F Cayden Lindstrom - Medicine Hat Tigers, WHL (2024, 4th, CBJ)

[Boss Man Hughes]

He doesn't really know where to be though....he skates around kinda aimlessly but is in a great situation where he gets to play with Basha+Mckenna who can find him anywhere. His one move is to drive wide and try to power to the net. He's not a 0 IQ player like Sampo Ranta is but he'll never be a line driver. Low IQ players get taken high all the time see Yakupov, Puljujarvi, Virtanen, Slafkovsky, etc but unless they can go into a perfect situation the odds of them busting are high. Lindstrom has the raw tools to at least stick as a energy guy but if you're taking someone top 5 even top 10 they better be a top 6 forward for you. Right now his warts aren't being exposed as badly but the higher he goes the smaller the decision windows are and while he'll always have a physical advantage it'll be less in pro hockey. For those who say there are different ways to judge hockey iq....well I've heard that from a few scouts and they surprisingly are really bad at identifying it or don't care about it just skating. Oh and for the people trying to bring race into this that's some soft bigotry of low expectations you got going on

Slafkovsky is NOT a low IQ player. He sets up scoring chances more than any other player on the team. Unfortunatley habs have vr few finishers. He does make wrong decisions at times and he needs a faster release oh his shots but at 19 those things may improve.

 

[austin63867]

lol what? we're talking hockey IQ not actual IQ...what a player does, or doesn't do on the ice is all you need to judge them. I'm sure quite a few low hockey IQ players are actually good in school, 2 completely separate things.

That's not what I mean. We only have a general idea of guessing why a player does something on the ice. We're not directly in team meetings or practices or speaking to players about what they were doing on each play so there's a lot of guesswork that goes into analyzing Hockey IQ here. I'm not talking about their actual IQ.

 

[Goldenhands]

He doesn't really know where to be though....he skates around kinda aimlessly but is in a great situation where he gets to play with Basha+Mckenna who can find him anywhere. His one move is to drive wide and try to power to the net. He's not a 0 IQ player like Sampo Ranta is but he'll never be a line driver. Low IQ players get taken high all the time see Yakupov, Puljujarvi, Virtanen, Slafkovsky, etc but unless they can go into a perfect situation the odds of them busting are high. Lindstrom has the raw tools to at least stick as a energy guy but if you're taking someone top 5 even top 10 they better be a top 6 forward for you. Right now his warts aren't being exposed as badly but the higher he goes the smaller the decision windows are and while he'll always have a physical advantage it'll be less in pro hockey. For those who say there are different ways to judge hockey iq....well I've heard that from a few scouts and they surprisingly are really bad at identifying it or don't care about it just skating. Oh and for the people trying to bring race into this that's some soft bigotry of low expectations you got going on

Cant be more left field. He is always putting himself in position to offer his linemates an option, great puck support everywhere on the ice and very solid positioning. You obviously cant understand what a puck possession player like him is about.

BTW Slafkovsky is not a low IQ player, he is a 19 yrs old kid who needed time to adapt to the NHL after spending time in Liiga where the systems are quite differents. He has become a beast lately, a matter of time before he racks up the pts with regularity.

 

[coooldude]

Are you f***ing serious? You’re the ONLY one brining race into this.

When I say IQ I’m referring to a player's understanding and decision-making ability. It involves anticipating plays, positioning, reading the flow of the game, and making smart choices on the ice. NOT because he is black.

I say he has IQ issues because down below this post are a few videos. in one of the themafter retrieving the puck from a battle he throws a pass in the middle of the ice to a guy being covered by 3 defenders rather than up the left half wall to the defender at the point. Low percentage play to say the least. The other is a penalty because he was trying to make a play on his knees with multiple defenders around him. Not a great look. please try to do better around here instead of disagreeing with someone and attacking them with ”he is saying it because the player at hand is black”
View attachment 780220
View attachment 780221

Hockey IQ is decision making. Vision is a tool, as is speed, stickhandling, manipulation, passing, shooting (various different types), body checking, stick checking, etc.

Hockey IQ is the selective application of these tools based on situation and reaction time.

What all these players have in common is low hockey IQ. What they also all have in common is they aren't black.

To bring race into this is laughable and you should feel bad.

