LW Lawson Crouse - Kingston Frontenacs, OHL (2015 Draft)
- Thread starter Woodhouse
- Start date
Ritchie also had an extra year in the OHL under his belt. Their goal scoring rates actually aren't that far off in their draft years, Ritchie's was better but he was also on a team that was half decent at scoring, Kingston is brutal. Crouse making Team Canada and playing well will also help his cause. Him being picked in the 10-15 range seems acceptable to me.
No. The comparisons to Matt Cooke on the previous page speak to preconceived ideas.
I really wouldn't say you brought anything special to thread either. Just sarcastic comments.
Either way there are reasonable people posting and those who seem to hate him because of his rankings. Seems lame but oh well.
Crouse is a good prospect, will definitely go top 12 imo. I think people just don't get why a prospect with so-so numbers is being projected by some scouts to go top-5 or even top 3, thus start finding ways to hate on him.
It's not just people stat watching. There are a quite a few people such as myself that watch him and don't see the elite potential that other people see and rank him top 5.
lawrence
Registered User
- May 19, 2012
- 16,742
- 7,664
so we are "hating" on the kid that is ranked highly by real scouts? that's a little far fetched, and extremely uncalled for. I know people will "disagree" with some rankings, which is totally fine but to totally hate someone for something out of his control? Disgusting. People seem to be losing sleep over the Lawson Crouse ranking who the hell really cares were are they ranked for crying out loud, it's not about stats, look at Horvats stats at draft year. Stats don't mean everything and anything, his stats were also based off playing on a very very good londing, and he only so/so stats? yea? stats mean everything to you? he's 19 and one of the best Canucks right now? Does stats truly mean everything?
If they "don't get why" a prospect with so so numbers is being projected so high then stay out of it! simple as that.! their not scouts, the lists are usually compiled by a team of scouts whois seen each player live at least 6 times (if it's a highly ranked player), and ****.
Random Forest
Registered User
- May 12, 2010
- 14,638
- 1,334
The problem I have with his ranking is that it's often justified by "how often do you see a guy with this skill set?!" as if that inherently makes him more valuable than another, perhaps more talented player.
Sure, Crouse could be a phenomenal, do-everything first line, goal scoring winger. He could also be Eric Fehr (who, imo, is the closest NHL comparable). Or he could still be less. Having "the complete package" is no guarantee of anything, and I constantly see people suggest that his toolbox is what makes him so much more appealing than other players near the top of the draft.
I just don't buy that line of reasoning. I like Crouse, but hockey folks tend to get carried away by things that "epitomize" hockey. Crouse is your prototypical hockey player. That alone does not make him better than another player, though. At the end of the day, effectiveness matters. In terms of skill sets, Eric Fehr is a more rare hockey player than Jiri Hudler, for example, but there's no question who the better player is. I find that too many people are getting carried away by the rarity of the skill set rather than the actual on-ice ability.
Sure, Crouse could be a phenomenal, do-everything first line, goal scoring winger. He could also be Eric Fehr (who, imo, is the closest NHL comparable). Or he could still be less. Having "the complete package" is no guarantee of anything, and I constantly see people suggest that his toolbox is what makes him so much more appealing than other players near the top of the draft.
I just don't buy that line of reasoning. I like Crouse, but hockey folks tend to get carried away by things that "epitomize" hockey. Crouse is your prototypical hockey player. That alone does not make him better than another player, though. At the end of the day, effectiveness matters. In terms of skill sets, Eric Fehr is a more rare hockey player than Jiri Hudler, for example, but there's no question who the better player is. I find that too many people are getting carried away by the rarity of the skill set rather than the actual on-ice ability.
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 56,941
- 49,670
Well, you sort of called it. The night he goes pointless against Ottawa and has a bad game, his detractors come out in droves. Funny that I didn't notice any of them posting when Crouse was producing before this weekend.
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 56,941
- 49,670
Really, that's my biggest issue. 99% of the "haters" don't even bother to explain what it is about his actual game they don't like. They'll either just post random one sentence sarcastic remarks about him not producing on a given night, or a generic "I just don't see the offensive upside" without actually pointing out things he does badly that will prevent him from ever being an offensive force.
I don't mind a discussion about Crouse's game. Problem is I'm not really seeing that from the majority of his detractors here.
McDNicks17
Moderator
I think you hit the nail on the head.
He's definitely one of the best "big men" coming into the draft in awhile, but I don't think he belongs in the conversation with Marner/Strome and I don't think that should put him there.
Pretty much. The only reason people have anything negative to say about Crouse is in the context of him being in the top 5 ahead of Hanifin, Strome and Marner. It's in that context that people have questions about his game.
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 56,941
- 49,670
I don't buy that, at least not for everyone who posts negatively about him. I've seen comments to the effect of him having no more than 3rd line NHL potential, or that they wouldn't draft him anywhere except late in the 1st round. That's far and beyond simply having an issue with him going ahead of the three guys you mentioned.
