I'd rather argue that there's only so much "hockey IQ" you can exhibit in 1 zone, going in 1 direction, compared to other players who exhibit the same "level of intelligence" going in both directions and in all zones on the ice. It's relative, not binary.
Okay, but here's the thing: Vlasic does show hockey IQ in the offensive zone. He makes lots of smart little plays that make a big difference, whether it's a good keep in or a set-up pass or a shot-pass or a purposeful rebound off the end boards to his teammate. They smart plays and they're functional, but they aren't particularly creative and Vlasic will never put up big point totals because he lacks that x-factor. As someone said, Crouse would be the ideal complimentary linemate to an elite scoring duo like Voracek and Giroux.
Take, for example, Melker Karlsson. Who? Exactly. 24 year old kid who came out of nowhere and is now sitting pretty on the Sharks top line with Joe Thornton and Joe Pavelski. He's not particularly talented and he won't stand out on his own, but he compliments them perfectly. He plays a smart effective game. He forechecks, he recovers the puck, he gets back on defense, he can participate in a strong cycle, and he can get shots on net. He doesn't need the puck to be effective, but his presence on the Thornton-Pavelski line is insanely important. The Sharks tried Hertl there, Nieto, Goodrow, everyone and their mother. But no one really fit until Karlsson, due to his well-rounded game, anticipation, puck management, the fact that he's an absolute puck-hound, and yes, his hockey IQ. Karlsson is a very smart player who gets to where he's needed and helps the play in all three zones. Creative? Not particularly. Effective? Absolutely.
That's the kind of player I see Crouse becoming. Either an elite third liner, or the perfect compliment to an elite scoring duo. Smart, quick, well-rounded. But you don't take that sort of player with a top-10 pick; Melker Karlsson was signed as an undrafted UFA out of Sweden at age 23.
Landeskog endured a lot of the same criticism during his draft year.
He strikes me as the type of player, that will himself to be better.
Really hope the Sens are able to land him.
I think there is a real off-chance of Crouse being a Landeskog type. They are similar players stylistically and you're right about there being a lot of the same criticisms. However, I would not take the chance that he will become a Landeskog. I wouldn't have taken the chance that Landeskog would become Landeskog. I think Crouse's ultimate upside is Landeskog, but I think there is only a small chance of him hitting it.
