Proposal: Lindholm and Rakell trade discussion thread for Anaheim.

[Vatican Roulette]

Too much risk with Despres. Boston doesn't own their 2nd. Bruins have been saving cap space for a bigger fish.

I know, the proposal was for NJ.

 

[Vipers31]

They were just drafted in the past two seasons. Their draft rankings and official ranking are relevant to the discussion. That's where they were seen within the last couple of years.

It's where they were seen by a few individual scouts, in their respective years, relative to their peers in those respective years. And we know how little these public pre-draft rankings tend to have in common with the rankings of NHL scouting staffs.

They both achieved top-6/top-4 production in pro leagues at comparable levels. Larsson's post+1 wasn't any more impressive than Kaps but even if you want to say it is, it's not by enough to do anything more than close the initial gap between the two.

There was no initial gap. The pre-draft rankings, if they had any value, at all, which they rather obviously do not, don't suggest one, given they weren't in the same class.

They are very much comparable in terms of value, upside and likeliness to reach their upside, which is what I've been arguing from the start.

And you're still wrong. In terms of value, upside, and likeliness. I'd make a poll for it, but I don't quite care enough to prove the obvious.

 

[Sojourn]

They were just drafted in the past two seasons. Their draft rankings and official ranking are relevant to the discussion. That's where they were seen within the last couple of years.

They both achieved top-6/top-4 production in pro leagues at comparable levels. Larsson's post+1 wasn't any more impressive than Kaps but even if you want to say it is, it's not by enough to do anything more than close the initial gap between the two.

They are very much comparable in terms of value, upside and likeliness to reach their upside, which is what I've been arguing from the start.

Yes, in different draft years. You keep trying to compare them directly, but their rankings are based off of different years. More than that, you seem to be looking at their pre-draft ranking as if it has some absolute value. That isn't really how it works. Those are suggestions, and opinions. That initial gap between the two is five spots, in a different draft year(which, in my opinion, is not all that relevant). It isn't the massive gap you keep suggesting it is.

And that's your opinion. Personally, I value Larsson's draft+1 season more highly, because as a young defenseman I feel it's harder to play against grown men, and it's absolutely harder to play well against grown men as a defenseman. Now, I'm not going to deny that this is my opinion, but you might also want to acknowledge that this is true from your side too. This is your opinion, and the point you keep bringing up to back up that opinion? Draft rankings. Not really the strongest argument, if you don't mind my saying. It's even worse because you seem to want to reinforce the actual pre-draft rankings, and not where Kapanen was actually taken.

I mean, using your logic, why isn't Hampus Lindholm a comparable for Kapanen? It's only two years from Kapanen's draft and Lindholm was projected to go lower than he was picked. Given the importance you seem to be giving the pre-draft rankings, a projected 10-20 pick in 2012 should be equivalent to a projected 10-20 pick in 2014, right?

 

[Magic Man]

Yes, in different draft years. You keep trying to compare them directly, but their rankings are based off of different years. More than that, you seem to be looking at their pre-draft ranking as if it has some absolute value. That isn't really how it works. Those are suggestions, and opinions. That initial gap between the two is five spots, in a different draft year(which, in my opinion, is not all that relevant). It isn't the massive gap you keep suggesting it is.

And that's your opinion. Personally, I value Larsson's draft+1 season more highly, because as a young defenseman I feel it's harder to play against grown men, and it's absolutely harder to play well against grown men as a defenseman. Now, I'm not going to deny that this is my opinion, but you might also want to acknowledge that this is true from your side too. This is your opinion, and the point you keep bringing up to back up that opinion? Draft rankings. Not really the strongest argument, if you don't mind my saying. It's even worse because you seem to want to reinforce the actual pre-draft rankings, and not where Kapanen was actually taken.

I mean, using your logic, why isn't Hampus Lindholm a comparable for Kapanen? It's only two years from Kapanen's draft and Lindholm was projected to go lower than he was picked. Given the importance you seem to be giving the pre-draft rankings, a projected 10-20 pick in 2012 should be equivalent to a projected 10-20 pick in 2014, right?

