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

[OttMorrow]

I agree that Crouse will be a player that every team would want, but the bottom line is you don't draft a player you know won't be a star over someone like Hanifin, Strome, Marner.

The HIGHEST he should be taken is 6, and that's only if the team believes that the upside isn't worth the risk on ALL of Kylington, Merkley, Zacha, Barzal, Werenski, Svechnikov, Rantanen, Connor, etc.

Don't forget about J. Roy. I'd take J. Roy way before Crouse too.

 

[CanadienShark]

I didn't see much offensive upside in Crowse or Ritchie. They could cycle the puck, but no finish. The kid is still young, but I don't know if he has enough top-end skill.

Same. I get that he has the tools, but I just don't see it translating well for whatever reason for either player. So basically, I have no real justifiable reason for not liking them.

 

[New Jack City]

How is this kid #3 in the ISS rankings?

 

[Juxtaposer]

Don't forget about J. Roy. I'd take J. Roy way before Crouse too.

Same, I just couldn't remember everyone I'd take over Crouse off the top of my head.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I agree that Crouse will be a player that every team would want, but the bottom line is you don't draft a player you know won't be a star over someone like Hanifin, Strome, Marner.

The HIGHEST he should be taken is 6, and that's only if the team believes that the upside isn't worth the risk on ALL of Kylington, Merkley, Zacha, Barzal, Werenski, Svechnikov, Rantanen, Connor, etc.

I think it's too early to say things like that definitively.

I also think it depends entirely on a team's make-up. Looking back, the Oilers probably wish they'd have taken a less dynamic option in 2012 instead of star-potential Yakupov.

 

[redacted]

IMO Crouse and Landeskog are not directly comparable nor are the draft classes, but it is essentially the same argument as Landy vs ____ in 2011 (minus the whole leadership angle).

 

[Paxon]

I think it's too early to say things like that definitively.

I also think it depends entirely on a team's make-up. Looking back, the Oilers probably wish they'd have taken a less dynamic option in 2012 instead of star-potential Yakupov.

They wish they picked a different star-potential player.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

They wish they picked a different star-potential player.

They wish they picked any number of different players. Including guys like Wilson and Girgensons.

 

[Sundinisagod]

Surprised to hear some are questioning his hockey sense, it looks like a strength of his imho.

For my Leafs, I would be happy taking him in the 6-10 range. If we take him that high it will no doubt be the most controversial pick of the first round.

 

[Marc the Habs Fan]

Surprised to hear some are questioning his hockey sense, it looks like a strength of his imho.

For my Leafs, I would be happy taking him in the 6-10 range. If we take him that high it will no doubt be the most controversial pick of the first round.

That's probably because the Leafs have plenty of high skilled forwards already and a guy like Crouse would definitely compliment them nicely.

Most teams picking in that range usually don't have those type of players in place and need more of a building block player than Crouse appears to be.

 

[UvBnDatsyuked]

He has a high Hockey IQ, he has had it his entire Hockey career so far.

Does he make the dependable, conservative plays or does he make the "wow" how did he see that kind of play?

Granted, I have only seen him with the WJC but there was nothing that stood out to me as a high hockey IQ. He did the things that coaches harp on for sound, good hockey but I didn't see anything that said he read the game on a top 3 pick level if that is one of the attributes he is being touted for at that draft position.

The only way I see him going this high is if Calgary drops to the third spot and lets Burke stand up at the podium

 

[Juxtaposer]

I think it's too early to say things like that definitively.

I also think it depends entirely on a team's make-up. Looking back, the Oilers probably wish they'd have taken a less dynamic option in 2012 instead of star-potential Yakupov.

If Crouse doesn't get his PPG up above 1, it is fair to say there is a 99.99% chance that he does not become a star.


I'd rather take a chance on a player with superstar potential like Yakupov than Crouse.

In fact, the Oilers might be the only team in the league for whom taking Crouse early might be acceptable. They direly need a player like Crouse and they already have a young offensively talented 1st line.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Does he make the dependable, conservative plays or does he make the "wow" how did he see that kind of play?

Granted, I have only seen him with the WJC but there was nothing that stood out to me as a high hockey IQ. He did the things that coaches harp on for sound, good hockey but I didn't see anything that said he read the game on a top 3 pick level if that is one of the attributes he is being touted for at that draft position.

The only way I see him going this high is if Calgary drops to the third spot and lets Burke stand up at the podium

Exactly. He was programmed with plugging hockey, and he executed plugging hockey. I've never heard nor seen of enough creativity (nor versatility) in the game of Crouse to believe that hockey I.Q. is a particular strength of his - certainly not one that leverages him as a top pick.

