, little tricks of the trade that you don't really know until you've played. I had total confidence that Fowler was going to be a wonderful two-way d-man because I saw the gaffes were just "experience errors"...on the flip side, I don't trust Bouchard to pick them up because he's missing the hockey sense and he's missing the urgency. In time, maybe you can get to some urgency (if so, Merkley becomes a top 15 pick easily), but hockey sense is just not something that can be meaningfully developed this late in the mental development arc.

That's why Cam Barker and Dion Phaneuf and Jared Cowen and Stanley Cup hero Luca Sbisa make the same mistakes they did in junior that they do in the show...that's why the production is high early but falls off as the game adapts to them and they can't adapt back. You need to be a freak physical athlete to overcome that (E.Kane, K.Letang, maybe even D.Byfuglien)...most guys aren't freak physical athletes...

- In order to see hockey sense, you need to have it. So if your OHL scout thought Erik Gudbranson was a good idea but Olli Maatta was a 6th round pick...then Evan Bouchard is probably top-5 on his board. Sometimes you're willing to take a chance on the physical/technical skills and pray...I don't know why, I don't subscribe to it...I should - in reality - soften my stance on it more than I do, but it's just so off putting to me that I struggle with it. That said, I'm not alone out there in having concerns about Bouchard...the stuff that gets read/posted here, I guess they don't see it...I can't speak for them. But I know I'm not alone out there on the whole and I'll just leave it at that. But, at the end of the day, it takes 31 teams not to like a guy for him to fall, it takes one team to like someone and then, whammo, you get Luke Schenn at 5 or whatever haha

 

[Michael Farkas]

Man, thank you so much for that vid. You know your stuff and I would grab a beer with you anytime and chat hockey.

To play devil's advocate, from the bit of your video that I watched (and it's late so I only watched the first few minutes but I can't wait to watch it when I get a chance). It seemed like a lot of his poor defence could be attributable to a couple of things.

1. Getting caught in between (i.e. not sure which decision to make, and so making neither which is ultimately the worst of the three options).

2. A feeling that he should always be doing 'something'. So defensively he wasn't waiting for the game to come to him, but would rush into stupid positions.

I wonder if both of these can't be attributable to playing for a bad team with teammates whom he cannot trust.

I played hockey for a long time (played rep levels and have followed the game extremely closely for 25 years, but can't say I was a pro or anything), and I know that I play my worst when I'm on a bad team where I don't trust my teammates. It begins to make you doubt your own intuition so you end up trying to anticipate how your teammates will **** up so that you can make up for it.

It also leads you to get caught in between really often because you can't play instinctively but are always thinking.

It would also account for him frequently trying to take on the world when he gets the puck.

All of this said, as a Canucks fan Bouchard is not the guy I want (I prefer any of Hughes, Dobson, Wahlstrom, or Tkachuk), but I would be curious to hear your thoughts. I have watched just a few minutes of Bouchard so I'm not really challenging your assertion so much as curious to hear your response to the questions I am posing.

Cheers.

- Thank you. And I'm a silver tequila man myself, but I love to talk about the game (and I love tequila), so I'm sure it would work out.

- 1. Yes, that's correct. Except reading the game through his eyes, he doesn't really see the options...it's just kind of blurry, so he skates at the puck.

2. I wish he was doing something sometimes...the fact that he can't figure out when to do something and when to not do something is basically the whole video in a nutshell...that's hockey sense meets risk mitigation meets whatever else I talk about in that thing...

- That is a thing (bad teammates, no trust) but that's not the sense I get here. Because he doesn't take over, per se...he doesn't have that urgency of "oh ****, #7 has the puck, let me get into a position to get that away from him, let me save the day" it's mostly like "oh, 7 has it...well, I'm probably not gonna get it back...and uh...what were we talking about again...?" When Evgeni Malkin used to take the puck from his left winger Eric Tangradi and then absolutely walk everyone, that's not trusting your teammates (big dog, doesn't have to eat apparently...) - this is just being a space cadet...in my opinion, of course...

 

[ForestCityHky]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

You lost all credibility when you ranked his Hockey Sense and vision so poorly. Too of his strongest attributes.

 

[briererocks]

You lost all credibility when you ranked his Hockey Sense and vision so poorly. Too of his strongest attributes.

The video he compiled is gold. It is easy to dismiss it out of hand by jumping to the conclusions, which you apparently do not like. Watch the video and listen to what he has to say. I guarantee you you will get something out of it.