You can prefer to have an asset and still acknowledge they're of similar value to another.

In Lindholm's case he ended up being drafted comfortably in the top-10 and has developed into an actual top pairing dman. So, no I don't think that, which is why I initially offered Kapanen as 1 piece in a 4 piece deal in exchange for him in this very thread.

 

[Sojourn]

You can prefer to have an asset and still acknowledge they're of similar value to another.

In Lindholm's case he ended up being drafted comfortably in the top-10 and has developed into an actual top pairing dman. So, no I don't think that, which is why I initially offered Kapanen as 1 piece in a 4 piece deal in exchange for him in this very thread.

I didn't say you did. The point was that you're giving too much importance to pre-draft rankings, two years after the fact.

And I could acknowledge that, but I won't. I think Larsson has shown more since being drafted, and I think he has greater upside. Whether he hits it remains to be seen. Most prospects don't. But I see Larsson as having legitimate top pairing upside, and even if he doesn't hit that potential, I feel good about his chances of turning into a good, skilled top 4 defenseman. I value that ahead of Kapanen's potential.

Notice that the draft rankings don't factor into this for me. If they were re-drafted now, I'm pretty confident Larsson goes higher than he did. I'm not nearly as certain that would be true of Kapanen. Being a safer pick, as a forward, doesn't make him a superior pick. Further evidence: Shea Theodore. Let's apply your logic again. Shea Theodore was picked 26th overall. Does that mean Kapanen is equivalent to him too? He was picked earlier. It was a different draft, but that doesn't seem to matter.

 

[Magic Man]

I didn't say you did. The point was that you're giving too much importance to pre-draft rankings, two years after the fact.

And I could acknowledge that, but I won't. I think Larsson has shown more since being drafted, and I think he has greater upside. Whether he hits it remains to be seen. Most prospects don't. But I see Larsson as having legitimate top pairing upside, and even if he doesn't hit that potential, I feel good about his chances of turning into a good, skilled top 4 defenseman. I value that ahead of Kapanen's potential.

Notice that the draft rankings don't factor into this for me. If they were re-drafted now, I'm pretty confident Larsson goes higher than he did. I'm not nearly as certain that would be true of Kapanen. Being a safer pick, as a forward, doesn't make him a superior pick. Further evidence: Shea Theodore. Let's apply your logic again. Shea Theodore was picked 26th overall. Does that mean Kapanen is equivalent to him too? He was picked earlier. It was a different draft, but that doesn't seem to matter.

Do you think Larsson's post draft has been comparable to Theodore's destruction?

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Do you think Larsson's post draft has been comparable to Theodore's destruction?

Different routes... whl is much different from sweeedish league, at least if were comparing Larsson to Theodore at the same age.

 

[Magic Man]

Dermott and Nielsen drafted from the same draft as Larsson had excellent post-draft years as well. Dermott nudged #26 pick Noah Juulsen for a spot on team Canada and Nielsen nudged #17 pick Travis Sanheim for a WHL 1st team all-star spot and Sanheim was in his draft+2. Given what they accomplished they should be viewed as comparable prospects to Larsson, regardless of the fact he was drafted higher.

The Leafs actually ended up with Dermott because after their first move down they planned on Larsson, the Ducks picked him and the Leafs moved down again and got Dermott and Bracco out of it.

The point is Larsson wasn't the only prospect to have a good year last year. It didn't elevate his status to blue-chip status. He's an 'A' prospect the same way the names I listed are. Projecting a prospect with his history to the top pairing is over hyping and Ducks fans are clearly overvaluing him in this thread. He's far more likely to end up a middle pairing defender than a top pairing one.

