Player Discussion Juraj Slafkovsky, the high offensive potential edition.

[junyab]

How do we calculate that? How do you arrive at this conclusion?

I fail to see or understand how he has lowest probability of success than Wright or Cooley.

How do WE calculate this? WE don't. Scouts, experts, analysts, etc. calculate this and its part of their prospect report - floor, ceiling, probability of reaching their ceiling or floor.

The lower the probability the higher the risk (gamble). Habs knew this and said so immediately.

And despite where Slaf played this year, nor the success, or lack there of, in his first season, his potential hasn't changed. He could break out next year, or take a few season, I'd bet on the latter.

 

[Breakfast of Champs]

2003 draft will always be Exhibit A:

- it went from Erik Staal being the best player of the draft, to Carter / Richards, to Getzlaf / Perry / Weber, to Brett Burns to now Bergeron / Pavelski 20-years removed

I guess that can also come to down peak vs longevity, Pavelski has been a solid top player for longer, but staal had a better peak and in his prime was better than pavelski IMO, do you take those years where he was a true Franchise C who led the playoffs in scoring and won a cup , or more years of a top line player? Peaking at 22 as a 100 pt #1C who leads the playoffs in pts while wining the cup is no less valuable than doing it at 28, and eben the subsequent years he was a true Elite #1C but scoring was down. I would easily take an 18 year old getzlaf over pavelski too knowing what I know now, longevity is great but getzlaf had a long run at a tier above him.

Bergeron I agree with

Playing 2 more years of juniors for any of the players you named would have ruined their career? Nope. Waterdown the league? what the hell are you talking about, the league would be stronger because there would be less "bust by premature confidence destruction" and more development at each level as they would be also more talented.

That's not the point, why would you rob the best league in the world of the best talent? stammer was literally winning a rocket, why on earth should he not be in the NHL? Tim Stutzle, who does he think he is, McDavid? Can't win an AR at 19 doesn't deserve to play, that guy should be "developing" in the minors or Europe, just disregard the fact that he is already one of the most dynamic players in the world capable of 90 pts, no room for him in this league full of finished products. Clearly he's not been developing in the NHL.... It's an entertainment business, keeping stars out of the league is not the answer, there are plenty of examples of guys under 21 who make a significant impact in the league making a 21 age cutoff is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Edit - right , bergeron and O'Reilly would be so much better if they had kept developing outside the NHL until they were 21, stamkos and matthews would probably have scored 70 goals, Jack Hughes would be better than McDavid, MacKinnon too. RNH would be having his 7th 100 pt season, couturier would have won 5 selkes if the flyers didn't rush him at 19, etc.

 

[Jaynki]

How do WE calculate this? WE don't. Scouts, experts, analysts, etc. calculate this and its part of their prospect report - floor, ceiling, probability of reaching their ceiling or floor.

The lower the probability the higher the risk (gamble). Habs knew this and said so immediately.

And despite where Slaf played this year, nor the success, or lack there of, in his first season, his potential hasn't changed. He could break out next year, or take a few season, I'd bet on the latter.

I totally agree on his potential. I just don't see how he is a more risky player than Wright or Cooley. I believe its even quite the opposite actually, with his tools, if he don't pan out as a 1st liner, he will surely have an avenir as a middle sixer. I dont think there was much risk with any of these three players to be honest. (There is always an inherent risk). What Habs specifically said? I don't remember them talking about Slafkovsky having a lowest probability of reaching his ceiling.

 

[SOLR]

That's not the point, why would you rob the best league in the world of the best talent? stammer was literally winning a rocket, why on earth should he not be in the NHL? Tim Stutzle, who does he think he is, McDavid? Can't win an AR at 19 doesn't deserve to play, that guy should be "developing" in the minors or Europe, just disregard the fact that he is already one of the most dynamic players in the world capable of 90 pts, no room for him in this league full of finished products. Clearly he's not been developing in the NHL.... It's an entertainment business, keeping stars out of the league is not the answer, there are plenty of examples of guys under 21 who make a significant impact in the league making a 21 age cutoff is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Edit - right , bergeron and O'Reilly would be so much better if they had kept developing outside the NHL until they were 21, stamkos and matthews would probably have scored 70 goals, Jack Hughes would be better than McDavid, MacKinnon too. RNH would be having his 7th 100 pt season, couturier would have won 5 selkes if the flyers didn't rush him at 19, etc.

