LW Lawson Crouse - Kingston Frontenacs, OHL (2015 Draft)

[Sidney the Kidney]

In case the stat watchers were curious:

A 2 goal effort and first star honors for Crouse in Kingston's OT win tonight. That makes 2 first star honors and 1 third star honor in 5 games since his return from the WJC. He's also got 4 goals and 3 assists in those 5 games. He's now up to 16 goals in 29 games (a 38 goal pace over a full season).

Record-wise, Kingston went 3-6-2 with Crouse out of the lineup in December/early January, but are 3-1-1 since his return.

 

[sharks9]

In case the stat watchers were curious:

A 2 goal effort and first star honors for Crouse in Kingston's OT win tonight. That makes 2 first star honors and 1 third star honor in 5 games since his return from the WJC. He's also got 4 goals and 3 assists in those 5 games. He's now up to 16 goals in 29 games (a 38 goal pace over a full season).

Record-wise, Kingston went 3-6-2 with Crouse out of the lineup in December/early January, but are 3-1-1 since his return.

I was at the game last night and he was easily the best player out of both teams! His 1st goal was a snipe on the short side and his second was a nice deke on a partial breakaway. Niagara was the better team and Kingston wouldn't have even gotten to OT if it wasn't for Krouse.

 

[Hockeypete49]

In case the stat watchers were curious:

A 2 goal effort and first star honors for Crouse in Kingston's OT win tonight. That makes 2 first star honors and 1 third star honor in 5 games since his return from the WJC. He's also got 4 goals and 3 assists in those 5 games. He's now up to 16 goals in 29 games (a 38 goal pace over a full season).

Record-wise, Kingston went 3-6-2 with Crouse out of the lineup in December/early January, but are 3-1-1 since his return.

He is one of the prospects I hope the Flyers have interest in. He fits just what they need, and I feel at 6 to 10 where I think they select he will be available.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

I don't mean this to slag Crouse at all and I find him to be a very intriguing prospect and a guy that I'd love to see in an Oilers jersey. My question is how does he compare to Benoit Pouliot at the same age? Now before people get up in arms IMO Pouliot has been exceptional for the Oilers this season in spite of not living up to his potential/draft number to this point in his career. He has been a great compliment to our young wingers and RNH when they've played together. How would you compare their speed, skill, and physicality in their draft years in the OHL?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I don't mean this to slag Crouse at all and I find him to be a very intriguing prospect and a guy that I'd love to see in an Oilers jersey. My question is how does he compare to Benoit Pouliot at the same age? Now before people get up in arms IMO Pouliot has been exceptional for the Oilers this season in spite of not living up to his potential/draft number to this point in his career. He has been a great compliment to our young wingers and RNH when they've played together. How would you compare their speed, skill, and physicality in their draft years in the OHL?

Bad comparison for two reasons (though both reasons contribute to even more reasons).

1-Pouliot was inconsistent as hell. One game he'd dominate, the next you wondered who that guy was who was floating around not really trying. Crouse is a hard worker. Crouse may not score every night, but it's a true rarity when Crouse can be accused of floating or looking lazy.

2-Pouliot's hockey sense was always questioned. He was the epitome of the guy with all the tools, but questions about his toolbox. Crouse has pretty good hockey sense, which helps when physical ability alone won't cut it at the next level.

If Pouliot had Crouse's work ethic and hockey sense, he'd probably be closer to Corey Perry than what he actually became. Great hands, wicked shot, and a good skater and physical package. He simply didn't have the brain or desire to go along with those physical tools.

 

[Fourier]

Bad comparison for two reasons (though both reasons contribute to even more reasons).

1-Pouliot was inconsistent as hell. One game he'd dominate, the next you wondered who that guy was who was floating around not really trying. Crouse is a hard worker. Crouse may not score every night, but it's a true rarity when Crouse can be accused of floating or looking lazy.

2-Pouliot's hockey sense was always questioned. He was the epitome of the guy with all the tools, but questions about his toolbox. Crouse has pretty good hockey sense, which helps when physical ability alone won't cut it at the next level.

If Pouliot had Crouse's work ethic and hockey sense, he'd probably be closer to Corey Perry than what he actually became. Great hands, wicked shot, and a good skater and physical package. He simply didn't have the brain or desire to go along with those physical tools.

