Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Karl Henriksson, C, 2nd round, 58th overall, 2019

broadwayblue said:
Does he really project as a 2C? A lot would have to break right for that to happen for him, no?
Click to expand...

The IQ is there. The vision is there. The playmaking and passing is there. The work ethic is there.

Do some of the physical aspects hold him back? Is he a AAAA player? We don’t know yet.

Henriksson is not a guy who jumps out at you when you watch a game. For example, you might just find yourself drawn to Holtz or Raymond or someone else. On the surface, Henriksson is a smaller player who doesn’t stand out.

Then you watch a play develop, and there he is. And then another play develops, and there he is again. And suddenly you watch him setting up a play or springing an open man. At some point you turn around and realize you’ve seen a lot of him that night. He kind of weasels his way into your notes. It happens a few times and one day you turn around and you think, “Shit, maybe he’s a pretty good player!”
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband, Captain Monglobster, doomscroll and 9 others
Calad said:
This kid seems like he could be an important piece for us now. Excelled at WJC with 2 great wingers in Raymond and Holtz, we could surround him with weapons like that.
Click to expand...

Can we just leave our prospects where they are? Let them develop in their own environment.

I can't wait for fans to cherry-pick the 2 or 3 NHLers drafted after him and complain how we never draft the right players, if he doesn't make it :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ola
Small and not a great skater is not a recipe for making the NHL and being productive if you game is offense. A lot of Rangers need to pick up a step. I hope they hire a power skating coach and work with some of our players on their speed. Kakko, Andersson, Henriksson, Howden, Fox. They could all get quicker.
 
Derek Stepan but 3 inches shorter and 20 lbs lighter. He could easily put on 10 lbs considering those figures are from being an 18 year old.

Even with mediocre skating included, those assets could work in the modern NHL. There are a lot of good things to be heard about him, so we'll see.

(Also, rather than using the cliche Marty St. Louis as the small kid example, Zucc actually can make a very good case for finding a diamond in the rough with these guys)
 
Edge said:
The IQ is there. The vision is there. The playmaking and passing is there. The work ethic is there.

Do some of the physical aspects hold him back? Is he a AAAA player? We don’t know yet.

Henriksson is not a guy who jumps out at you when you watch a game. For example, you might just find yourself drawn to Holtz or Raymond or someone else. On the surface, Henriksson is a smaller player who doesn’t stand out.

Then you watch a play develop, and there he is. And then another play develops, and there he is again. And suddenly you watch him setting up a play or springing an open man. At some point you turn around and realize you’ve seen a lot of him that night. He kind of weasels his way into your notes. It happens a few times and one day you turn around and you think, “Shit, maybe he’s a pretty good player!”
Click to expand...
Just scares me because guys that even stand out completely at that level sometimes don’t make it. Sounds like he’s got a pretty sizeable task ahead of him to become and NHL player.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Can we just leave our prospects where they are? Let them develop in their own environment.

I can't wait for fans to cherry-pick the 2 or 3 NHLers drafted after him and complain how we never draft the right players, if he doesn't make it :laugh:
Click to expand...

Where did anyone mention he needs to be brought over and inserted into the lineup?

Now we have lots of elite wingers and if/when he makes it here we can put him in a position to succeed by surrounding him with that talent, just like he's done for Sweden in the past
 
Bacon Artemi Bravo said:
Just scares me because guys that even stand out completely at that level sometimes don’t make it. Sounds like he’s got a pretty sizeable task ahead of him to become and NHL player.
Click to expand...

That’s just part of the deal as you get further and further into the draft most times.

The further you move into the first round, and eventually the second round and beyond, the more work there is to be done by a prospect and the less likely the pieces come together.

Henriksson is a very solid option as far as late second round picks go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband, Bacon Artemi Bravo and Brooklyn Rangers Fan
I don’t agree with the weak skating assessments at all. I think he’s a fantastic skater and is in incredible shape. He certainly doesn’t buzz like Barzal or Point but he can move.