You don't rob the league of any talent, you just make sure these athletes are actual mental adults before they get in the ring, and that is not at 18 years old, that's at 25 years old according to science. 21 is close enough to 25 in progress level because between 21 and 25 there is only 2-3% left. But between 18 and 21 there is a significant amount of brain development. This is a significant ethical issue, a lot of hockey players in the US can play pro hockey but they can't drink yet (are they adults or are they not? they are not, the answer is clear).

You can't look at the ledger only from one side. That's what you are doing. Starting too early has "robbed" the league of quite a few talents. A lot of the examples you are providing are top draft picks and are nearly exceptional, all I'm suggesting here is that if you start a player early it affects your UFA retention of that player. Therefore would push teams to delay the entry of each player to when they know they are fully ready more than they do now. KK, Slaf and Galchenyuk were all controversial players to play at 18 in the NHL, none of them were as ready as Bedard is right now.

 

[Jaynki]

I guess that can also come to down peak vs longevity, Pavelski has been a solid top player for longer, but staal had a better peak and in his prime was better than pavelski IMO, do you take those years where he was a true Franchise C who led the playoffs in scoring and won a cup , or more years of a top line player? Peaking at 22 as a 100 pt #1C who leads the playoffs in pts while wining the cup is no less valuable than doing it at 28, and eben the subsequent years he was a true Elite #1C but scoring was down. I would easily take an 18 year old getzlaf over pavelski too knowing what I know now, longevity is great but getzlaf had a long run at a tier above him.

Bergeron I agree with


That's not the point, why would you rob the best league in the world of the best talent? stammer was literally winning a rocket, why on earth should he not be in the NHL? Tim Stutzle, who does he think he is, McDavid? Can't win an AR at 19 doesn't deserve to play, that guy should be "developing" in the minors or Europe, just disregard the fact that he is already one of the most dynamic players in the world capable of 90 pts, no room for him in this league full of finished products. Clearly he's not been developing in the NHL.... It's an entertainment business, keeping stars out of the league is not the answer, there are plenty of examples of guys under 21 who make a significant impact in the league making a 21 age cutoff is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Edit - right , bergeron and O'Reilly would be so much better if they had kept developing outside the NHL until they were 21, stamkos and matthews would probably have scored 70 goals, Jack Hughes would be better than McDavid, MacKinnon too. RNH would be having his 7th 100 pt season, couturier would have won 5 selkes if the flyers didn't rush him at 19, etc.

I just want to add a point to the "Bust by premature confidence destruction". Which the poster SOLR you quoted has argued.

Confidence comes before success. It is not the consequence of success which a lot of people seems to pretend here. If having struggle in the NHL at 18 is enough to kill the confidence of Slafkovsky, or Stutzle or Jack Hughes, then they won't have what they need to reach the superstar status they have the potential to achieve. (Spoiler : neither of them have suffered from confidence destruction.)

Also, maybe they can have way more personal confidence hanging with NHLer than they would have killing juniors or minor leaguer, no ?

The "confidence destruction" has to be one of the weakest argument for sending a player down.

Like you stated in other words, there is no examples of a player busting because he has been rushed. There is evidence of players busting for attitude or addiction reason tho.

 

[NORiculous]

You paint a very negative pictures of him. He had easiest opposition that is true.

But he mainly played with Evans and Hoffman then Evans and Pezzetta. He still had 48.9% corsi, not good but it aint incredibly bad either.

Honestly, its adequate for an 18 years old in his role. Again, i understand its a disappointment for a 1st overall, but still, its an average 4th liner performance with his production. Its not a player that was not able to handle the NHL.

Also, when im talking about a small sample size of data, we as fans don't know how he evolved in practices, we don't know what was asked of him and how he answered.

I still fail to see how the AHL would have been a better place for him to learn. If anything, i just think it would comfort us fans seeing him produce but thats it. The NHL was the best place, in my opinion, for him to learn the processing of the game, the toughness of defenseman, etc. He would have learned nothing about the NHL down there.

