International: German Junior National Teams

[Chapin Landvogt]

Does anyone know what happened to Paul Vinzens? Was he just healthy scratched forever after the USA game or did he get hurt?

He was dressed as the extra forward in the game against the Finns and then not once after that.

He must have fallen out of favor.

And Elias Pul was "only" the extra forward for the last three games.

Before the tournament, I thought both would surely be playing in the top 6.

By the relegation round, I thought Maul was one of the better forwards and was playing with a lot of confidence. He and Vinzenz play the same type of game, so I can imagine that in Abstreiter's book, he was kind of only going with one of them.

I also understand fully why they'd stick with Münzenberger and Sager on the lower lines. They are simply hard to play against and both stuck to their job.

I knew Ruckdäschel would be important as a banger, but I wouldn't have thought he'd stick with Sumpf on line 1 throughout the tourney.

The program seems to really like Seidl and Schwarz. Haven't quite seen why yet, although they can play responsibly. Next to Maul, they were basically the RWs in the top 9, with Seidl playing on the first line. Brandl was the center on the 4th line and I thought he was pretty noticeable by the relegation game.

Can't argue with the results, but at the end of the day, Vinzenz becoming a scratch (unless injured, which wasn't reported) is one of the disappointing results here. I thought this would be the tourney where he breaks out internationally. He's done VERY well with the RB Juniors this season and I felt he looked very strong against Slovakia in the test games.

 

[pgfan66]

He was dressed as the extra forward in the game against the Finns and then not once after that.

He must have fallen out of favor.

And Elias Pul was "only" the extra forward for the last three games.

Before the tournament, I thought both would surely be playing in the top 6.

By the relegation round, I thought Maul was one of the better forwards and was playing with a lot of confidence. He and Vinzenz play the same type of game, so I can imagine that in Abstreiter's book, he was kind of only going with one of them.

I also understand fully why they'd stick with Münzenberger and Sager on the lower lines. They are simply hard to play against and both stuck to their job.

I knew Ruckdäschel would be important as a banger, but I wouldn't have thought he'd stick with Sumpf on line 1 throughout the tourney.

The program seems to really like Seidl and Schwarz. Haven't quite seen why yet, although they can play responsibly. Next to Maul, they were basically the RWs in the top 9, with Seidl playing on the first line. Brandl was the center on the 4th line and I thought he was pretty noticeable by the relegation game.

Can't argue with the results, but at the end of the day, Vinzenz becoming a scratch (unless injured, which wasn't reported) is one of the disappointing results here. I thought this would be the tourney where he breaks out internationally. He's done VERY well with the RB Juniors this season and I felt he looked very strong against Slovakia in the test games.

Fully agree with most of what you said. My projected top line was Pul-Sumpf-Vinzens, so I was definitely surprised 2/3 of that group barely played. I honestly never see Vinzens play so that was mostly because of his stats and the fact there’s a Red Bull connection, so whatever. But I do like Pul, I liked him a lot in the relegation game, and absolutely think he deserved more ice time.

I mostly agree with all the other things you mentioned. Seidl would’ve been nowhere near my top line and I thought moving Lewandowski up to replace Seidl in the relegation game was a good move. Probably should’ve done that much earlier.

I also understood why the 4th line was what it was, but for me it was just too slow. Three below-average skaters on the same line is usually a bad idea. I think Samanski could’ve done the same job but with a little more pace to his game.

At the end of the day, it’s tough to build a lineup with the available players. I don’t think Sager deserved to be a WJC player but I also understand having him on the 4th line over guys like Vinzens or Boos. Just as one example. But I feel like some improvements would’ve been possible.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

Fully agree with most of what you said. My projected top line was Pul-Sumpf-Vinzens, so I was definitely surprised 2/3 of that group barely played. I honestly never see Vinzens play so that was mostly because of his stats and the fact there’s a Red Bull connection, so whatever. But I do like Pul, I liked him a lot in the relegation game, and absolutely think he deserved more ice time.