 

[Vipers31]

Dermott and Nielsen drafted from the same draft as Larsson had excellent post-draft years as well. Dermott nudged #26 pick Noah Juulsen for a spot on team Canada and Nielsen nudged #17 pick Travis Sanheim for a WHL 1st team all-star spot and Sanheim was in his draft+2. Given what they accomplished they should be viewed as comparable prospects to Larsson, regardless of the fact he was drafted higher.

Why? Because they did better against kids relative to some other prospects that don't have anything to do with Larsson?

The point is Larsson wasn't the only prospect to have a good year last year.

Nobody said so.

It didn't elevate his status to blue-chip status. He's an 'A' prospect the same way the names I listed are.

Which doesn't matter. It isn't a two-dimensional world where there's a cutoff at some arbitrary "blue chip" line, where you get to classify everyone in the non-blue-chip category as equals.

Projecting a prospect with his history to the top pairing is over hyping and Ducks fans are clearly overvaluing him in this thread. He's far more likely to end up a middle pairing defender than a top pairing one.

We've been talking about ceiling, not mid-level projection. Mid-level projections for late 1st rounders would see them more likely to not be NHLers, at all. It's just not important to this discussion when comparing two specific prospects.

 

[Magic Man]

Why? Because they did better against kids relative to some other prospects that don't have anything to do with Larsson?


Nobody said so.


Which doesn't matter. It isn't a two-dimensional world where there's a cutoff at some arbitrary "blue chip" line, where you get to classify everyone in the non-blue-chip category as equals.


We've been talking about ceiling, not mid-level projection. Mid-level projections for late 1st rounders would see them more likely to not be NHLers, at all. It's just not important to this discussion when comparing two specific prospects.

Those prospects were drafted from the past 2 drafts, the ones I'm comparing the Leafs prospects to were drafted in the 1st round. Their success was being compared favourably to names that have been seen on the same tier or even higher than Larsson in the past couple years.

You were arguing that draft rankings and where they were selected were irrelevant and that players can improve their stock over short time frames. Well look no further than Dermott and Nielsen two dmen from the exact same draft. Who if we were to just look at last season directly out played some very impressive names.

 

[Vipers31]

Those prospects were drafted from the past 2 drafts, the ones I'm comparing the Leafs prospects to were drafted in the 1st round. Their success was being compared favourably to names that have been seen on the same tier or even higher than Larsson in the past couple years.

You were arguing that draft rankings and where they were selected were irrelevant and that players can improve their stock over short time frames. Well look no further than Dermott and Nielsen two dmen from the exact same draft. Who if we were to just look at last season directly out played some very impressive names.

Okay? They may well have improved their stock, but not at Larsson's level. One thing important to note is that the accomplishments you mentioned (earning spots on national or junior all star teams) speak to their ability and effectiveness as junior players against other junior players, which is far from equal to being better NHL prospects.

 

[Exit Dose]

Those prospects were drafted from the past 2 drafts, the ones I'm comparing the Leafs prospects to were drafted in the 1st round. Their success was being compared favourably to names that have been seen on the same tier or even higher than Larsson in the past couple years.

You were arguing that draft rankings and where they were selected were irrelevant and that players can improve their stock over short time frames. Well look no further than Dermott and Nielsen two dmen from the exact same draft. Who if we were to just look at last season directly out played some very impressive names.

Considering that Larsson looks like he may jump ahead of Theodore this year, and possibly even Montour, you might want to give it a rest and stop pretending like you know anything about this player beyond looking up his stats on EliteProspects. You already look foolish.

 

[Magic Man]

Okay? They may well have improved their stock, but not at Larsson's level. One thing important to note is that the accomplishments you mentioned (earning spots on national or junior all star teams) speak to their ability and effectiveness as junior players against other junior players, which is far from equal to being better NHL prospects.

That's fair, but it's not really based off of anything but your eye test, that is tainted by Ducks bias. Nothing he's done in comparison with his peers directly points to him having blown past all these guys.

 

[Vipers31]

That's fair, but it's not really based off of anything but your eye test, that is tainted by Ducks bias. Nothing he's done in comparison with his peers directly points to him having blown past all these guys.