WilliamNylander
Papi's home
- Jul 26, 2012
- 12,896
- 2,608
Seems like a Burke/Nonis type pick. Safe but low ceiling.
Hopefully Shannahan/Hunter avoid him with our 1st. Wouldn't be opposed to taking him with the NSH 1st if he's still on the board.
Hopefully Shannahan/Hunter avoid him with our 1st. Wouldn't be opposed to taking him with the NSH 1st if he's still on the board.
- Apr 27, 2005
- 36,512
- 36,860
He's nothing like Eric Fehr. Like nothing.
I don't know where that even comes from. Because he's 6'3".
Eric Fehr was always a one way shooter.
That isn't Crouse's game so other than the lazy comparison. I'll engage you.
Nichushkin and Virtanen are recent examples or players selected based on their rare skill/size/speed combos.
I'd say there are less players like these types in the league than those who are 5'10" and known for their hands and agility.
Now crouse isn't really like either of these guys from my viewings. He has some board work like nichushkin but he's a grittier player but IMO his hockey sense and attention to detail on all fazes is at a higher level than both these guys.
He's a helluva goal scorer. Something that very few like to offer credit for. I guess this is where your Fehr comp comes into it. Still don't like that comp at all.
Random Forest
Registered User
- May 12, 2010
- 14,638
- 1,334
Eric Fehr is big, solid defensively, physical, a strong-skater, and a goal scorer. Same as Crouse. Every time I watch Crouse, this is who I see. If you don't like the comparison, then good for you. Comparing him to Fehr was not the purpose of my post.
You did not address my substantive argument which is that Crouse is more highly regarded for his tools than his effectiveness. I'm arguing that having such special tools does not make him inherently more valuable or effective. We both agree that players of Crouse's skill set are very rare finds. But I do not understand why that is justification for his ranking alone. Like I said, Fehr is more unique than Hudler, but Hudler is still better.
If effectiveness means productivity sure.
Crouse is an extremely effective player. Seems to me your mistaking production for being effective.
Fehr wasn't drafted to be the things you've described about his game. Might be his game now.
Either way. Don't like the comp at all. But I didn't mean to railroad the thread.
Crouse is an extremely effective player. Seems to me your mistaking production for being effective.
Fehr wasn't drafted to be the things you've described about his game. Might be his game now.
Either way. Don't like the comp at all. But I didn't mean to railroad the thread.
Random Forest
Registered User
- May 12, 2010
- 14,638
- 1,334
Relative to the players he's being compared against, I don't think he is as effective. And people lose sight of that because he has such special tools. As if that compensates for the difference.
Why would I be comparing him to 2003 Eric Fehr?
I'll bite. What about Crouse's game makes him less effective than the guys you listed?
Random Forest
Registered User
- May 12, 2010
- 14,638
- 1,334
I wasn't aware that I listed anybody...
But what makes Crouse inferior to the players I have above him is similar to what makes Eric Fehr less effective than Jiri Hudler despite Fehr being a harder skill set to find. Hudler is more dynamic and controls the game better. Yes, that results in more production. It's not the production that makes Hudler better. It's the reasons why Hudler is able to produce more.
Crouse doesn't have the vision, creativity, or ability to control the game like Marner, Strome, Rantanen, or Barzal, imo.
He's a damn good prospect, but I just don't see him being above those players. He's a top 15 prospect for me, and that's still damn good.
I've seen Crouse be the best player on the ice numerous times while playing on a team that has the second least goals in the OHL, while also playing against high scoring teams. He good vision and creativity, Suprised people list that as something he doesn't have and that points back to strictly numbers. I feel if Sam Bennet was playing, Crouse would be thought of as that top 8 pick that he will most likely be. Would I take him over Strome or Marner? Not a chance, Barzal and Rantanen? For sure I would.
phillipmike
Registered User
- Oct 27, 2009
- 12,991
- 9,194
Agreed. Hopefully the Leafs pick in the top 5. My top 5 is...
McDavid
Eichel
Marner
Strome
Hanifin
i would like to get some in the top 4.
Crouse is a top 10 pick. Will be long gone before our second pick. I agree that he is a lower ceiling pick.
Random Forest
Registered User
- May 12, 2010
- 14,638
- 1,334
I didn't say he doesn't have those attributes. I said relative to Marner, Strome, Rantanen, Barzal, etc. he is inferior in those areas.
I'm involved in multiple discussions on here right now, and in each thread I am constantly met with straw man arguments. Please, please, please be aware of arguing against ghosts. Crouse is a fantastic prospect and stating that he is inferior in terms of vision and creativity to the forwards whom he is rated alongside is NOT the same as saying he does not have these qualities at all.
Many disputes on here could easily be avoided if people weren't so keen on responding to points that have not been implied.