You guys both got triggered by a perfectly reasonable post, and then ended up agreeing with the post in the end.

Majormajor wasn't calling you racists, but he was pointing out that it is, in fact, a historical pattern across e.g. black NHL prospects and black NFL QB prospects and white NBA prospects that they are often compared to others of the same race and can be pigeonholed into comparisons, intentionally or no. For hockey players and black QB prospects it is commonly discussed that historically, IQ has been an unfair short hand, as recently as Lamar Jackson and Quentin Byfield.

That was his minor point, and his major point you both ended up agreeing with, because you both got a lot more specific about what you mean by IQ, and he was saying that we should all be more specific instead of using IQ as a lazy short hand. No need for the intense responses, really. You guys all agree: just saying "low IQ" is not very accurate or helpful in an evaluation.

In terms of the specific examples MikeyS showed on video, I don't agree that those are glaring examples of bad decision making or poor vision. The one pass up the half wall would have also been a possible turnover and the penalty on his knees was a weird play. If he consistently makes decisions that lead to turnovers, misses chances, or in the D zone makes decisions that lead to chances against, then there is a criticism of awareness/vision or decision making, but one mistake, one turnover, or one penalty isn't enough. I want to watch a lot more games to get my own sense of the evaluation but from the shifts I have watched, I saw a player with good D zone awareness and pretty solid vision and decision making in the O zone as well, a solid physical 2 way player with elite tools. I don't know enough to say whether I, an amateur, think he's good enough for top 5 pick or hoping for a franchise center, versus just a first rounder, but most pro services seem to think he's in the top 15 with a chance to keep rising and I haven't seen many pro evaluations that argue he has poor vision, bad positioning, or bad decision making on the puck.

 

[MikeyS]

You guys both got triggered by a perfectly reasonable post, and then ended up agreeing with the post in the end.

Majormajor wasn't calling you racists, but he was pointing out that it is, in fact, a historical pattern across e.g. black NHL prospects and black NFL QB prospects and white NBA prospects that they are often compared to others of the same race and can be pigeonholed into comparisons, intentionally or no. For hockey players and black QB prospects it is commonly discussed that historically, IQ has been an unfair short hand, as recently as Lamar Jackson and Quentin Byfield.

That was his minor point, and his major point you both ended up agreeing with, because you both got a lot more specific about what you mean by IQ, and he was saying that we should all be more specific instead of using IQ as a lazy short hand. No need for the intense responses, really. You guys all agree: just saying "low IQ" is not very accurate or helpful in an evaluation.

In terms of the specific examples MikeyS showed on video, I don't agree that those are glaring examples of bad decision making or poor vision. The one pass up the half wall would have also been a possible turnover and the penalty on his knees was a weird play. If he consistently makes decisions that lead to turnovers, misses chances, or in the D zone makes decisions that lead to chances against, then there is a criticism of awareness/vision or decision making, but one mistake, one turnover, or one penalty isn't enough. I want to watch a lot more games to get my own sense of the evaluation but from the shifts I have watched, I saw a player with good D zone awareness and pretty solid vision and decision making in the O zone as well, a solid physical 2 way player with elite tools. I don't know enough to say whether I, an amateur, think he's good enough for top 5 pick or hoping for a franchise center, versus just a first rounder, but most pro services seem to think he's in the top 15 with a chance to keep rising and I haven't seen many pro evaluations that argue he has poor vision, bad positioning, or bad decision making on the puck.

holy crap, the world is f***ed if I can’t compare Lindstrom to Byfield when they play similar styles of games but they just so happen to share the same skin tone too.

I never look at a hockey players skin tone, I don’t give a shit. I care if you can play hockey. I will evaluate a player the same and look for the strengths and weakness’ of a players game no matter their skin tone.

Why the hell this is even a conversation is beyond me.

For what it‘s worth, this player is loved by NHL scouts and don’t be surprised if he goes top-5.

I’m done with this website, not worth cotributing when a bunch of wannabe‘s are this soft. Assclowns.

 

[coooldude]

holy crap, the world is f***ed if I can’t compare Lindstrom to Byfield when they play similar styles of games but they just so happen to share the same skin tone too.

I never look at a hockey players skin tone, I don’t give a shit. I care if you can play hockey. I will evaluate a player the same and look for the strengths and weakness’ of a players game no matter their skin tone.