Sure, he has done those things, just nothing you have seen or are willing to acknowledge. A guy like Craig Button, who sometimes has controversial ideas, but at least has a scout's process, obviously saw something as well to put him in his top-5. You're just failing to see it on eliteprospects. So, your dismissal doesn't hold any more water. You're free to go with your lack of belief, obviously.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Dermott and Nielsen drafted from the same draft as Larsson had excellent post-draft years as well. Dermott nudged #26 pick Noah Juulsen for a spot on team Canada and Nielsen nudged #17 pick Travis Sanheim for a WHL 1st team all-star spot and Sanheim was in his draft+2. Given what they accomplished they should be viewed as comparable prospects to Larsson, regardless of the fact he was drafted higher.

The Leafs actually ended up with Dermott because after their first move down they planned on Larsson, the Ducks picked him and the Leafs moved down again and got Dermott and Bracco out of it.

The point is Larsson wasn't the only prospect to have a good year last year. It didn't elevate his status to blue-chip status. He's an 'A' prospect the same way the names I listed are. Projecting a prospect with his history to the top pairing is over hyping and Ducks fans are clearly overvaluing him in this thread. He's far more likely to end up a middle pairing defender than a top pairing one.

i get it now
larsson isn't as good as a prospect, because he wasn't drafted by the leafs
why didn't you just say that to start, and save us all the time?

 

[KaseMeOutside]

That's fair, but it's not really based off of anything but your eye test, that is tainted by Ducks bias. Nothing he's done in comparison with his peers directly points to him having blown past all these guys.

because you have no leafs bias when you try to push your 2nd tier prospects on ducks fans claiming it's good value for a franchise dman

 

[snipes]

Not a Ducks fan, in fact I ****ing hate the Ducks.

Larsson >> Dermott

I don't think Dermott will ever even be an NHLer, not a fan of his game.

Love Nielsen though, watched him a fair amount in the WHL. Larsson has a higher ceiling, he's got legit top pairing potential. Nielsen is pretty much a guarantee to be a #5, possibly #4.

 

[Magic Man]

Sure, he has done those things, just nothing you have seen or are willing to acknowledge. A guy like Craig Button, who sometimes has controversial ideas, but at least has a scout's process, obviously saw something as well to put him in his top-5. You're just failing to see it on eliteprospects. So, your dismissal doesn't hold any more water. You're free to go with your lack of belief, obviously.

I'm sorry I use facts and accomplishments and the opinion of scouts and compare them with other similar level prospects in order to help formulate my opinion. Helps to eliminate bias and I'll admit I don't scout every team's obscure prospects and follow their European games. So, you'll have to excuse my ignorance. I'm sure you've seen all the Leafs prospects games.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

I'm sorry I use facts and accomplishments and the opinion of scouts and compare them with other similar level prospects in order to help formulate my opinion. Helps to eliminate bias and I'll admit I don't scout every team's obscure prospects and follow their European games. So, you'll have to excuse my ignorance. I'm sure you've seen all the Leafs prospects games.

Why would I watch the Leafs prospects when I can come to hfboards and have them jammed down my throat as greatest players ever

 

[Magic Man]

i get it now
larsson isn't as good as a prospect, because he wasn't drafted by the leafs
why didn't you just say that to start, and save us all the time?

Never once claimed he was a bad prospect. I've only ever said he was comparable to 'A' level top-10 prospects in the Leafs system, which is the league's strongest system presently.

because you have no leafs bias when you try to push your 2nd tier prospects on ducks fans claiming it's good value for a franchise dman

How much would you ask in return for an offer of Fowler (50%) + Larsson + Montour + Steel?

 

[Vipers31]

I'm sorry I use facts and accomplishments (...)

You don't really. You're handpicking them, using just as much bias as any eye-test can. If we're talking achievements, we don't just get past Larsson being a top-4 defender on a championship winning team in the 3rd best league in hockey. Yet, you're looking past that accomplishment to point out guys beating out other guys for junior all star team spots, and stuff like that. That stuff isn't more "factual" or more of an "accomplishment".

(...) and the opinion of scouts (...)

You're not really doing that, either. You're taking opinions of a few scouts from different years for specific drafts prior to those, and try to make cross-comparisions to other guys; that's not how it works. You haven't brought up a single scout that actually compares the guys we're talking about. Ironically, that's precisely what I did, which you have never addressed.

(...) and compare them with other similar level prospects in order to help formulate my opinion.

That process isn't a problem. It's how you attempt to compare guys playing junior hockey to kids playing pro hockey. Whether anyone is actually at a similar level is the question, not the result.

Helps to eliminate bias and I'll admit I don't scout every team's obscure prospects and follow their European games. So, you'll have to excuse my ignorance. I'm sure you've seen all the Leafs prospects games.

Here's the difference - you say two guys are comparable. I say I disagree. You say he has done nothing. I say I disagree and point to a number of things. You - foolishly - try to hold up your unnecssarily absolute claim of "has done nothing" until you get to the point where you have to acknowledge that you have no idea what he has actually done beyond the boxscores. I'm not putting my head out so far that I lose my balance that easily.

 

[Magic Man]

You don't really. You're handpicking them, using just as much bias as any eye-test can. If we're talking achievements, we don't just get past Larsson being a top-4 defender on a championship winning team in the 3rd best league in hockey. Yet, you're looking past that accomplishment to point out guys beating out other guys for junior all star team spots, and stuff like that. That stuff isn't more "factual" or more of an "accomplishment".


You're not really doing that, either. You're taking opinions of a few scouts from different years for specific drafts prior to those, and try to make cross-comparisions to other guys; that's not how it works. You haven't brought up a single scout that actually compares the guys we're talking about. Ironically, that's precisely what I did, which you have never addressed.


That process isn't a problem. It's how you attempt to compare guys playing junior hockey to kids playing pro hockey. Whether anyone is actually at a similar level is the question, not the result.


Here's the difference - you say two guys are comparable. I say I disagree. You say he has done nothing. I say I disagree and point to a number of things. You - foolishly - try to hold up your unnecssarily absolute claim of "has done nothing" until you get to the point where you have to acknowledge that you have no idea what he has actually done beyond the boxscores. I'm not putting my head out so far that I lose my balance that easily.

In Larsson's case he was awarded an opportunity that Dermott and Nielsen will never have the chance to do. That's play in the SHL. I've never dismissed the fact that Larsson played at a top-4 level in a pro league. I repeatedly stated it in comparison with Kapanen.

I'm sure GM's around the league don't hold it against say Travis Sanheim for example and value him less because he didn't come from Sweden and get a chance to play in the SHL. Their accomplishments in junior are against their peers they've been directly compared to over the years. Their success in doing so against those other highly valued defenders should be equally as noted. Surely you wouldn't value a guy like Larsson over Provorov simply because he played in the SHL.

I do see that Button values him highly. That's a good example. I was comparing scouting rankings/draft position etc. with the Kapanen comparison which required the opinions of numerous scouts. Dermott was selected for a team that was very hard to make which reflected his stock. Likewise, Nielsen getting recognized over some significant defenders in the WHL for 1st team all-star does the same.

 

[Vipers31]

I'm sure GM's around the league don't hold it against say Travis Sanheim for example and value him less because he didn't come from Sweden and get a chance to play in the SHL. Their accomplishments in junior are against their peers they've been directly compared to over the years. Their success in doing so against those other highly valued defenders should be equally as noted. Surely you wouldn't value a guy like Larsson over Provorov simply because he played in the SHL.

No, it should not be "equally" as noted. There's zero reason for it to be "equally" noted. There's zero basis for it to be considered equal. It's not the end-all-be-all, as your extreme Provorov example rightfully illustrates, but there's plenty of room between that and just calling it equal because it's the comfortable thing to say.