His video is worth pages and pages of comments. He actually breaks down video of his play, his mistakes etc.. Great contribution to the board.

 

[Frk It]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

Good stuff, but thanks now I am doubting taking him at #6 more than before...

 

[raymond23]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

Thank you for this. Exactly the type of concerns I have.

His center of gravity always seems so high as well. Always so upright. Probably not an issue in junior with his size, but I can definitely see him having trouble with any type of physical battles in pros.

 

[1972]

Yikes...he's going to get eaten up in the NHL defensively, that's alot like Ristolainen.

 

[Castle8130]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

I think he has acquired a bit of laziness throughout the year and the year before, he was a beast in his own zone. I think it's more of an effort concern in the video. He feels like he can do whatever he wants based on his skills. I have no doubt in my mind that the team that drafts him will put him back on the right track.

 

[Michael Farkas]

So, someone asked earlier...what would make a team look the other way on some of this stuff and draft a player like this...the answer by Castle is a big chunk of it. It's the ol' Six Million Dollar Man defense "We can rebuild him. We have the technology."

And from a reasonability perspective, it's a rational point of view. From my point of view, I'm not drafting this player and putting up an argument as to why I'm not drafting this player in the room. Sometimes you get overruled by the logic - backed by other things, of course - that Castle provided.

That's why draft boards among NHL teams are sandboxed and highly variable...whereas the stuff that's public strives for consensus as to not be...mocked...? It's a very odd way of thinking in my eyes. A lot of parroting is done and it creates of perception that doesn't necessarily jive with reality...

 

[McDNicks17]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

If you don't mind me asking, who are the OHL defensemen you have ahead of him?

 

[Michael Brand Eggs]

That's why draft boards among NHL teams are sandboxed and highly variable...whereas the stuff that's public strives for consensus as to not be...mocked...? It's a very odd way of thinking in my eyes. A lot of parroting is done and it creates of perception that doesn't necessarily jive with reality...

Do you think Bob McKenzie's aggregated rankings are doing this? They seem very "consensus" for the most part.

Do you think the reason Bouchard is so highly ranked is because the people ranking him are trying to meet consensus?

 

[Zaddy]

- Good question. Yes, little things: skate/stick positioning those can be picked up. So, hold on, let me start over. There's three main components to the developmental defensive arc really: hockey sense/anticipation, urgency/desire, experience. The problem is so many people will just go "oh, he's a young d-man, he'll learn" as if everyone develops at the same rate and has the same propensity and same ceiling. That's not how it works.

Good example: young Cam Fowler (staying in the OHL), he was kind of a mess defensively, early on in Anaheim...still kind of a mess. His errors were "experience" errors...they weren't hockey sense errors, they weren't desire errors. He just literally ("literally") didn't know how to do it. Box out principles, skate/stick stuff, little tricks of the trade that you don't really know until you've played. I had total confidence that Fowler was going to be a wonderful two-way d-man because I saw the gaffes were just "experience errors"...on the flip side, I don't trust Bouchard to pick them up because he's missing the hockey sense and he's missing the urgency. In time, maybe you can get to some urgency (if so, Merkley becomes a top 15 pick easily), but hockey sense is just not something that can be meaningfully developed this late in the mental development arc

This is very well said and something I think a lot of people miss out on when evaluating defensemen. Sometimes a defenseman make a bad play because of inexperience and just because that particular player hadn't learned that lesson yet, but some mistakes are simply due to the player not having the instincts, anticipation or awareness to make the right play. And that's something you can't really teach. Either you have it from a young age or you don't.

Just looking at your video Bouchard does some real egregious stuff. His defensive instincts just doesn't seem to be there at all. He fails to do something so basic as going wide or behind the net to make himself available for a pass when his D partner have the puck. That should be just a natural reaction and something that is ingrained into your play that you shouldn't even have to think about doing it. It should just come naturally. I was actually shocked to see it happening not only once, but twice (and maybe more, I didn't finish the entire video). I thought that was something everyone knew since peewee hockey pretty much.

 

[Michael Farkas]

If you don't mind me asking, who are the OHL defensemen you have ahead of him?

I don't really care much for rankings per se, because it really gets kind of muddy...what's actually the difference between a player ranked 87th and a player ranked 89th? But rather than answering your question with a rhetorical bunch of nonsense...

