Edge
Kris King's Ghost
I think it's a difference in the tools.
For me, Kotkaniemi's tools don't register as high as Zadina's --- pretty much across the board.
I don't think he has the same shot --- accuracy, ability, etc. I don't think he has the same offensive vision or the ability to create a play.
I think Zadina is a significantly better skater. Kotkaniemi would rank as average for me. Zadina as very good or above average.
I liked Zadina's creativity better. I think he sees the ice better from an offensive standpoint and generates more offense.
Whereas Kotkaniemi strikes me as someone who benefited from very good from his system and the veterans he played with, I think Zadina's system didn't necessarily maximize his talent and I think he was often the one dragging more marginal talent along. When I see Kotkaniemi, I see a fairly familiar vision of good, efficient, Finnish playing systems. Those teams tend to work like well-oiled machines, but removing individual components and putting them in different environments doesn't always result in the same "driving" results. They may result in guys who play important roles for 10 and 15 years and can adapt as their offensive abilities or deployment fluctuate, but I'm not sure they're necessarily the engines as frequently as one thinks they'd be.
Zadina's looked very good, consistently, against all levels of competition. I think the numbers are deceiving because of the time missed with his junior team, so there's some stat glance bias. But over a full season in the Q he scores 52 goals and 98 points. But the consistent production was there in the Q, in the playoffs and the WJC. To some extent I think we also take that for granted. There was no "rising" with Zadina, he consistently performed at a higher level.
I'd say that there's some mis-labeling with Zadina. He's consistently mentioned with the top offensive guys in the draft and he more than holds his own in those conversations, but I don't think people give him nearly as much credit as a two-way forward. Like I said, if he's a center we'd be talking extensively about his 200 foot, three zone game.
For me, even if they're close in most categories (I personally think there's a noticeable gap), I think the skating and the shot are what separates a very good second line player, from a clear first line player. That extra dash of offense and creativity is a pretty significant to me.
Now, I freely admit that Kotkaniemi could indeed develop into a first line player. It wouldn't shock me, though I personally still feel more comfortable projecting him in more of a top-six capacity at this time. Age could very well be a factor, but I'm not sure it's always as big of a factor as we think.
I think there's a tendency to assume that the younger player has more room for growth because he's not as developed or experienced. While in some cases that's true, I don't know if it's as much of a factor when you get to the higher talents of the draft. I think if you're looking at two mid- to upper-mid range prospects in Canadian juniors, and the production is similar, you may assign a greater value to the younger guy. But I also think as a board it's one of those things that we gravitate toward and probably assign a greater value to than most teams. Not to say they don't take it into consideration, but I don't know if it's not one of those areas that they talk about and then kind of move on.