The picture I paint is what I saw on the ice and what the advanced stats say. He had the worse of the Habs. I am not trying to paint anything else.

Evans had much much harder toughness of opposition… So did Pezzetta to a lesser extent.

Slafkovsky also played with Dvorak, Gallagher, Anderson and a little bit of Monahan and Hoffman. They all faced a harder toughness of opposition and also did better. God I hope they trade Dvorak quick. I wouldn’t mind if they paid to get ride of him.

Back to Slafkovsky, I rather follow what Yzerman says (among others). If you don’t dominate a league, you have something to learn.

To say he can learn, you need something to base that on. Hope isn’t enough.

A young kid like Slafkovsky has lots to learn just to able to absorb what the NHL has to teach ( we saw that this year). He can get polished in the AHL much more efficiently.
(The university analogy I talked about earlier)

 

[Miller Time]

My point is, I think the chances he runs away and destroys junior competition is almost zero. He would be fine, but he wouldn't be lapping the field. Not even close.

Disagree.

Small sample, but at the Olympics there were several NCAA studs he outclassed, including our own Farrell... And Cooley didn't even make the US squad.

It's far fetched to suggest he wouldn't have been dominant in the NCAA, or CHL, this past season. Silly really.

 

[Canadienna]

I'll definitely be listening to this one. He's a pretty funny dude.

 

[Jaynki]

Disagree.

Small sample, but at the Olympics there were several NCAA studs he outclassed, including our own Farrell... And Cooley didn't even make the US squad.

It's far fetched to suggest he wouldn't have been dominant in the NCAA, or CHL, this past season. Silly really.

He outclassed good NHLers in the world cup... He was absolutely dominant against Canada it was not even funny.

 

[le_sean]

He outclassed good NHLers in the world cup... He was absolutely dominant against Canada it was not even funny.

Yeah the World Championships were more impressive than the Olympics. The Olympics was just an unsustainable shooting percentage against poor competition. World Championships he made his way to be the play driver on the top line of his team which included NHLers. He was a force.

 

[Jaynki]

Yeah the World Championships were more impressive than the Olympics. The Olympics was just an unsustainable shooting percentage against poor competition. World Championships he made his way to be the play driver on the top line of his team which included NHLers. He was a force.

Although effectively unsustainable, it was more than just that. He was a monster out there and generated offense a lot.

To me, the real eye opener was in late October, Slafkovsky was not in the discussion for the top 3 just yet. Kemell was killing the liiga with 12 goals in 16 games. I remember seeing a hockey amateur in Finland who did an in deep analysis of Slafkovsky, Lambert and Kemell. (I still have the tweets with the data).

Well despite Kemell killing the league, and Slafkovsky having only 2 points in 11 games, his cumulated stats displayed that Slafkovsky was the one generating the most chances both for him and his teammates out of the three and to watch out for him. Well two months later and he totally exploded offensively in the OG, then his production doubled on a per 60 basis in Liiga and then the world cup to cement everything.

I remenber during the world cup, i had the Wright bias and i was afraid or deranged when Slaf, game after game was so good. Then one night i said to myself, don't be afraid, he is so f***ing good, be excited if he is our pick. I still maintained my preference for Wright. Then when he got booed on the red carpet, and he answered it and did his interviews with so much confidence and eloquence and charisma. I said to myself f*** off, get him. At this point i started to believe Wright was not the pick anymore. He arrived a couple of minutes later, he looked and talked solid but he did not have the starpower and charisma Slafkovsky had. Cooley looked a bit younger and shy. I am not sure he had what is required for our debile market.

 

[Miller Time]

He outclassed good NHLers in the world cup... He was absolutely dominant against Canada it was not even funny.

Yeah the World Championships were more impressive than the Olympics. The Olympics was just an unsustainable shooting percentage against poor competition. World Championships he made his way to be the play driver on the top line of his team which included NHLers. He was a force.

Yup & yup... Pretty laughable to suggest that he'd have been anything short of dominant playing against NCAA competition this past season...