Joey Keane is my clear #1 among OHL d-men. The only player I have on the same tier as him is Mac Hollowell.

After that second tier is where things get a little muddy...I think the next tier leads off with Merkley and Sandin...Bouchard is there, Vallati is there, Stratis is there I think...if you really like him, MacPherson isn't far off either...

Full disclaimer: of all the OHL eligible d-men, there are three I haven't seen enough of yet (Malik, Everett, Timms).

 

[CanuckCity]

In order (if I may):

- Thanks for watching, I appreciate it.

- Feedback noted. This was not intended to be a full scope of him, this was intended to focus on a few main things. Those main things I consider to be negatives, so therefore it came out like it did. You guys have all the highlight paks already...you know what his best looks like, you don't need me for that. It's like I always say, if you watch the Draft, every single of these kids is gonna turn out and be a star...just not reality. And while this won't just justify my position, he's getting off pretty easy compared to how I've heard some scouts talk about players but again, two wrongs don't make a right. If Mr. and Mrs. Bouchard happen to come across that video, I'm sorry if it's a little too rough.

- I did not read that article. I'd be curious to know what kind of detail it actually goes into. Just covering for a wandering point man that has a green light isn't a system, that's just fundamental hockey - or piece thereof. Bouchard doesn't play fundamental hockey, so that's why I take exception. Unique things like how Wilkes-Barre/Scranton (AHL) plays where d-men have the green light to be first on the forecheck regularly, that's unique, that's noteworthy...having watched Bouchard and Regula in separate games, there's nothing especially unique about London's system that would have second guess what I'm watching. But that doesn't mean I catch everything...so I'd never turn down information...

- Good question. Yes, little things: skate/stick positioning those can be picked up. So, hold on, let me start over. There's three main components to the developmental defensive arc really: hockey sense/anticipation, urgency/desire, experience. The problem is so many people will just go "oh, he's a young d-man, he'll learn" as if everyone develops at the same rate and has the same propensity and same ceiling. That's not how it works.

Good example: young Cam Fowler (staying in the OHL), he was kind of a mess defensively, early on in Anaheim...still kind of a mess. His errors were "experience" errors...they weren't hockey sense errors, they weren't desire errors. He just literally ("literally") didn't know how to do it. Box out principles, skate/stick stuff, little tricks of the trade that you don't really know until you've played. I had total confidence that Fowler was going to be a wonderful two-way d-man because I saw the gaffes were just "experience errors"...on the flip side, I don't trust Bouchard to pick them up because he's missing the hockey sense and he's missing the urgency. In time, maybe you can get to some urgency (if so, Merkley becomes a top 15 pick easily), but hockey sense is just not something that can be meaningfully developed this late in the mental development arc.

That's why Cam Barker and Dion Phaneuf and Jared Cowen and Stanley Cup hero Luca Sbisa make the same mistakes they did in junior that they do in the show...that's why the production is high early but falls off as the game adapts to them and they can't adapt back. You need to be a freak physical athlete to overcome that (E.Kane, K.Letang, maybe even D.Byfuglien)...most guys aren't freak physical athletes...

- In order to see hockey sense, you need to have it. So if your OHL scout thought Erik Gudbranson was a good idea but Olli Maatta was a 6th round pick...then Evan Bouchard is probably top-5 on his board. Sometimes you're willing to take a chance on the physical/technical skills and pray...I don't know why, I don't subscribe to it...I should - in reality - soften my stance on it more than I do, but it's just so off putting to me that I struggle with it. That said, I'm not alone out there in having concerns about Bouchard...the stuff that gets read/posted here, I guess they don't see it...I can't speak for them. But I know I'm not alone out there on the whole and I'll just leave it at that. But, at the end of the day, it takes 31 teams not to like a guy for him to fall, it takes one team to like someone and then, whammo, you get Luke Schenn at 5 or whatever haha

Appreciate your alternative take on him. In your opinion how much is fair to attribute his lack of defensive urgency and indecisiveness to fatigue and him playing 30+ a night for london?

 

[McDNicks17]

I don't really care much for rankings per se, because it really gets kind of muddy...what's actually the difference between a player ranked 87th and a player ranked 89th? But rather than answering your question with a rhetorical bunch of nonsense...

Joey Keane is my clear #1 among OHL d-men. The only player I have on the same tier as him is Mac Hollowell.

After that second tier is where things get a little muddy...I think the next tier leads off with Merkley and Sandin...Bouchard is there, Vallati is there, Stratis is there I think...if you really like him, MacPherson isn't far off either...