As Bryan said, Pouliot has been excellent this year for the Oilers. His work ethic has been stellar. I actually agree though that his hockey sense is not up to snuff with the rest of his skills. It has taken Pouliot a few years to recognize that to have the career he seems to desire he has to play with much more emotion and put out a consistent effort. If Crouse can top Pouliot at his best he will be a terrific player because eat his best Pouliot can be a handful.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

As Bryan said, Pouliot has been excellent this year for the Oilers. His work ethic has been stellar. I actually agree though that his hockey sense is not up to snuff with the rest of his skills. It has taken Pouliot a few years to recognize that to have the career he seems to desire he has to play with much more emotion and put out a consistent effort. If Crouse can top Pouliot at his best he will be a terrific player because eat his best Pouliot can be a handful.

I was referring to Pouliot's work ethic in junior, as I thought the question was about how they compared at the same age (ie. their draft years). At the same age (17 going on 18), work ethic and hockey sense were two things working against Pouliot that aren't working against Crouse.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

Bad comparison for two reasons (though both reasons contribute to even more reasons).

1-Pouliot was inconsistent as hell. One game he'd dominate, the next you wondered who that guy was who was floating around not really trying. Crouse is a hard worker. Crouse may not score every night, but it's a true rarity when Crouse can be accused of floating or looking lazy.

2-Pouliot's hockey sense was always questioned. He was the epitome of the guy with all the tools, but questions about his toolbox. Crouse has pretty good hockey sense, which helps when physical ability alone won't cut it at the next level.

If Pouliot had Crouse's work ethic and hockey sense, he'd probably be closer to Corey Perry than what he actually became. Great hands, wicked shot, and a good skater and physical package. He simply didn't have the brain or desire to go along with those physical tools.

I was referring to Pouliot's work ethic in junior, as I thought the question was about how they compared at the same age (ie. their draft years). At the same age (17 going on 18), work ethic and hockey sense were two things working against Pouliot that aren't working against Crouse.

Thank you very much for the insight. How physical is he? He sounds like a great fit for the Oilers IMO.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Thank you very much for the insight. How physical is he? He sounds like a great fit for the Oilers IMO.

He's strong along the boards and good at cycling the puck, will constantly drive to the net when carrying the puck and has the ability to fend off defenders when going there, and he'll finish his checks when the opportunity is there but won't go running everything in sight. He'll fight, too, and can handle himself quite well.

I truly believe the biggest thing that's keeping him from really tearing it up this season is the lack of a playmaking center on his line. He goes to the front of the net/slot area all the time, but no one on his line can get him the puck when he's parked in front. And he'll drive the net, but often times it's on a self-created play where he just carries the puck in over the blueline in a 1 on 1 situation and powers his way to the net. No one is capable of consistently carrying the puck over the blueline and hitting Crouse in stride as he drives to the net without the puck.

I think people will be surprised with how good he is in front of the net when he plays with actual talent that can make use of him going to the net. He's got a quick release, and he's got good hands to stickhandle in close.

 

[West]

You suspect wrong, then. I've followed junior players since the late 80s. I remember distinctly Malhotra's draft year, and seeing (not just looking at his stats, but watching him on the ice) a guy with limited offense, but who had a mature defensive game. That's a lot different than what I see in Crouse. I see a guy who does possess a good offensive game to go along with his other strengths.

Keep in mind also with regard to their respective production, Malhotra played on a pretty strong Storm team. Yet he still couldn't produce much. Crouse plays on a really bad offensive club in Kingston, but is still on pace for 30+ goals this year. You simply can't ignore the team they play on and the support around them when comparing players.

That was either very insightful or hindsight, I had alot more free time back then to watch players and despite his low point totals thought he was pretty impressive especially in play-offs and ok in WJC. Given where he went in the draft I'd say this is a reasonably valid assessment at the time.

As for teams I'd say to a large degree going "look at his teammates" is only a valid opinion for guy's like Sean Monahan who are the highest scorers on bad teams by like 20+ pts. As far as Malhotra goes I could just as easily say look how well he produced even though he was on a deep team and didn't get all the prime scoring opportunities.

That's something that should be kept in mind when comparing Crouse to guys like Strome and Marner, too. How much different would their offensive productions be if it were Crouse who were on McDavid's line and playing top PP with McDavid? Would Crouse still have only 20 points in 27 games if he was playing with Max Domi?

The above isn't to discount what Marner and Strome are doing -- they're not passengers by any means, but just that it's easier to put up numbers when you play with other talented players.

Again only from watching him at WJC I'd honestly have to say noticeably better point totals but I would also say Marner and Strome would likely easily be the highest scores on the Kingston team. To be honest what you like about him is what I dislike, he reminds me of players like Jack Skille and Jake Virtanen who have size and speed but only seem to be able to drive the net (yes I know way to soon to say anything one way or the other about Virtanen).