 

[junyab]

I totally agree on his potential. I just don't see how he is a more risky player than Wright or Cooley. I believe its even quite the opposite actually, with his tools, if he don't pan out as a 1st liner, he will surely have an avenir as a middle sixer. I dont think there was much risk with any of these three players to be honest. (There is always an inherent risk). What Habs specifically said? I don't remember them talking about Slafkovsky having a lowest probability of reaching his ceiling.

Let's say Slaf has a 20% chance to be a top 3 power scoring winger in the league vs Wright/Cooley having an 80% chance at becoming a top 20 #1 center in the league. Obviously I'm just making up numbers but maybe that would help explain my comment.

I couldn't find the quote but I remember him saying he was aware that it wasn't the safest pick, but his physical tools were too special to pass up.

 

[rik schau]

Could we say the same about Guhle?

Perhaps,was he getting pelted as regularly as Slaf? I didn't notice it that much but limited viewing.

 

[rik schau]

Who cares? The AHL argument is ridiculous. As another poster said there are a preponderance of goons in the AHL ready to take him out. And there is likely no one to help him progress. If Houle is booted after the season we will know why they didn't send him to laval.

Who cares? about what ? All I'm understanding is that you never saw any AHL hockey or even played the game,don't be so gullible.

 

[NORiculous]

Could we say the same about Guhle?

No because Guhle played VERY hard toughness of opposition.

Slafkovsky played VERY easy toughness of opposition.

Please don’t compare the two.

But what we can say… is that Guhle isn’t ready for top pair toughness of opposition. He would be fine as 3rd pair that can fill in on the 2nd pair.

Just as a comparable, Sergachev isn’t ready for the hardest toughness of opposition either. I use Sergachev because his name gets thrown a lot of this board. Up to 40 games ago, Sergachev was a 3rd pair + top PP guy. It takes time for Ds to play the harder minutes.

Perhaps,was he getting pelted as regularly as Slaf? I didn't notice it that much but limited viewing.

Totally different situation. Guhle was facing the toughest toughness of opposition. Slafkovsky was facing the easiest toughness of opposition.

That makes a huge difference.

 

[Wats]

Yup & yup... Pretty laughable to suggest that he'd have been anything short of dominant playing against NCAA competition this past season...

Players regularly play well in tournaments and struggle to produce in league play. I hope he'd be dominant in NCAA but all this pretending like its a guarantee is disingenuous. The league isn't that easy.

 

[NORiculous]

The AHL argument is ridiculous. As another poster said there are a preponderance of goons in the AHL ready to take him out.

That is complete BS. A lot of potential stars go learn the ropes in the AHL and don’t get destroyed. The first name that popped in my head is Rantanen.

 

[rik schau]

No because Guhle played VERY hard toughness of opposition.

Slafkovsky played VERY easy toughness of opposition.

Please don’t compare the two.

But what we can say… is that Guhle isn’t ready for top pair toughness of opposition. He would be fine as 3rd pair that can fill in on the 2nd pair.

Just as a comparable, Sergachev isn’t ready for the hardest toughness of opposition either. I use Sergachev because his name gets thrown a lot of this board. Up to 40 games ago, Sergachev was a 3rd pair + top PP guy. It takes time for Ds to play the harder minutes.


Totally different situation. Guhle was facing the toughest toughness of opposition. Slafkovsky was facing the easiest toughness of opposition.

That makes a huge difference.

That is why I said perhaps due to limited exposure on my part. Like I said,I did not notice Guhle getting nailed to the extent that I saw Slaf getting nailed.

 

[junyab]

Slafkovsky played VERY easy toughness of opposition.

I find it funny that you think 3rd/4th liners are easy to play against, whoops, my mistake, sorry, VERY easy.

 

[Koivu11]

 

[NORiculous]

I find it funny that you think 3rd/4th liners are easy to play against, whoops, my mistake, sorry, VERY easy.

Are you serious? Are you real?

lol

Ok, I will spell it out for you.

I was talking about advanced stats. I have been in multiple previous messages. So that is the context of my post.

Slafkovsky played very easy minutes compared to his teammates… (that is what advanced stats do… they don’t compare it to playing in the duck pound next door) so all the players he played with faced harder too much toughness of opposition. That is what the stats say.