Full disclaimer: of all the OHL eligible d-men, there are three I haven't seen enough of yet (Malik, Everett, Timms).

Interesting.

Is that more of a ranking on how good they are now or is that how you project them down the road?

 

[Michael Brand Eggs]

Joey Keane is my clear #1 among OHL d-men. The only player I have on the same tier as him is Mac Hollowell.

But Keane is an overager, isn't it? I guess he's eligible, but that doesn't seem like the most apples-to-apples comparison. I mean, if we look at your criticisms of Bouchard, it's not impossible to come away there and think you're very critical of defensemen who aren't good defensive players today. In that case, your top OHL player being an overager serves to reinforce that picture.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Do you think Bob McKenzie's aggregated rankings are doing this? They seem very "consensus" for the most part.

Do you think the reason Bouchard is so highly ranked is because the people ranking him are trying to meet consensus?

I'm not 100% sure I understand your question to be honest. I will say, Bob and Elliotte Friedman are the gold standard. I had a chance to meet Bob at the last World Juniors, the man is a legend. He polls scouts, that's who are influencing decisions...so what they say goes, by and large...that said, is there maybe some posturing there, eh, maybe...but really, you're talking about how many scouts across all these different leagues? It's not like he's talking to just OHL guys, because he's getting all kinds of other names from other leagues on the list...

I think...I guess...I think it's pretty easy at the top...top 10, 12, 15 whatever to get pretty close to the right idea. After that, it's really wide open...so when you get the rankings that come out and the same guy playing in Mestis League is 33, 35, 29, 40, 38...eh...I have my doubts...I'd just rather say I'd never seen him play and move on instead of trying to just put him at 35 because the guy before me had him at 33 and then the next guy goes, "I'll be a little different and put him at 29" and then...and I think sometimes it becomes a game of telephone a little bit...

It happens with scouting reports too...I think I discussed this with you actually FKH...there's a kid I saw in Buffalo this year for the Czechs, kind of an extra forward...got the duck feet, looks like he's up on cinder blocks a bit...forgive me for not wanting to page through my notes right now for his name...and I was like "woof, this kid is doing nothing for me..." so I take my notes down and just for fun I take out my phone after the game and take a look if he's on anyone's radar...all across the board from all these different public spots: 25-40 and "one of the fastest skaters in the draft" and "great skater" and "dynamic stride" and all this...I'm pretty sure he's playing pro in the Czech League or else he wouldn't have been on my watch list because if he's a major junior player I can see him on my own time...so I'm like "what in the hell?"

So I don't know, I just don't worry about the consensus or anything close to it...I'm not perfect at this, but I also trust my eyes...so when I say, I wouldn't hesitate to draft Joey Keane with a mid-first round pick and I'm not sure I would take Evan Bouchard if I had an extra 2 lying around, well, it will either age well or it won't...I'm not too concerned.

Last point in this rambling mess...I don't think Bouchard is ranked high because some guys are trying to fit in with their rankings or whatever...I think they're looking at what he could possibly be and ranking him and that's it. Let me say this, if Bouchard had Fowler's smarts and Ellis' compete, I can't imagine a scenario where he's not top-5, if he's not 2. So it's perfectly reasonable to have him in the upper reaches, I see it, I know what you're seeing...it makes a total sense. I just don't buy it, I see a little red flags all over, they scare the **** out of me, I don't want anything to do with it...

 

[Michael Brand Eggs]

I will say, Bob and Elliotte Friedman are the gold standard. I had a chance to meet Bob at the last World Juniors, the man is a legend. He polls scouts, that's who are influencing decisions...so what they say goes, by and large...that said, is there maybe some posturing there, eh, maybe...but really, you're talking about how many scouts across all these different leagues? It's not like he's talking to just OHL guys, because he's getting all kinds of other names from other leagues on the list...

What I'm asking is: how do you reconcile the fact that Bob's rankings have Bouchard quite highly with your take that he's got all these problems? I mean, it would seem that either Bob's rankings were temporarily not so good, or scouts were intentionally misranking, or just that other scouts don't share your opinion. Granted, Bob has new rankings coming out pretty soon here, so you could be vindicated yet.

Maybe I had you a little strong, but it sounded like you were saying that some of the rankings that have Bouchard so high are just following consensus, and not really based on quality scouting. But even if that's true, Bob's rankings set the consensus. If Bob's rankings are credible, then the consensus should be credible, too, albeit in a parrot-y, zero evidence kind of way.

But to be clear, I'm not trying to harp on you or something. What I'm really trying to do is make a point about how big a deal sampling is in scouting. Scouts see different things constantly, and tons of scouts come away from their viewings with inaccurate (often inappropriately extreme) samples. This is actually the value of Bob's rankings, because averaging rankings helps to smooth out the statistical noise and error. But I think that's where consensus comes from in a lot of these situations, and it gets mistaken as parroting or something like that. We give inappropriate levels of importance to individual perspectives and viewings in scouting, when in reality that's at most a handful of data points on that kid's distribution.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Interesting.

Is that more of a ranking on how good they are now or is that how you project them down the road?

So this is a really interesting question and it's a good one. So...what are you trying to accomplish? My guess: Evan Bouchard is one of the better players in this draft in the first 2, 3 or 4 years...I think he's a cap dump by year 8. I don't like that because I'm not playing GM here, I'm playing scout. So I can't go to my boss and say, "hey, let's go with this guy at 6...but you gotta move him when that entry level contract is up, even though he's still gonna be valuable to us at that time, he turns into a pumpkin soon...oh, and also, you have to do better in value than the 6th overall pick at that time to make it worth it asset wise..."

Yeah, ok, I'll just go and update my resume now...

So I'm looking for players who are going to have the most impactful, long-term careers...I don't really care how good a player is right this second, that's easy to figure out. The art is in the projection.

 

[Michael Farkas]

But Keane is an overager, isn't it? I guess he's eligible, but that doesn't seem like the most apples-to-apples comparison. I mean, if we look at your criticisms of Bouchard, it's not impossible to come away there and think you're very critical of defensemen who aren't good defensive players today. In that case, your top OHL player being an overager serves to reinforce that picture.

Joey Keane is a '99.

Again, it's all about the projection. I project Bouchard to bad defensively for the foreseeable future...this goes back to my Cam Fowler analogy. Fowler was not good at defense, but it was for the right reasons. Same thing when I saw Shea Theodore play in Seattle (WHL)...I think he was 9 or 12 or something on my draft board overall that year...he was like a dash 12,000 or something in his first two years haha - I thought he'd get good...I'm a huge fan of that player. Still today even.

 

[Michael Farkas]

What I'm asking is: how do you reconcile the fact that Bob's rankings have Bouchard quite highly with your take that he's got all these problems? I mean, it would seem that either Bob's rankings were temporarily not so good, or scouts were intentionally misranking, or just that other scouts don't share your opinion. Granted, Bob has new rankings coming out pretty soon here, so you could be vindicated yet.

Maybe I had you a little strong, but it sounded like you were saying that some of the rankings that have Bouchard so high are just following consensus, and not really based on quality scouting. But even if that's true, Bob's rankings set the consensus. If Bob's rankings are credible, then the consensus should be credible, too, albeit in a parrot-y, zero evidence kind of way.

But to be clear, I'm not trying to harp on you or something. What I'm really trying to do is make a point about how big a deal sampling is in scouting. Scouts see different things constantly, and tons of scouts come away from their viewings with inaccurate (often inappropriately extreme) samples. This is actually the value of Bob's rankings, because averaging rankings helps to smooth out the statistical noise and error. But I think that's where consensus comes from in a lot of these situations, and it gets mistaken as parroting or something like that. We give inappropriate levels of importance to individual perspectives and viewings in scouting, when in reality that's at most a handful of data points on that kid's distribution.

Oh, I don't have any interest in reconciling that. They see it their way and I totally respect that. I stated my case, I do my best to back it (I know it's unpopular, so I made the video so it didn't look like nonsense trolling or whatever that's considered here) and that's that. If Bob's ranking has him at #2, that doesn't bother me. If Bob's ranking has him at 49, that doesn't bother me. I'm sure there's some discussion, somewhere about this player right now not unlike the one you and I are having...it's perfectly reasonable.

Let me be clear, I think the consensus following stuff comes from these mocks and rankings where there's no staff or no access or whatever...when you see rankings with no notes and no backing or just like a line or two...I get suspicious at the least...

Let me be crystal clear: Bob's rankings are extremely credible and there is absolutely no reason to doubt anything about them. That doesn't mean they'll end being right (I mean, we know NHL scouts aren't perfect either) but they're still 100% credible and I think they should be considered in some of the highest regard, no question.