Honestly I'm interested in watching him at the Top Prospects game but likely won't see him or change my mind till then. From the very little I know I wouldn't pick him until 15-30 range. He'll probably end up better than half the guy's who go 1-15 but I doubt he has the upside of the other half,

 

[sniper81]

That was either very insightful or hindsight, I had alot more free time back then to watch players and despite his low point totals thought he was pretty impressive especially in play-offs and ok in WJC. Given where he went in the draft I'd say this is a reasonably valid assessment at the time.

As for teams I'd say to a large degree going "look at his teammates" is only a valid opinion for guy's like Sean Monahan who are the highest scorers on bad teams by like 20+ pts. As far as Malhotra goes I could just as easily say look how well he produced even though he was on a deep team and didn't get all the prime scoring opportunities.



Again only from watching him at WJC I'd honestly have to say noticeably better point totals but I would also say Marner and Strome would likely easily be the highest scores on the Kingston team. To be honest what you like about him is what I dislike, he reminds me of players like Jack Skille and Jake Virtanen who have size and speed but only seem to be able to drive the net (yes I know way to soon to say anything one way or the other about Virtanen).

Honestly I'm interested in watching him at the Top Prospects game but likely won't see him or change my mind till then. From the very little I know I wouldn't pick him until 15-30 range. He'll probably end up better than half the guy's who go 1-15 but I doubt he has the upside of the other half,

This was a very well thought out post so I don't want you to think I'm attacking you, that's a very valid opinion. People who have watched and followed this guy absolutely love what he brings game in and game out and stick up for him. Most of the people that don't like his game haven't actually watched him play more than a couple times.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

Quick question - can someone point up an instance of a forward putting up sub .80 PPG in juniors getting drafted in the high first round and succeeding?

Players like Lucic are the exception. Guys like Ashton, Beach and Gillies are far more common place.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

As for teams I'd say to a large degree going "look at his teammates" is only a valid opinion for guy's like Sean Monahan who are the highest scorers on bad teams by like 20+ pts. As far as Malhotra goes I could just as easily say look how well he produced even though he was on a deep team and didn't get all the prime scoring opportunities.

The thing you have to keep in mind is the type of player he is. He's more of a goal scorer who earns his points by driving to the net and finishing off plays around the slot area/crease area. He's not going to generate a tonne of assists to boost his point totals, because a]his game is geared more to being the finisher on a line and b]because he doesn't have any natural goal scorers on his line that can put the puck away when he does set them up.

Again only from watching him at WJC I'd honestly have to say noticeably better point totals but I would also say Marner and Strome would likely easily be the highest scores on the Kingston team. To be honest what you like about him is what I dislike, he reminds me of players like Jack Skille and Jake Virtanen who have size and speed but only seem to be able to drive the net (yes I know way to soon to say anything one way or the other about Virtanen).

Honestly I'm interested in watching him at the Top Prospects game but likely won't see him or change my mind till then. From the very little I know I wouldn't pick him until 15-30 range. He'll probably end up better than half the guy's who go 1-15 but I doubt he has the upside of the other half,

Is the bolded the extent of your viewings of him? I'm honestly curious, because if it is then you're naturally not going to see much "offensive upside" in him based on the role he was used in there. It's like judging a European prospect on his point totals in the SEL, but ignoring the fact he only plays on the 4th line for his club. Context is needed.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Quick question - can someone point up an instance of a forward putting up sub .80 PPG in juniors getting drafted in the high first round and succeeding?

Players like Lucic are the exception. Guys like Ashton, Beach and Gillies are far more common place.

I think with a guy like Crouse, you have to focus on his goal scoring. That's going to be his strength at the next level. He's never going to win the Art Ross by racking up 60+ assists. Which is why I think focusing on overall point totals does him a discredit.

In any case, a guy who put up similar totals (with a heavy leaning on goals and low assist totals) and was drafted high is Nino Niederreiter. In his draft year, he had 36 goals and only 24 assists. Crouse's goal totals will be similar, with his assist totals likely falling a bit lower than that.

Another prospect who is high on everyone's list at the moment because of how he broke out is Anthony Mantha. He had a late birthdate so he wasn't drafted after his 17 year old season, but at the same age Crouse is right now (17 going on 18), Mantha put up 22 goals and 51 points in 63 games. He blossomed the following year with his 50 goal, 89 point season. But if people wrote him off after "just 22 goals and 51 points in 63 games", they'd have ignored the toolset he had and focused on just his point totals.

A guy I've compared Crouse's NHL upside to is Andrew Ladd. Now while Ladd put up over a point per game in his draft season, strangely enough he put up *worse* numbers than Crouse is on pace for in his post-draft year. Ladd followed up a decent draft year of 75 points with only 19 goals and 45 points the next year. So people who focused entirely on stats might see that and think he was going to bust because of how his stats "regressed". But that's why you have to evaluate the player's skillset, not his point total. Ladd didn't "lose ability". The points -- for whatever reason -- just weren't there.

I know you specifically mentioned the .8 PPG mark, but players producing under a point per game in their draft year have gone on to become top end NHLers. Two obvious examples being Ryan Getzlaf (68 points in 70 games) and Ryan Johansen (69 points in 71 games), as well as the guys I listed above.

 

[West]

The thing you have to keep in mind is the type of player he is. He's more of a goal scorer who earns his points by driving to the net and finishing off plays around the slot area/crease area. He's not going to generate a tonne of assists to boost his point totals, because a]his game is geared more to being the finisher on a line and b]because he doesn't have any natural goal scorers on his line that can put the puck away when he does set them up.

Personally I consider most of what you say here about his offensive game big red flags. Like I said before not my style of player (let's agree to disagree here). Style of play wise I can see issues with the Malhotra comparison but for what they've accomplished at nearly the same ages I see a lot of similarities.

Is the bolded the extent of your viewings of him? I'm honestly curious, because if it is then you're naturally not going to see much "offensive upside" in him based on the role he was used in there. It's like judging a European prospect on his point totals in the SEL, but ignoring the fact he only plays on the 4th line for his club. Context is needed.

Yes, tried to be pretty up front about that (work/family pretty much kills my time these days). Been around long enough to know he'd have pretty limited play at WJC and what an achievement it is to make the team but tried to pay attention to him specifically.

Seeing what he does at Top Prospects game will be really interesting. Right now he'd need to surprise me. Looking more at Malhotra's career again I'm softening on him a little but would still say he's a 10-20 range player for me. He is a very safe player to make the NHL and a very easy player to screw up his offensive development (see below, and above).

Now to completely derail this thread ...

Looking back surfing the net and from distant memory and the very little I've seen of Crouse I'd take Malhotra over him pretty easily. IMO Rangers completely @#%$!@$ up his career by keeping him up and playing him an 8:36, 6:41, 9:03 minutes/game in his first 3 years after his draft.

I really really wonder what would have happened if they either gave him playing time or sent him back to OHL. To be 100% fair Malhotra was to big strong fast and defensively sound to truly be challenged in OHL but he might have developed his scoring touch more and playing 4th line in NHL did little to develop his game.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

In any case, a guy who put up similar totals (with a heavy leaning on goals and low assist totals) and was drafted high is Nino Niederreiter. In his draft year, he had 36 goals and only 24 assists. Crouse's goal totals will be similar, with his assist totals likely falling a bit lower than that.

Another prospect who is high on everyone's list at the moment because of how he broke out is Anthony Mantha. He had a late birthdate so he wasn't drafted after his 17 year old season, but at the same age Crouse is right now (17 going on 18), Mantha put up 22 goals and 51 points in 63 games. He blossomed the following year with his 50 goal, 89 point season. But if people wrote him off after "just 22 goals and 51 points in 63 games", they'd have ignored the toolset he had and focused on just his point totals.

...

I know you specifically mentioned the .8 PPG mark, but players producing under a point per game in their draft year have gone on to become top end NHLers. Two obvious examples being Ryan Getzlaf (68 points in 70 games) and Ryan Johansen (69 points in 71 games), as well as the guys I listed above.

All four names in bold here are (and were) more talented, more creative, better skaters, and better shooters than Crouse, which will obviously make the biggest difference at the NHL level.

And for someone who goes on about the laments of box score scouting, you seem to want us to draw all kinds of inferences from Crouse's box scores compared to those of other players.

 

[Gritty]

All four names in bold here are (and were) more talented, more creative, better skaters, and better shooters than Crouse, which will obviously make the biggest difference at the NHL level.

And for someone who goes on about the laments of box score scouting, you seem to want us to draw all kinds of inferences from Crouse's box scores compared to those of other players.

Getzlaf was not a better skater than Crouse in junior... Getzlaf's biggest post draft weakness was his skating.

 

[capfit9]

I see Chad Kilger

 

[West]

Getzlaf was not a better skater than Crouse in junior... Getzlaf's biggest post draft weakness was his skating.

Back in the day they used to post skills times from Top Prospect events. Getzlaf posted noticeably above average in each event. His issue was that he didn't always go all out and it showed (Spezza was like this also) but he was is a very good skater.