I mostly agree with all the other things you mentioned. Seidl would’ve been nowhere near my top line and I thought moving Lewandowski up to replace Seidl in the relegation game was a good move. Probably should’ve done that much earlier.

I also understood why the 4th line was what it was, but for me it was just too slow. Three below-average skaters on the same line is usually a bad idea. I think Samanski could’ve done the same job but with a little more pace to his game.

At the end of the day, it’s tough to build a lineup with the available players. I don’t think Sager deserved to be a WJC player but I also understand having him on the 4th line over guys like Vinzens or Boos. Just as one example. But I feel like some improvements would’ve been possible.

Re: Samanski, they had him centering Maul and Schäfer on the 3rd line for most of the tournament. He got better as the tourney went along. I thought he looked a bit weak in the test games against Slovakia beforehand.

And the second line as of the game against Finland was Lewandowski-Boos-Schwarz. I think Boos was definitely the winner at this tourney because he went from being unlikely in the summer to being the 2nd line center as an 18-year-old. Not shabby!

Also, I'd say Lewandowski is in a good place in his development. He played with confidence and we saw some good things, particularly east-west movement with the puck. There could have been some better decisions but he showed the kind of hands and creativity that we're not often seeing from German prospects. I'm sure he didn't harm his draft value in this tournament.

I'd also point out that I thought Tropmann filled in well as captain and did indeed produce along the way, even if he was a -7. Wonder if this tournament was enough to re-peak any draft curiosity?

 

[Maverick41]

Yeah, the usage of Pul and Vinzens was surprising. Vinzens has always been a bit inconsistent when I watched him. Sometimes he was looking as good as Sumpf on his best day, but other times he disappeared completely. Pul on the other hand has been as consistent as anyone I have watched from this group.

But even with those two playing bigger roles this team still would have been lacking in speed and creativity, which is why Bicker and Schreiner were missed even more than they would have anyway.
I don't know what the timeline with the nomination and Willhöft's injury was, but I am wondering if he may have been in consideration for the team, since he would also have brought those same elements the team was sorely lacking.

I have not watched all the games (missed the entire US game and parts of the Canada game), but based on what I have seen these are my thoughts aobut the defensemen

Carlos Händel:
For me Händel was our best defensemen out there. He wasn't perfect or even great by any means, but in the games I saw he was a clear net positive. He was basically the only defenseman that actually managed to pull off some of the things he tried. He also looked better defensively than I had seen him in a long time. He still overdid things at times, but I'll take that bad with the good.

Max Hense:
Hense was a pleasant surprise for me. There was a time when I thought he could become quite good, but since then he did not progress as I had hoped. But in this tournament he made a lot of correct decisions. He kept the game simple, was physical and had an active stick breaking up plays. Nothing spectacular, but solid.

Rio Kaiser:
Kaiser did not play a lot, and I was ok with that. It's not like he was horrible when he played, but he did not really contribute in a positive way, either. Clearly the #7D in my eyes.

Kilian Kühnhauser:
I am sorry, but this was bad. Kühnhauser had already struggled in the pre-tournament games I saw, and it only got worse in the tournament. He looked completely out of his depth most of the time.

Paul Mayer:
If I had to describe Mayer's play in a couple of words, I would call it mostly inoffensive. Yes, he lost a few too many puck battles, but overall I saw fewer mistakes from him than from any defenseman not names Hense or Niehus. Unfortunately his transition game was non-existent when I watched. For a 3rd pairing his play was ok, I guess.

Lua Niehus:
Next to Hense the most solid dman in his own end. He also broke up a few rushes from the other teams with his stick at his own blue line. He had a few nice passes, but was mostly focused on defense. I actually had hoped for more from him based on how well he was playing this season, but he wasn't really bad, at least not by comparison to the rest of the team.