I think he could end up a similar player to Kerfoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
Absolute best case scenario and a very low probability of happening (10%) is he becomes Brad Richards 2.0 a guy with elite IQ/passing who worked his best with quicker wingers because he wasn't a great skater.

Most likely with his size and skating he ends up somewhere between Michael St. Croix/Boo Nieves (70%).

The remainder (20%) is in the Stepan/Strome category where his smarts help him be a very useful NHLer but his skating and size hold him back from being a top tier guy.
 
QJL said:
I don’t agree with the weak skating assessments at all. I think he’s a fantastic skater and is in incredible shape. He certainly doesn’t buzz like Barzal or Point but he can move.

I think he could end up a similar player to Kerfoot.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's a bad skater, I just don't think he's a dynamic skater either. And when you're generously listed at 5'9, and you play center, that becomes a steeper hill to climb.

Now, having said that, if you can get the most out of your stride, play damn smart hockey, and get the puck to dynamic wingers, nobody is going to care how you skate. It's all about the results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Filthy Dangles, pld459666, QJL and 1 other person
Roo Returns said:
Absolute best case scenario and a very low probability of happening (10%) is he becomes Brad Richards 2.0 a guy with elite IQ/passing who worked his best with quicker wingers because he wasn't a great skater.

Most likely with his size and skating he ends up somewhere between Michael St. Croix/Boo Nieves (70%).

The remainder (20%) is in the Stepan/Strome category where his smarts help him be a very useful NHLer but his skating and size hold him back from being a top tier guy.
Click to expand...

I think that's fair. Because of his size and skating, I always saw a bit of Doug Weight in him. But both guys career numbers are reasonably close.

It all depends on how he adjusts as the competition gets bigger and faster and better.

Again, when we start talking about a guy who was taken toward the end of the second round, that's a gamble you take.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HFsNumber1Heel
Edge said:
I think that's fair. Because of his size and skating, I always saw a bit of Doug Weight in him. But both guys career numbers are reasonably close.

It all depends on how he adjusts as the competition gets bigger and faster and better.

Again, when we start talking about a guy who was taken toward the end of the second round, that's a gamble you take.
Click to expand...

Yessir, since you have a lot more experience around you might correct my statement but when my friends or coworkers and I talk hockey the rule is anything after the first ten of the second round is referred to as a "Hope Pick."
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
Roo Returns said:
Yessir, since you have a lot more experience around you might correct my statement but when my friends or coworkers and I talk hockey the rule is anything after the first ten of the second round is referred to as a "Hope Pick."
Click to expand...

That's a good perspective.

Really, by the time you get out of the top 15, maybe the top 20, you typically have guys who are missing one or more bigger pieces. Sometimes it's experience, it might strength and physical maturity, it might be skating, or IQ, or their shot, or some combination of those things.

The further you go, the number of question marks can increase, or the concerns grow a little, and that continues through the draft.

I tend to believe second rounders don't have the success rate they used to, because the draft has become a bit more frontloaded. But if you can find the occassional contributor, that's usually where you find your depth. I believe the ability to find talent in the second and third round can really be where the battle to become a contender is won.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband and HFsNumber1Heel
Edge said:
That's a good perspective.

Really, by the time you get out of the top 15, maybe the top 20, you typically have guys who are missing one or more bigger pieces. Sometimes it's experience, it might strength and physical maturity, it might be skating, or IQ, or their shot, or some combination of those things.

The further you go, the number of question marks can increase, or the concerns grow a little, and that continues through the draft.

I tend to believe second rounders don't have the success rate they used to, because the draft has become a bit more frontloaded. But if you can find the occassional contributor, that's usually where you find your depth. I believe the ability to find talent in the second and third round can really be where the battle to become a contender is won.
Click to expand...

Rangers win the Cup in 94 because they hit on a 1990 5th round comp pick from LaFleur going to Quebec who led their team in scoring and was on the ice for every important postseason moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom