GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 192,512
- 43,242
(EDIT)
Last edited by a moderator:
He's been playing with Dickinson for two years, I think as a pair they'd be fine, and that would give you 2 solid pairs that could eat the lion's share of defensive minutes. You don't need a true #1 if you have two pairs that can hold their own in any situation and play big minutes. See Florida.Bonk doesn't project as a top pairing defenseman. Every scouting report I've seen had him as a top 4 (one had him as bottom pairing) and that he doesn't have any particular skills that stand out, but was the "safest" defensive pick in the 1st round.
Of course, he can always develop and become a top pairing defenseman over time. But nothing to date says that it is a likely outcome.
that's terrifyingI think if Dickinson fell, they would have jumped on him.
More of the prototype 1D, and a perfect pairing with Bonk.
Luchanko is probably their prototype top 6 center, full sized, elite speed, two way player who can cover for scoring wings with defensive issues. I think next season you'll see Luchanko and Michkov joined at the hip.
Ideally, they land another top six center in the 2025 draft, make Frost the 3C (if they keep him) and move Couts to LW in a couple years.
Copium.
Forget equivalents, I think I would rather take my chances with TK actually playing defense over Drysdale. That’s how bad it’s been.
And no, Buium was a much better and more accomplished prospect than Drysdale entering the draft. Yes he played on a stacked team, but he led the country in TOI as a draft eligible defenseman. They were stacked in large part because of his impacts (especially in the playoffs).
Oh and he scored more per game in college hockey as a defenseman than the player they picked in the first round as a 1C in the OHL. In no way shape or form was that an “easy choice”.
I'm not looking for articles. I'm going off of what I saw.It’s not hard to find articles pre-draft that call Drysdale a #1, elite player based on production and projection.
Jamie Drysdale - 2020 NHL Draft Prospect Profile - The Hockey Writers NHL Entry Draft Latest News, Analysis & More
We profile Erie Otters' defenseman Jamie Drysdale. He is among the best defensemen available in this draft class. How high will he go?thehockeywriters.com
Thinking otherwise is just revisionist history. Buium has all the same hype now, still pre-NHL, but still somehow taken 6th in his own draft class.
Are NHL GMs infallible? No, absolutely not. But the trend lately is to hype up prospects like crazy before they make the NHL, reaching to the far side of their upside.
Even over talented players only have a small chance to reach that upside, so treating Buium as high likelihood to reach those goals is in itself disingenuous at best. He can; but so can a lot of players at 18-19.
You don't need a true #1 if you have two pairs that can hold their own in any situation and play big minutes. See Florida.
Uh, how many D-men under 6'0 are starting in the NHL?There is way too much made out of where he went in the draft as proof he wasn't a good prospect? How many times do we need to see smaller defensemen drop in the draft and excel post draft before we stop appealing to authority? Look at how many defensemen under 6 foot were taken in this most recent draft (Hint: you can count on one hand). It's really not hard to see how a league of size queens let him fall.
And it's not discrimination at that level, after a year or two in the AHL, teams can identify short D-men who are NHL capable. Someone will claim that player on waivers and play them if they're good.
Revealed preference.When all roads lead to arguing in favor NHL orgs always getting things right, that should probably be a sign something has gone wrong.
Revealed preference.
A short player who performs in the AHL will get a shot at the NHL at some point, maybe a year or two later than a taller player, but Guorde still ended up with a pretty good career. So the lack of short NHL players suggests it is a liability, all else held equal.
The relative scarcity of short D-men suggests size does matter, since the distribution in the general population peaks around 5'10.
This lists suggests NHL teams are pretty rational, one should only draft a D-man under 6'0 in the top 20 picks if he's otherwise exceptional. Drysdale was clearly over drafted.
However once past pick #40, I'd gamble on offensively talented short D-men until the cows come home, since I can shelter them on 3rd pairs and get value on the PP.
When people talk about you have to have a 1D to win a Cup, they usually mean an elite D-man who plays 25+ minutes in all situations and double shifts at times. Hedman, Pronger, etc.Whoa. I know some people got carried away with Forsling and started arguing he was top 5, but he's easily a top 20 guy who played at the absolute top of his game for that run.
Off the top of my head, he'd probably be top 15 but we know how these lists go. You don't know until you make them. Given that you subscribe to the counting teams style of making these lists, asserting that he's not even top 32 is wild.
You're trying too hard, arbitrage suggests even if half the GMs in the NHL are idiots, good players will surface as the other GMs take advantage of their stupid peers.Revealed preference assumes rationality or logic or whatever other phrase you would like to use. I think you know I'm not willing to go that far with NHL orgs.
Please consider that when things happen in a player's development matters quite a bit. You do it all the time when talking about how rushing players can hurt them, but never in the other direction.
Let's see what Shaw can do with Drysdale.
Anaheim makes the Flyers look competent the last decade.
Zegras (#9) regressed, Lundestrom, Max Jones and Larson (all 1st rd picks) never developed, Steel (1st rd) played better after he left. McTavish (#3) hasn't developed past 3rd line forward. Jacob Perreault is a flop.
Terry (5th rd) did emerge as a top forward at age 24.
Comtois (2nd rd) had a good season at 22, then went backwards.
They're awful at drafting and/or they're awful at development.
No, we haven't. Miracles don't happen overnight.We have
No, we haven't. Miracles don't happen overnight.
By April we'll know whether Drysdale can improve or he is what he is.
He claims Shaw to have fixed Risto……We have
You're trying too hard, arbitrage suggests even if half the GMs in the NHL are idiots, good players will surface as the other GMs take advantage of their stupid peers.
Size is an attribute that's correlated with success up to a certain level (6'4 or so?).
Probably due to a number of factors:
1) size/mass provides leverage as well as strength, to anchor and to move others
2) height correlates with reach, especially for D-men breaking up plays
3) height makes it easier to track the puck and other players, if you're 5'9 it's hard to see around a guy 6'2.
Like all player attributes, one of a number of variables that can impact player success.
Size probably has most value on defense for defensemen, where longer reach to break up plays, harder to get around and more mass to anchor in front of net and win board battles. Height without mass might be detrimental when it comes to leverage (Zamula).
Least value might be for play making forwards b/c longer stick make may it harder to control puck, longer legs makes it harder to get up to speed quickly and change direction.
Would be an interesting study to see if this holds true.