Norwin Panocha:
I was very worried about him before the tournament, and I was actually somewhat happy with his play, as it was a big improvement to the last few times I saw him. But overall he seemed to struggle more as the tournament went on, though mostly he was just inconsistent. At times he almost looked like his old self, skating the puck out of danger, making high percentage plays to get the puck out of the dzone. But then there were just too many instances of him turning the puck over needlessly. I don't know if it was lack of confidence, or just sloppy play. His board play was also a big problem for me.

Edwin Tropmann:
Tropmann, like Händel, showed good and bad, it's just that it was more bad than good as far as I am concerned. On the plus side, I liked his play in the offensive zone especially on the power play. He moved his feet and the puck very well. His shot was a pleasant surprise, with regard to both power and accuracy. But his stupid turnovers, often by telegraphing passes, were too much for me. Especially against Latvia and Kazakhstan I was really annoyed with his transition play. Maybe I am selling him a bit short, but those turnovers just stuck with me.

I am thinking about doing a little preview for next year later. Making a most certainly completely incorrect prediction what next year's roster could look like.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

Yeah, the usage of Pul and Vinzens was surprising. Vinzens has always been a bit inconsistent when I watched him. Sometimes he was looking as good as Sumpf on his best day, but other times he disappeared completely. Pul on the other hand has been as consistent as anyone I have watched from this group.

But even with those two playing bigger roles this team still would have been lacking in speed and creativity, which is why Bicker and Schreiner were missed even more than they would have anyway.
I don't know what the timeline with the nomination and Willhöft's injury was, but I am wondering if he may have been in consideration for the team, since he would also have brought those same elements the team was sorely lacking.

I have not watched all the games (missed the entire US game and parts of the Canada game), but based on what I have seen these are my thoughts aobut the defensemen

Carlos Händel:
For me Händel was our best defensemen out there. He wasn't perfect or even great by any means, but in the games I saw he was a clear net positive. He was basically the only defenseman that actually managed to pull off some of the things he tried. He also looked better defensively than I had seen him in a long time. He still overdid things at times, but I'll take that bad with the good.

Max Hense:
Hense was a pleasant surprise for me. There was a time when I thought he could become quite good, but since then he did not progress as I had hoped. But in this tournament he made a lot of correct decisions. He kept the game simple, was physical and had an active stick breaking up plays. Nothing spectacular, but solid.

Rio Kaiser:
Kaiser did not play a lot, and I was ok with that. It's not like he was horrible when he played, but he did not really contribute in a positive way, either. Clearly the #7D in my eyes.

Kilian Kühnhauser:
I am sorry, but this was bad. Kühnhauser had already struggled in the pre-tournament games I saw, and it only got worse in the tournament. He looked completely out of his depth most of the time.

Paul Mayer:
If I had to describe Mayer's play in a couple of words, I would call it mostly inoffensive. Yes, he lost a few too many puck battles, but overall I saw fewer mistakes from him than from any defenseman not names Hense or Niehus. Unfortunately his transition game was non-existent when I watched. For a 3rd pairing his play was ok, I guess.

Lua Niehus:
Next to Hense the most solid dman in his own end. He also broke up a few rushes from the other teams with his stick at his own blue line. He had a few nice passes, but was mostly focused on defense. I actually had hoped for more from him based on how well he was playing this season, but he wasn't really bad, at least not by comparison to the rest of the team.

Norwin Panocha:
I was very worried about him before the tournament, and I was actually somewhat happy with his play, as it was a big improvement to the last few times I saw him. But overall he seemed to struggle more as the tournament went on, though mostly he was just inconsistent. At times he almost looked like his old self, skating the puck out of danger, making high percentage plays to get the puck out of the dzone. But then there were just too many instances of him turning the puck over needlessly. I don't know if it was lack of confidence, or just sloppy play. His board play was also a big problem for me.