Why the hell this is even a conversation is beyond me.

For what it‘s worth, this player is loved by NHL scouts and don’t be surprised if he goes top-5.

I’m done with this website, not worth cotributing when a bunch of wannabe‘s are this soft. Assclowns.

Dude, you're the one getting triggered and making it about you. Reread the post, I literally said nothing about you, I only disagreed with your specific video examples, and I made a point about the broader world of talent evaluation bias. Might wanna look in the mirror about who's being soft, you're perfectly welcome to stay and continue discussing the prospect's merits.

 

[covfefe]

A Lindstrom/Byfield comp dies on the basis of how much Lindstrom loves to mix it up, while Byfield does not.

The guy is a complete lunatic out there. Byfield wore a bowtie to the OHL draft.

 

[Castle8130]

Byfield had a really average hockey IQ for a 2nd oa. Good enough to play top minutes in the NHL, but not good enough to boost his other attributes.

Lindstrom is a guy that I see with better hockey IQ and playmaking potential than that of Byfield. Aside from race, they are somewhat comparable in the sense that they are exceptionally big center men that are atop of their draft classes. Lindstrom has a much smoother skating stride and cleaner stick-handling abilities. He can play just about anywhere on the ice and can see plays before they happen. He does make a couple errors a game where he will miss a pass or a play, but nothing concerning. Byfield was more of a brute and physical specimen. Incredibly strong and could play a solid gritty two-way game.

It's really hard for black athletes in predominantly white sports to not be compared to each other. Similar to how every Swedish defenseman is compared to Erik Karlsson and all Russian prospects with potential are compared to Ovechkin. It's seeped into our subconscious as humans. If we are going to talk about tall black prospects in the sport of hockey with bad hockey IQ, Serron Noel is your answer. Neither Byfield or Lindstrom have bad hockey IQ that will keep them from being great.

 

[Just Linda]

Instead of getting into IQ, I'll say vision and quick decision making.

I'm not completely sold on him quite yet having those tools to be a top 5 pick. I'm gonna keep watching him play but right now they seem like 2nd rounder level to me. I've had moments where I've doubted myself, I'm gonna keep watching.

I compare him to other high first rounders taken over the past few years who've rolled through town. I liked Dach more. I like him a lot more than the next set of guys on that list though, guys like any of the Winnipeg Ice guys (Savoie).

Same time though, it's hard not to place him above anyone in the 2-5 range since noone has grabbed those spots.

I have him later in the top 10 but I'm prepared to love him a lot more.

 

[rt]

I see a PLD/Crouse hybrid. Which means likely a top 5-10 pick.

 

[covfefe]

Lindstrom has a much smoother skating stride and cleaner stick-handling abilities. He can play just about anywhere on the ice and can see plays before they happen. He does make a couple errors a game where he will miss a pass or a play, but nothing concerning. Byfield was more of a brute and physical specimen. Incredibly strong and could play a solid gritty two-way game.

Interesting. Certainly don't mean to say I'm right, but I'd say you've got this entire description backwards.

 

[Bubbles]

He doesn't really know where to be though....he skates around kinda aimlessly but is in a great situation where he gets to play with Basha+Mckenna who can find him anywhere. His one move is to drive wide and try to power to the net. He's not a 0 IQ player like Sampo Ranta is but he'll never be a line driver. Low IQ players get taken high all the time see Yakupov, Puljujarvi, Virtanen, Slafkovsky, etc but unless they can go into a perfect situation the odds of them busting are high. Lindstrom has the raw tools to at least stick as a energy guy but if you're taking someone top 5 even top 10 they better be a top 6 forward for you. Right now his warts aren't being exposed as badly but the higher he goes the smaller the decision windows are and while he'll always have a physical advantage it'll be less in pro hockey. For those who say there are different ways to judge hockey iq....well I've heard that from a few scouts and they surprisingly are really bad at identifying it or don't care about it just skating. Oh and for the people trying to bring race into this that's some soft bigotry of low expectations you got going on

I agree with the point that he is not too comfortable with the puck on his stick. He is definitely NOT a playmaker as someone else on this thread has said. Any time I've seen him with the puck longer than a few seconds, he'll make the wrong decisions. But at the same time, he shows a great awareness around the net, as knowing where the soft areas to score goals. Disappearing as 6'5 forward near the net is a good indication of 'IQ".