His -0,409 (QoC rel Corsi For %) indicates this. Look at his other advanced stats and they all suck, but the stat I just pointed out to you confirms that he was in over his head because it can’t get much easier in the NHL.

When looking at advanced stats, you need to look at the global picture and put the stats up against each other, then compare to teammates.

That is how you can say that he faced easy toughness of opposition, because other 4th liners faced tougher opposition then him.

So…. Slafkovsky had trouble coping at the NHL level.

IS IT MORE CLEAR NOW???

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

Let's say Slaf has a 20% chance to be a top 3 power scoring winger in the league vs Wright/Cooley having an 80% chance at becoming a top 20 #1 center in the league. Obviously I'm just making up numbers but maybe that would help explain my comment.

I couldn't find the quote but I remember him saying he was aware that it wasn't the safest pick, but his physical tools were too special to pass up.

Definitely a bit of a gamble there but I'm fine with it because you could really hit big with this kid. The swagger he plays with it is a big thing too. Kind of reminds me of a forward version of Subban. Swagger can be a bit of a double edged sword but you'd certainly take that over someone who gets shook real easily.

I was watching his highlights and honestly I don't see why people think that he's some kind of serious step down from the top forwards of this draft.
I think IQ concerns are SOMEWHAT valid. I don't think he has elite IQ but he's not a stupid player. He made plenty of deft passes to show me he's not a Josh Anderson.

He's just super raw which really just makes his upside even higher. You're just gambling on whether he hits. THAT to me is a valid concern. Not his ultimate upside.

 

[JoelWarlord]

This is a significant ethical issue, a lot of hockey players in the US can play pro hockey but they can't drink yet (are they adults or are they not? they are not, the answer is clear).

You can't look at the ledger only from one side. That's what you are doing. Starting too early has "robbed" the league of quite a few talents.

This seems a little dramatic to me. My answer would be that it is clear they are adults. You can drive at 16/17 in either country, join the military at 17 in either country, vote at 18 in either country, drink at 18 in all the European countries players are drafted from, and drink at 18 or 19 in Canada. The American drinking age is globally recognized as a massive outlier in the western world, and I don't see any compelling reason to consider it an ethical standard. It's not even strictly enforced because people recognize the inherent silliness of it being legal for a 20 year old to pilot a helicopter loaded with missiles it being illegal for that person to drink a beer.

The league already incentivizes teams to keep players out until they're ready by providing the ELC slide rules and the 7 season UFA rules, the only players that will start at 18 or 19 are a select few that are very talented and/or physically strong outliers relative to their peers. Even the ones that you brought up as "rushed" went on to have pretty solid careers. Kotkaniemi will have nearly 50 million dollars in career earnings by the time he's 29 years old. Galchenyuk fizzled out as top 6 player after his early-mid 20s and still has nearly 25M in career earnings. Not sure I can agree that NHL clubs have acted unethically in their dealings with these players.

all I'm suggesting here is that if you start a player early it affects your UFA retention of that player. Therefore would push teams to delay the entry of each player to when they know they are fully ready more than they do now.

This is already the case. The NHL CBA grants UFA eligibility to players at age 27 or after 7 NHL seasons (a season for UFA eligibility is defined as 40+ games on an NHL roster or 30+ for goalies). Players that enter the NHL immediately after the draft can hit UFA at 25, players that start in their D+1 season can hit UFA at 26, and everyone else is 27 regardless of when they start excluding the niche UFA categories based on games played or whatever. The ELC slide rules also already incentivize teams to keep players out of the NHL if they aren't sure if they're ready.

 

[Miller Time]

Players regularly play well in tournaments and struggle to produce in league play. I hope he'd be dominant in NCAA but all this pretending like its a guarantee is disingenuous. The league isn't that easy.

Has nothing to do with the league being "easy".

Few NCAA players can/do put on dominant performances at senior men's international events... But many do at WJC & it would be an oddity for a US player to be dominant at WJC and not excel in the NCAA.

Then factor in that imposing physical talent is one of his biggest assets and the point remains... It's silly to suggest he wouldn't have been an elite/dominant NCAA player this year.