Also don't think anyone can say Crouse's skating is anything but above average and not above average for a big guy just plain good. I don't think skating would go to one guy or the other by a wide margin.

p.s. Also Chad Kilger apparently was crazy fast and routinely posted very well in team skating events.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Getzlaf was not a better skater than Crouse in junior... Getzlaf's biggest post draft weakness was his skating.

And he was still a better skater than Crouse, though he might not have looked it skating next to a fantastic skater for a big man in Carter back in the day. He, in particular, also came with a much better reputation for making those around him better, as opposed to just being the most productive part of his line, and skating wasn't even in the top 3 things people talked about when Getzlaf's talent was brought up anyway.

 

[capfit9]

Getzlaf was not a better skater than Crouse in junior... Getzlaf's biggest post draft weakness was his skating.

Actually I believe the weakness/issue with Getzlaf were more to do with his attitude and motor more than anything

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I see Chad Kilger

Probably a more realistic expectation in terms of potential NHL impact. Definitely displayed great speed for a big man.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

All four names in bold here are (and were) more talented, more creative, better skaters, and better shooters than Crouse, which will obviously make the biggest difference at the NHL level.

Those guys were not better skaters than Crouse. I'm not sure how often you've seen Crouse live (or those other guys) to come to this conclusion. And guys like Ladd and Niederreiter were not "more creative" than Crouse. Again, I don't think you've seen Crouse play much based on your assessment of his game.

And for someone who goes on about the laments of box score scouting, you seem to want us to draw all kinds of inferences from Crouse's box scores compared to those of other players.

Context? The poster asked for a list of guys with lower than a point per game in their draft year. How am I supposed to answer that type of question without pointing out point totals to compare to him?

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

It's an interesting discussion, and one that has taken place in one form or another on these boards for the last 15 years.

In the end, Crouse seems like a low risk player with some decent upside to be a key player in a contender's top 6. There isn't much not to like about the kid or what he brings to the table. I've seen him play a handful of games in the OHL and liked what I saw, although I was never wowed.

The main argument being posed here seems to be does he have scoring line upside, and I certainly see it, albeit more of a role player on a scoring line. He gets you 20-25 goals per year while bringing a lot more to the table than scoring. But being a top 6 player is very different from being an elite scoring line center, and it's a fine line between a role player on a scoring line, to a checker. Some players bounce back and forth for their careers

If I have a top 10 pick in this draft, there are likely a few forwards I put ahead of him in terms of a sheer impact player who can be the central figure on a scoring line. The Stanley Cup winning formula is pretty consistently about having two top end forwards (typically centers) and when you have a lottery pick, especially in a draft like this, you don't pass on guys with that type of upside. Marner certainly has it, and I'd say Strome does to, so I can't see passing on either of those guys for Crouse. I think there is a third tier of forwards with a bunch of guys, including Crouse, but also including Merkley, Rantanen, Barzal, Zacha, Connor and Konecny.

Even the most top scouts will differ on how to rank that group, so there are no right answers.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Those guys were not better skaters than Crouse.

Says Crouse's #1 white knight in this thread.

I'm not sure how often you've seen Crouse live (or those other guys) to come to this conclusion. And guys like Ladd and Niederreiter were not "more creative" than Crouse. Again, I don't think you've seen Crouse play much based on your assessment of his game.

Don't know how you got Ladd chucked in there, but I've seen more than enough of all these guys to be comfortable in my assessment(s) for now. I pay much more attention to how they play, contribute, and get around the ice than their actual numbers, and I don't typically need a half season's worth of video to pick out flaws and strengths in players. Things change, players surprise/disappoint in the end, but Crouse is entirely unimpressive to me at this time. Seems like a complimentary player that you'd surround a "star" with, or maybe fill out a bottom 6 with; not a star than you'd find complimentary players for. And I think there are enough potential stars to be had before committing to a pick like Crouse anywhere near the top end of the first round. Most draft ranking services seem to disagree, so we'll see.

The guy who brought up Kilger is bang on - not as a comprehensive skill set comparison mind you, but in terms of what kind of reach it would be to take a guy like Crouse as high as 3rd or 4th, and what it is about the player(s) that sucks teams into claiming them that quickly (projecting size and skill to have a similar/greater impact at the NHL level after junior).

Context? The poster asked for a list of guys with lower than a point per game in their draft year. How am I supposed to answer that type of question without pointing out point totals to compare to him?

You ask that like it's the only side conversation here where you've addressed his numbers at length.