Johnny Gaudreau: 2015/16 expectations?

[Volica]

Man is it ever fun to read through all the garbage posts at the start of this thread.

Why do people keep doubting this kid? Guess some people like to be wrong over and over again.

It's strange right? When I look at it, I think of it like an inspirational story or at least a feel good story. Very undersized American kid, given an opportunity in a late round, brilliant in college, brilliant on the world stage and continue to be brilliant in the NHL.

I think it's probably the hype he got in College. I think a lot of posters are younger, the fact this kid was given so much praise during his college career probably rubbed people the wrong way.

I always find his arch funny.
Too small for the NCAA, he'll come back down to earth - Best player in college.
Yeah, but he'll get creamed by NHL defencemen - Goes to Worlds and makes a fool of NHL defencemen.
Psh, he'll be lucky to get on the team, he needs to mature and get bigger - Makes team no problem.
Well, he can't do it against the BEST defencemen in the world, the WC was a fluke - 64 points as a rookie.
So what? Luck, Sophomore slump - Top 5 point producer so far.

I don't get it, but then again, it's funny to watch people back peddle after.

 

[AngelDuck]

Why would anyone expect him to regress? He has elite skill. That's not going to go into long slumps.

Even if the Flames suck all year, he's going to get his points (probably 70 of them)

 

[Kranix]

Talk to me when he plays against top pairing D-men for 20 years.

 

[JagrBomber]

Talk to me when he plays against top pairing D-men for 20 years.

I'll talk to you right now when he has played top pairing D-men for a full season and continues to do so right now. There's no stopping, he's too silky with the puck, and will continue to bury against top pairing D-men.

A full NHL season and 2 playoff rounds, plus his production this season already is enough of a sample size to prove he is NHL calibre top line player, if you say otherwise you are simply wrong.

 

[Kranix]

I'll talk to you right now when he has played top pairing D-men for a full season and continues to do so right now. There's no stopping, he's too silky with the puck, and will continue to bury against top pairing D-men.

A full NHL season and 2 playoff rounds, plus his production this season already is enough of a sample size to prove he is NHL calibre top line player, if you say otherwise you are simply wrong.

Talk to me when he plays against Hampus Lindhome and Kevin Bieska for all his shifts.

 

[Anglesmith]

I'll talk to you right now when he has played top pairing D-men for a full season and continues to do so right now. There's no stopping, he's too silky with the puck, and will continue to bury against top pairing D-men.

A full NHL season and 2 playoff rounds, plus his production this season already is enough of a sample size to prove he is NHL calibre top line player, if you say otherwise you are simply wrong.

You may have missed the sarcasm.

 

[Deen]

Ross better move over because what this kid does is actually Art.

 

[newfy]

I didnt know what to expect of Gaudreau, I thought he would take some adjusting and maybe work out in the future. I definitely didnt expect this big of a difference maker this early, especially because of his size. I was definitely wrong

 

[djpatm]

There is not a single player I'd trade Johnny for right now. No point. I can't picture anyone coming in and being a sure fire improvement over him.

 

[Pizza the Hutt]

Crosby
Ovechkin
Stamkos
Tavares
Malkin
Benn
Kane (Patrick)
Seguin
Toews

Then these guys are comparable (ignoring some older guys):
Voracek
Tarasenko
Backstrom
Kopitar
Getzlaf
McDavid
Giroux
Kessel
Pacioretty
Hall
MacKinnon
Bergeron

You'd just need to prefer any one player from that second list to push Gaudreau out of the top10.

You've got it wrong, Johnny is in that second list, knocking on the top ten's door along with them. (And it is worth noting that this season he's scored more than everyone on that list of door-knockers).

Of course it's still premature, but I think by the end of the season we should have a pretty good sense of his door-knocking abilities.

 

[thalegion]

Hate that this kid is so good, not because he's a flame I'm totally cool with them, but because during after hours he dressed like a 90's B-Boy and that made me unnecessarily angry for some reason.

 

[Straight Fire]

I didnt know what to expect of Gaudreau, I thought he would take some adjusting and maybe work out in the future. I definitely didnt expect this big of a difference maker this early, especially because of his size. I was definitely wrong

I remember clearly during last season's training camp (his rookie year) how high Pat Steinberg (Calgary sports radio commentator) and others spoke of Johnny. They were free in speaking about how well he was doing as a rookie at camp going so far as to say that, "he is head and shoulders above everyone else." I specifically remember Pat saying these words. All the other commentators were making similar statements of high praise. And Johnny hasn't disappointed or regressed.

So I say all of that just to show that we're really talking about about a year and a third sample size. So far very few lulls over that time-period (minus one early-season benching last year for 2 games for lord/Hartley knows why).

 

[blankall]

Talk to me when he plays against Hampus Lindhome and Kevin Bieska for all his shifts.

He was in the same division as Bieksa all last year and then faced the Canucks in the playoffs....

Bieksa sandwiched by two of the smallest players in the league:

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Crosby
Ovechkin
Stamkos
Tavares
Malkin
Benn
Kane (Patrick)
Seguin
Toews

Then these guys are comparable (ignoring some older guys):
Voracek
Tarasenko
Backstrom
Kopitar
Getzlaf
McDavid
Giroux
Kessel
Pacioretty
Hall
MacKinnon
Bergeron

You'd just need to prefer any one player from that second list to push Gaudreau out of the top10.

I don't disagree with your list. But IMO John deserves to be in the same breath as those guys in the first grouping. He's that good.

In the second group I'd put Tarasenko, Bergeron, Getzlaf, and Kopitar ahead of him for sure.
And then I would put 3 of the leagues next superstars in the next group. Mackinnon, McDavid and Gaudreau.
Although if Johnny keeps playing the was he has over the past 80 games or so, then i don't think its a stretch at all to put him in that top group. He's that dominant.

 

[djpatm]

If he can maintain his play so far from this season, he is 100% in that top group. There's no real explanation for leaving him out of it besides the fact that he hasn't shown he can maintain this level for more than a season. If he can do it, or even improve still then he could easily be a top player.

 

[NeoCanuck]

He was in the same division as Bieksa all last year and then faced the Canucks in the playoffs....

Bieksa sandwiched by two of the smallest players in the league:

Do people really not understand how sarcasm works?

 

[PsYcNeT]

Do people really not understand how sarcasm works?

Welcome to HF, where anything less than the most polarizing hyperbole is a rare gem.

 

[Figgy44]

I remember clearly during last season's training camp (his rookie year) how high Pat Steinberg (Calgary sports radio commentator) and others spoke of Johnny. They were free in speaking about how well he was doing as a rookie at camp going so far as to say that, "he is head and shoulders above everyone else." I specifically remember Pat saying these words. All the other commentators were making similar statements of high praise. And Johnny hasn't disappointed or regressed.

So I say all of that just to show that we're really talking about about a year and a third sample size. So far very few lulls over that time-period (minus one early-season benching last year for 2 games for lord/Hartley knows why).

I love Gaudreau as much as the next guy and am inherently biased, but to say he has never had lulls is not true. IIRC, I'm quite sure he started off poorly, was placed in the press box to be ready for demotion, but a game after that press box sitting, he became Calder dark horse Gaudreau. He didn't start last season with elite play. A transition period took place. To say otherwise is pure revisionist history.

http://flamesnation.ca/2014/10/18/give-the-gaudreau-demotion-talk-a-rest-at-least-for-now
http://www.flamesfrom80feet.ca/2014_09_01_archive.html

These links mention Gaudreau's obvious talent but mention the poor start and the potential AHL demotion/mentions he probably would be back in the NHL sooner than later.

I believe there's an interview somewhere this off season where Brian Burke said management was getting ready to demote him. Luckily, Gaudreau instead figured things out and tore up the league after the press box visit and I think Granlund was sent down instead (or maybe it was Barts, I don't recall). Furthermore, Burke supposedly sat Gaudreau down and told him not to change his game or he'd be sent down for sure. But unfortunately I can't find the interviews or an article mentioning it.

Gaudreau made the team just barely over Baertschi last season IIRC. He was our 1st line LW after overtaking Raymond (2nd Line), Glencross (1st line/traded), Baertschi (4th line expected, but never got it, was last demotion instead), Bollig (3rd/4th) and Bouma (3rd/4th). I have no doubt that the part about Gaudreau being heads and shoulders above everyone else in rookie camp is probably true. It's rookie camp after all playing games mostly against prospects. It's amazing to see how much Gaudreau has grown in a single year (though it feels like he's been in the league longer).