I do see that Button values him highly. That's a good example. I was comparing scouting rankings/draft position etc. with the Kapanen comparison which required the opinions of numerous scouts.

Again: you were taking opinions of numerous scouts, from different years, prior to drafts, and merely attempting to infer who they possibly liked better between two guys they never actually compared, let alone having a chance to consider how those opinions developed since those pre-draft rankings. That process just can't produce valuable evidence by design.

Dermott was selected for a team that was very hard to make which reflected his stock. Likewise, Nielsen getting recognized over some significant defenders in the WHL for 1st team all-star does the same.

And another "again": I'm not debating those guys can't have seen their stocks rise. But these are junior players selected to play on teams playing against junior players; that doesn't reflect their stocks as NHL prospects. Guys like Andrew Mangiapane or Spencer Watson, just to name two, are fantastic junior players and much better than many of their peers at that, without being nearly the NHL prospects those peers may be. That relative effectiveness as junior players just isn't too meaningful, and isn't equal to proving effectiveness on the next levels as pros.

 

[Magic Man]

No, it should not be "equally" as noted. There's zero reason for it to be "equally" noted. There's zero basis for it to be considered equal. It's not the end-all-be-all, as your extreme Provorov example rightfully illustrates, but there's plenty of room between that and just calling it equal because it's the comfortable thing to say.


Again: you were taking opinions of numerous scouts, from different years, prior to drafts, and merely attempting to infer who they possibly liked better between two guys they never actually compared, let alone having a chance to consider how those opinions developed since those pre-draft rankings. That process just can't produce valuable evidence by design.


And another "again": I'm not debating those guys can't have seen their stocks rise. But these are junior players selected to play on teams playing against junior players; that doesn't reflect their stocks as NHL prospects. Guys like Andrew Mangiapane or Spencer Watson, just to name two, are fantastic junior players and much better than many of their peers at that, without being nearly the NHL prospects those peers may be. That relative effectiveness as junior players just isn't too meaningful, and isn't equal to proving effectiveness on the next levels as pros.

Nielsen was a 1st team all-star along with Provorov. Ahead of Sanheim and Juulsen. He was 2nd in scoring only to Provorov. If Provorov is an extreme example, because he is a top-10 drafted actual blue chip prospect. What more could anyone down the draft list have done to prove their worth in junior hockey in order to put themselves on someone's level who was allowed to play pro hockey in the SHL? Really what you're saying is he kind of gets to be ranked higher regardless of skill level because of the league he stumbled into by being born in Sweden.

 

[Vipers31]

Nielsen was a 1st team all-star along with Provorov.

Again (and the frequency with which I have to use that word is alarming): it's a junior all star team. I literally just explained the issue with the meaning of that.

If Provorov is an extreme example, because he is a top-10 drafted actual blue chip prospect. What more could anyone down the draft list have done to prove their worth in junior hockey in order to put themselves on someone's level who was allowed to play pro hockey in the SHL?

Why do you feel there has to be a way for him to do accomplish that? On some level, for prospects looking to prove what they are as prospects for a future at the professional level, there's nothing at the junior level to match pro effectiveness.

Really what you're saying is he kind of gets to be ranked higher regardless of skill level because of the league he stumbled into by being born in Sweden.

No, not "regardless of skill". Precisely because of the skill displayed, which you just have a hard time to make out given the different competition. Just like Nielsen doesn't "get to" play professionally against grown men and be effective, Larsson doesn't get to feast on kids to put up big time numbers. It's nice for Nielsen to leapfrog the likes of Juulsen. That doesn't have anything to do with Larsson. When he stepped down to that level in the junior tournaments this summer, you could have an idea what the viewers and scouts walked away with. And if Nielsen is starting to effectively challenge guys like Provorov, Theodore or Sanheim for actual NHL jobs, you'll get to adequately note that as an accomplishment of his.