Edwin Tropmann:
Tropmann, like Händel, showed good and bad, it's just that it was more bad than good as far as I am concerned. On the plus side, I liked his play in the offensive zone especially on the power play. He moved his feet and the puck very well. His shot was a pleasant surprise, with regard to both power and accuracy. But his stupid turnovers, often by telegraphing passes, were too much for me. Especially against Latvia and Kazakhstan I was really annoyed with his transition play. Maybe I am selling him a bit short, but those turnovers just stuck with me.

I am thinking about doing a little preview for next year later. Making a most certainly completely incorrect prediction what next year's roster could look like.

Good stuff!

I was the first to be surprised at Willhöft's omission. But in light of the injury that clearly kept him out of U18 play as well, he was out one way or the other. He has to be seen as a lock for next year at this point though.

Schreiner certainly would have been a boon as well. What a bummer for him to get injured in late November. He would have brought a good chunk of pro experience with him.

That they maintained the class without Bicker is an achievement in and of itself. I look at how teams like the US have been using a player like Eiserman as a 13th forward with almost solely PP looks - and then think about how much a player like Bicker was so missed here. Just worlds apart.

PS) I agree with you wholey on Hense. Felt he kept things safe and simple. It was understandable why Abstreiter kept going with him.

 

[pgfan66]

Re: Samanski, they had him centering Maul and Schäfer on the 3rd line for most of the tournament. He got better as the tourney went along. I thought he looked a bit weak in the test games against Slovakia beforehand.

And the second line as of the game against Finland was Lewandowski-Boos-Schwarz. I think Boos was definitely the winner at this tourney because he went from being unlikely in the summer to being the 2nd line center as an 18-year-old. Not shabby!

Also, I'd say Lewandowski is in a good place in his development. He played with confidence and we saw some good things, particularly east-west movement with the puck. There could have been some better decisions but he showed the kind of hands and creativity that we're not often seeing from German prospects. I'm sure he didn't harm his draft value in this tournament.

I'd also point out that I thought Tropmann filled in well as captain and did indeed produce along the way, even if he was a -7. Wonder if this tournament was enough to re-peak any draft curiosity?

Boos was a weird one too. He played a lot in the first three games but his ice time went way down when it mattered. He only got 12 minutes vs. Latvia and, like I said above, was replaced by Pul in the third period against Kazakhstan. That's when Abstreiter changed the top 6 to Lewandowski-Sumpf-Ruckdäschel and Pul-Seidl-Schwarz.

Agreed on Tropmann. He was good. Not enough to be considered a draft prospect, though. He's still an average-sized physical D with no dynamic offensive skill. Not exactly the type of player NHL teams pursue. He should've made the jump to North America when he had the chance. Who knows, perhaps he'll manage to pull a Rio Kaiser and find a team for the rest of the year. The USHL is only halfway through their season.

Yeah, the usage of Pul and Vinzens was surprising. Vinzens has always been a bit inconsistent when I watched him. Sometimes he was looking as good as Sumpf on his best day, but other times he disappeared completely. Pul on the other hand has been as consistent as anyone I have watched from this group.

But even with those two playing bigger roles this team still would have been lacking in speed and creativity, which is why Bicker and Schreiner were missed even more than they would have anyway.
I don't know what the timeline with the nomination and Willhöft's injury was, but I am wondering if he may have been in consideration for the team, since he would also have brought those same elements the team was sorely lacking.

I have not watched all the games (missed the entire US game and parts of the Canada game), but based on what I have seen these are my thoughts aobut the defensemen

Carlos Händel:
For me Händel was our best defensemen out there. He wasn't perfect or even great by any means, but in the games I saw he was a clear net positive. He was basically the only defenseman that actually managed to pull off some of the things he tried. He also looked better defensively than I had seen him in a long time. He still overdid things at times, but I'll take that bad with the good.