 

[Peter Zezel]

Gaudreau reminds me of Comrie.

 

[Anglesmith]

I love Gaudreau as much as the next guy and am inherently biased, but to say he has never had lulls is not true. IIRC, I'm quite sure he started off poorly, was placed in the press box to be ready for demotion, but a game after that press box sitting, he became Calder dark horse Gaudreau. He didn't start last season with elite play. A transition period took place. To say otherwise is pure revisionist history.

http://flamesnation.ca/2014/10/18/give-the-gaudreau-demotion-talk-a-rest-at-least-for-now
http://www.flamesfrom80feet.ca/2014_09_01_archive.html

These links mention Gaudreau's obvious talent but mention the poor start and the potential AHL demotion/mentions he probably would be back in the NHL sooner than later.

I believe there's an interview somewhere this off season where Brian Burke said management was getting ready to demote him. Luckily, Gaudreau instead figured things out and tore up the league after the press box visit and I think Granlund was sent down instead (or maybe it was Barts, I don't recall). Furthermore, Burke supposedly sat Gaudreau down and told him not to change his game or he'd be sent down for sure. But unfortunately I can't find the interviews or an article mentioning it.

Gaudreau made the team just barely over Baertschi last season IIRC. He was our 1st line LW after overtaking Raymond (2nd Line), Glencross (1st line/traded), Baertschi (4th line expected, but never got it, was last demotion instead), Bollig (3rd/4th) and Bouma (3rd/4th). I have no doubt that the part about Gaudreau being heads and shoulders above everyone else in rookie camp is probably true. It's rookie camp after all playing games mostly against prospects. It's amazing to see how much Gaudreau has grown in a single year (though it feels like he's been in the league longer).

True, but that's not really a lull. That was the start of his NHL career, so he had nothing really to come down from.

 

[Figgy44]

True, but that's not really a lull. That was the start of his NHL career, so he had nothing really to come down from.

If that's the case, then I agree with you. Gaudreau has been pretty darn consistent.

However, I think semantics are in the way, because the last line of the other post mentioned the "early season benching" as an event to ignore in terms of lulls.

 

[Anglesmith]

If that's the case, then I agree with you. Gaudreau has been pretty darn consistent.

However, I think semantics are in the way, because the last line of the other post mentioned the "early season benching" as an event to ignore in terms of lulls.

The benching (for one game, not two) was justified. Gaudreau needed to adjust to the NHL game, and viewing from the pressbox with someone in your ear is one way to help kids see the game differently. And it worked. But again, it's not really a lull in his career. It was a period of adjustment to a new league and a new difficulty level. He adjusted, and since then he's been a rock star.

It would be like calling Stamkos' first year in the league a lull. It would be like saying Stamkos had a lull in his first couple months in the league.

 

[Kovaz]

Gaudreau's such an odd player to try to project. If you were to list all of his attributes, there are very few that are anywhere close to average; he's either in the top 5% or bottom 5% of NHLers.

Hockey Sense? Elite
Vision? Elite
Passing (technically) ? Elite
Skating (technically) ? Elite
Puck Handling? Elite

Shooting Power? Mediocre to Bad
Strength? Possibly the weakest in the NHL

That's where the difficulty comes from. Gaudreau fans see his unreal intelligence and technical skills, and he's right there with the superstars of the game. Naysayers see that physically he's maybe the weakest player in hockey, and think that it should hold him back severely.

It's easy to look at a player who's more or less average at everything, and say that he'll likely be more or less average. But the more wildly a player's skills vary the harder it is to guess. There are countless players out there with a few other-worldly skills who just couldn't put it together, and then there are players who get by almost entirely on one strong attribute.

 

[DJJones]

I wouldn't say his shooting is bad. Maybe in a straight velocity sense but aim, deception, delivery speed more than make up for it.

 

[tmurfin]

Regarding his shot, while it is "weak", it is insanely accurate, when he scores on a shot it's a pure snipe.