As a centre, he is a fantastic faceoff man. As a distributor or line driver, I agree he is deficient in this regard and relies on his linemates. But his speed is fantastic for a guy his size.

I'm still placing him in the mid teens as a draft pick.

 

[Nabrules]

Better compete and physical nature than QB, less pure skill

 

[rt]

Better compete and physical nature than QB, less pure skill

If you’re picking a Kings player, he’s MUCH more like PLD than QB. I don’t actually understand all this QB talk, at all. They aren’t similar to me.

 

[Nabrules]

If you’re picking a Kings player, he’s MUCH more like PLD than QB. I don’t actually understand all this QB talk, at all. They aren’t similar to me.

Fair enough!

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

This thread has gone in some different directions. Call it whatever you want, but to me Lindstrom is just more a goal scorer & not a big playmaker.

He's not great as the puck carrier/distributor, but hes not a 'low' IQ player. He's actually pretty smart about getting himself in scoring areas & making himself an option. Its not 'low IQ' its just a different skillset.

On top of it he's got great hands and he does use his size effectively downlow. You don't want him as the puck carrier, you want to put him with a great playmaker & he'll fill the net. His shot is heavy & he doesn't need many chances. And he's the kind of guy thats a huge weapon for high end playmakers to play with.

I was originally a bit skeptical but I have him 5-10 range now. Won't be surprised if he's considered a clear top 5 pick by the time the draft comes around given these are rare player types.

 

[TLEH]

Come back to this thread and see that my comments about a players hockey IQ are somehow racist. Interesting. Not going to act naïve, I realize where it comes from. My problem with the conversation is that we all on the HF Prospects board know exactly what we mean when we say IQ. No need to get into the deep end on topics like that in my opinion. I guess I'll just clarify that I am speaking solely based on what I see on the ice. Its all a matter of opinion anyway, someone can come in here and say they think he is the smartest player in history and I can't really refute it, its not quantifiable.

The Byfield comparisons are more about how they are two guys with elite tools that I don't necessarily see as having a HOCKEY SENSE to get the most out of their tools.

 

[Castle8130]

Interesting. Certainly don't mean to say I'm right, but I'd say you've got this entire description backwards.

I feel my description of Byfield didn't go into detail as much as my description of Lindstrom. By "brute" I don't mean he doesn't have slick hands. I mean he utilizes his strength to get to the front of the net. Defensemen in the NHL have a really tough time pushing Byfield off the puck when he drives to the net. He has a lot of individual skill and cannot be man-handled. I think Byfield struggles at utilizing space that's given with his playmaking. He is highly successful at 5v5 where he has to create space for himself using his physical tools. On the power-play, he is less impressive. The opposite is the story with Lindstrom from what I've seen.

 

[rt]

Come back to this thread and see that my comments about a players hockey IQ are somehow racist...

I find it quite gross when anyone brings up race in a conversation like this.

 

[BKarchitect]

Growing on me. The physical tools are elite. The floor is high. It’s hard combo to pass on. I think if he keeps this pace it’s a near certainty he’s top 5.

 

[dj Mahoney]

Anyone who's older , a comparable might be Keith Primeau ?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

To me, he's reminiscent of Adam Fantilli. I think Fantilli's shot and agility were probably a bit more polished, but obviously these are great strengths of Lindstrom's game as well. I see some Timo Meier as well, at least stylistically.

My biggest "concern" for Lindstrom is the same concern I had for Fantilli, which is his ability to slow the play down enough to let the play develop before committing to a decision with the puck. But like Fantilli, he's very clearly going to be a guy who can skate, shoot, and carry the puck at the NHL level right off the bat.

His floor feels like that of a middle 6 PWF C/W with mid tier 1C upside, so I'd be very surprised to see him fall out of the top 5 when all is said and done.

 

[LemonSauceD]

He reminds me of Jeff Carter in his prime.

 

[SlafySZN]

2 more goals tonight

26 goals, 42 points in 30 games

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

2 more goals tonight

26 goals, 42 points in 30 games

how long until he is consensus top 10 pick? he and helenius to me are shooting up list and threatening for top 5 (2?).