Max Hense:
Hense was a pleasant surprise for me. There was a time when I thought he could become quite good, but since then he did not progress as I had hoped. But in this tournament he made a lot of correct decisions. He kept the game simple, was physical and had an active stick breaking up plays. Nothing spectacular, but solid.

Rio Kaiser:
Kaiser did not play a lot, and I was ok with that. It's not like he was horrible when he played, but he did not really contribute in a positive way, either. Clearly the #7D in my eyes.

Kilian Kühnhauser:
I am sorry, but this was bad. Kühnhauser had already struggled in the pre-tournament games I saw, and it only got worse in the tournament. He looked completely out of his depth most of the time.

Paul Mayer:
If I had to describe Mayer's play in a couple of words, I would call it mostly inoffensive. Yes, he lost a few too many puck battles, but overall I saw fewer mistakes from him than from any defenseman not names Hense or Niehus. Unfortunately his transition game was non-existent when I watched. For a 3rd pairing his play was ok, I guess.

Lua Niehus:
Next to Hense the most solid dman in his own end. He also broke up a few rushes from the other teams with his stick at his own blue line. He had a few nice passes, but was mostly focused on defense. I actually had hoped for more from him based on how well he was playing this season, but he wasn't really bad, at least not by comparison to the rest of the team.

Norwin Panocha:
I was very worried about him before the tournament, and I was actually somewhat happy with his play, as it was a big improvement to the last few times I saw him. But overall he seemed to struggle more as the tournament went on, though mostly he was just inconsistent. At times he almost looked like his old self, skating the puck out of danger, making high percentage plays to get the puck out of the dzone. But then there were just too many instances of him turning the puck over needlessly. I don't know if it was lack of confidence, or just sloppy play. His board play was also a big problem for me.

Edwin Tropmann:
Tropmann, like Händel, showed good and bad, it's just that it was more bad than good as far as I am concerned. On the plus side, I liked his play in the offensive zone especially on the power play. He moved his feet and the puck very well. His shot was a pleasant surprise, with regard to both power and accuracy. But his stupid turnovers, often by telegraphing passes, were too much for me. Especially against Latvia and Kazakhstan I was really annoyed with his transition play. Maybe I am selling him a bit short, but those turnovers just stuck with me.

I am thinking about doing a little preview for next year later. Making a most certainly completely incorrect prediction what next year's roster could look like.

I watched every German game and kind of agree with you on most things but also not really haha.

Händel: 100% agree.

Hense: It may still be based on (at this point) unreasonable expectations but I thought Hense's performances were mostly disappointing. Yes, he was mostly solid defensively and that's all he was there for, but he really struggled anytime he touched the puck. And if we're viewing him as a purely defensive D at this point, I think he has way too little physicality in his game.

Kaiser: Agreed.

Kühnhauser: Agreed. Never understood why they brought him in the first place.

Mayer: Not as bad as he once was but he showed his usual problems with the puck and I don't think they'll go away. He is what he is. Like you said, for a third-pairing guy, that's ok.

Niehus: Perhaps the biggest positive surprise for me. I never really liked him since his first DNL season, but it looks like he's developed quite well over the past couple years. For a smaller guy, he still doesn't have the necessary dynamic tools, but at the same time, being small results in him being a decent skater and that certainly helps on the defensive side of things too.

Panocha: It's so weird with him. You may recall I brought up his name pretty early here in his draft year when he wasn't really talked about yet and kept pushing his name because he just kept getting better and better that year. But somehow he's really struggled since then. I don't know if going to North America hurt him, but I'm really hoping he'll come home next season and play a decent role with Berlin. I believe they only have Hördler, Schneider and Schäfer as U23 players for next season as of today, and with Geibel turning 23, there should be a spot for him. I thought the world juniors were good for him. He wasn't high-end but he was a top-3 D for Germany along with Händel and Tropmann and that should be enough to have him back on track for a successful DEL rookie season.

Tropmann: See above.