 

[Michael Brand Eggs]

Oh, I don't have any interest in reconciling that. They see it their way and I totally respect that. I stated my case, I do my best to back it (I know it's unpopular, so I made the video so it didn't look like nonsense trolling or whatever that's considered here)

To circle back, I think this is one of the great directions the internet can take scouting. It's one thing for random idiots like me to post thoughts about players, but it's quite another for someone to put their money where their mouth is and show us, not just tell us. The fact that it's an unpopular just makes it even better, because we don't necessarily need more videos telling us how good Rasmus Dahlin is. We need more people to do what you've done, and show us how we're seeing this the wrong way.

 

[Lays]

Finally got around to putting together a little video on Evan Bouchard regarding his hockey sense and defensive technique...(usual apologies because of my lackluster video editing ability and voiceover talent)...

Needless to say, this is not a highlight video...but nor is it a lowlight video...I grabbed a couple game's worth of shifts and broke down some plays.



I guess I'll share my little write-up on Bouchard as well, because not everyone knows my thoughts on him, so I should be forthcoming in unison with the video...

Evan Bouchard (London [OHL], #2, RHS RD) - Looks like a pro on the rink. Already has a healthy, thick frame and really just looks the part. Doesn't think the part very well. Poor hockey sense and his defensive awareness and feel in his own zone is poor. Has no sense of danger, looks like he's stuck in "lane hockey" mode. He won't cross the net line even if it close off a play, he'll chase players out high all the time, he gives up his feet in situations that do not call for it, isn't attentive near his net, no risk mitigation, isn't physical to close off plays. He generally just goes and stands in front of his goalie until the puck comes near him, then he'll chase it around for a little while. Has a plus first step and he can fly up the middle of the rink to join the rush with some powerful strides, which he does constantly. He can carry the puck and snap some passes around at a rate better than most offensive defensemen. He can bring a lot of heat from the point with his shot - has a slapper, a wrister and a one-timer that are a threat to score from well out. A little stiff out there sometimes and his compete level in his own zone is very weak. When the puck isn't near him, he might as well have bought a ticket to the game. His offensive upside is very high, and he'll have some really strong production early in his career like Phaneuf or even Letang, but as the game adapts to his physical traits, he'll struggle to keep the pace.

Hockey Sense: D
Skating speed/power/acc: A
Skating lateral/edges/agility: C+
Vision: C
Puck skills: B
Shot: A
Defense technique: D-
Defense urgency: D-
Frame/size: A-
Ceiling/Risk: High/Very high (2nd round)

I'm just about done by ranking of OHL d-men...I have in my second tier, just about the fifth d-men in the OHL...when he goes really high in the draft, I won't be shocked, when he has a strong first few seasons, I won't be shocked...long term, I don't like this prospect. I wouldn't recommend my club to draft him, but I understand what his appeal is...it's just not appealing to me...

Great analysis
Bouchard gets praised quite often for having good-great hockey IQ, at least in the majority of posts I’ve seen about him, people bring it up as a positive. I haven’t yet seen someone say his hockey IQ is sub par until I saw your post and that’s something I agree with. I think I’ve watched Bouchard more than any draft eligible prospect this season and I’ve yet to be impressed with his IQ. Every game I’ve seen I think to myself “wtf are you doing.” I do have him in my top 10 due to him having great tools and offensive upside to negate his defensive play but whoever drafts him better pray his IQ improves somehow. As you also said, his skating really isn’t as big an issue as it’s made out to be. I think we’re just spoiled with all the great skating dmen this year that when we see Bouchard we think he’s below average. He’s an ok skater, not great but not bad. With defense as well I do think he’s solid 1v1 but he’s brutal when it comes to defending sustained offensive pressure and positioning. His stick work isn’t bad and I do think he has a lot of room to improve defensively and maybe he can top out as at least average defensively. He reminds me a little of Burns

 

[Michael Farkas]

Appreciate your alternative take on him. In your opinion how much is fair to attribute his lack of defensive urgency and indecisiveness to fatigue and him playing 30+ a night for london?

No, I don't believe so. He does the same thing in the first period of game 1 of the season as he did in the last period of game 4 vs Owen Sound. It's all duplicated and it's all almost the exact same way. I think I tagged him in one regular season game that I watched at like 32:30 or something...Jesus...but no, I don't think it's fatigue at all, 0% in my opinion...