 

[Maverick41]

If there are no significant injuries, I think the team next year will be slightly better than this year, but some guys like Sumpf will be really hard to replace.
This is the pool of players I would expect next year's team will be coming from. The players in bold are the ones I would pick as of now (3 G, 8 D, 14 F).

I may have overlooked some players, because I am doing this off the top of my head, without access to my database or the internet (I am writing this offline, and will copy & paste it later, when my internet works again). Maybe I will do a quick check before I post it, but I will probably just leave it as it is.


Goalies:
2006: Linus Vieillard, Lennart Neiße, Michail Elagin, Cole Danielsmeier
2007: Lukas Stuhrmann, Nikita Kluev, Aaron Kaiser, Noah Pfab, Bartholomäus Oswald, Kimi Saffran

I think we will be fine in goal. Vieillard was good this year and Neiße can be just as good. For the third goalie I would pick a 07 and right now I would go with either Pfab or Stuhrmann, but there are some other interesting options out there.


Defense:
2006: Max Hense, Matthias Pape, Rio Kaiser, Finn Serikow, Noah Hahn, Jacob Ficenec, Maximilian Merkl, Moritz Kretzschmar, Nikita Müller, Dominik Zerhoch, Manuel Schams, Robin Krening
2007: Carlos Händel, Max Bleicher, Fabio Kose, Niclas Hempel, Gregor Stocker, Felix Krüger, Matthias Harr, Timo Hausfelder, Cedric Wijacki, Philipp Stock, Albert Bicker, Simon Schlosser, Noah Smith, Moritz Warnecke
2008: Darian Rolsing, Daniel Kettler

The defense is cause for concern the 06s don't really project as being better or even nearly as good as the 05s this year. Hopefully Händel's development can compensate for some of that. I think Bleicher and Kose will also make the team, and guys like Hempel and/or Smith are totally in the mix. As of now, Hense, Pape and Kaiser are the only 06s that look like locks for me. Usually, I would not think that any 08s have a shot to make the team, but neither 06 nor 07 is blessed with an abundance of strong defensemen, so there is a small chance especially for Rolsing who has developed well so far this season.


Forwards:
2006: Elias Pul, Lenny Boos, Clemens Seeger, Bence Farkas, Simon Seidl, Tobias Schwarz, Maximilian Brunner, Nick Maul, Clemens Sager, Felix Kerbel, Tim Schütz, Nikolas Biggins, Maxime Bickel, Maximilian Oswald, Max Herzog
2007: David Lewandowski, Dustin Willhöft, Gustavs Griva, Rihards Griva, Mateu Späth, Max Ziergiebl, Sebastian Zwickl, Timo Kose, Elias Schneider, Maxim Schäfer, Nikita Kessler, Justus Kaufmann, Pepino Langmeier, Andreas Grin, Tobin Brandt
2008: Tobias Krestan, Mats Geppert, Lukas Greil, Vyacheslav Permitin
2009: Max Penkin, Jonas Schwarz, Jaden Switzer

The forwards will definitely offer a lot of depths. Whether or not the top-end talent will depend on the development of the 07s. If Lewandowski in particular, and guys like Willhöft, Schneider and Späth can improve a lot in this next year, we should have one of our better forward groups of recent years.

Because of this depth, I can only see one (or none) of Krestan or Penkin making this team. I went with Krestan, because I trust more in his development playing in Sweden, than I do in Penkin’s playing in Germany, even if he is playing against older competition. On the other hand, Penkin is possibly already the better player. Honestly, I could easily pick 20 forwards and make a solid case for each one of them. I could see us go with as few as four 2006 forwards or as many as nine. The only locks for me at this point are Pul, Boos, Seidl, Schwarz, Lewandowski, Schäfer, Kose, Schneider and Willhöft.

If I have missed any obvious candidates feel free to point them out. I just did a quick check on eliteprospects and noticed I had initially forgotten Fabio Kose, but beyond that I have not detected any glaring omissions.