 

[sniper81]

Does he make the dependable, conservative plays or does he make the "wow" how did he see that kind of play?

Granted, I have only seen him with the WJC but there was nothing that stood out to me as a high hockey IQ. He did the things that coaches harp on for sound, good hockey but I didn't see anything that said he read the game on a top 3 pick level if that is one of the attributes he is being touted for at that draft position.

The only way I see him going this high is if Calgary drops to the third spot and lets Burke stand up at the podium

I personally would pick him 5th after Mcdavid, Eichel, Marner and Hanafin. I see him make safe dependable plays as well as wow plays on a nightly basis. The real problem here is that you have posters who only watched a few games on TV and then look at his point totals and decide he isn't good enough. Plenty of scouts have seen these tools on display for the past 3 years and know what he can do. I feel people just think he's ranked that high because he is big when it can't be farther from the truth. Even just go on YouTube and look at his rookie season and tell me you can't see his offense translating easily to the NHL. The fact that he isn't playing with an offensive minded centre in junior should be taken into account. He will score a lot in the NHL.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Exactly. He was programmed with plugging hockey, and he executed plugging hockey. I've never heard nor seen of enough creativity (nor versatility) in the game of Crouse to believe that hockey I.Q. is a particular strength of his - certainly not one that leverages him as a top pick.

Well-phrased. I think Crouse is a coaches dream because he always makes a smart play and doesn't make mistakes, but he doesn't show much in the way of offensive creativity. That's my beef. He's a smart player, but in the same way Tommy Wingels is a smart player.

Actually, now that I think about it, Tommy Wingels would be an excellent example of how Crouse's type of player functions in the NHL. As a Sharks fan, I absolutely love Tommy Wingels. He does everything right, he can fit on any line and not look out of place, he's a leader, he's fast and physical and excellent defensively, and he's a very very valuable player. He can even chip in offensively as excellent secondary scoring. I often say that Wingels is "untouchable", because his value to our team is much more than anything he would reasonably get in trade. However, much as I love Wingels, I would never take a player like him 3rd overall or 10th overall. I might take him 15th overall if I really didn't think there were better options. But 15-20th overall seems about right.

I would never take a potential Tommy Wingels over a potential Drew Doughty, a potential Joe Thornton-lite, or a potential Patrick Kane-lite, as much as a love Tommy Wingels. Does that make sense?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Well-phrased. I think Crouse is a coaches dream because he always makes a smart play and doesn't make mistakes, but he doesn't show much in the way of offensive creativity. That's my beef. He's a smart player, but in the same way Tommy Wingels is a smart player.

Actually, now that I think about it, Tommy Wingels would be an excellent example of how Crouse's type of player functions in the NHL. As a Sharks fan, I absolutely love Tommy Wingels. He does everything right, he can fit on any line and not look out of place, he's a leader, he's fast and physical and excellent defensively, and he's a very very valuable player. He can even chip in offensively as excellent secondary scoring. I often say that Wingels is "untouchable", because his value to our team is much more than anything he would reasonably get in trade. However, much as I love Wingels, I would never take a player like him 3rd overall or 10th overall. I might take him 15th overall if I really didn't think there were better options. But 15-20th overall seems about right.

I would never take a potential Tommy Wingels over a potential Drew Doughty, a potential Joe Thornton-lite, or a potential Patrick Kane-lite, as much as a love Tommy Wingels. Does that make sense?

I think so, yes.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I have yet to see a single Crouse proponent answer that question.

I've actually answered the question about why his production in the OHL may not be that high is numerous times. People just seem to ignore it.

So at the risk of being a broken record...

He's on pace for 34 goals. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his goal scoring production when you compare him to other recent high picks. Ritchie (39 goals), Bennett (36 goals), MDC (39 goals), and Perlini (34 goals) were all top rated players from Last year's draft, and no one seemed to have an issue with their goal scoring production.

Where his production seems low is his assist totals. Kingston has a dreadful time scoring goals, period. And he's generally been playing on a line with two guys who were struggling to score goals early on (Kujawinski and McGlynn). Kind of hard to have big assist totals when the guys on your line aren't burying the puck.

This is where I don't think people are fully aware of the situation in Kingston enough to understand why his totals are low. Kingston is the THIRD LOWEST SCORING TEAM in the entire OHL. They're not even on pace for 200 goals this year. Add to that, they've been hit by a rash of injuries to their select few guys who actually can score goals, and it's no wonder Crouse's production isn't high.

This post will probably be ignored again, and we'll have people asking "why isn't he producing" every single time his name is brought up. But there it is. He plays on a team that struggles to score, and usually on a line with no goal scorers (the only "pure" scorer Kingston has is Spencer Watson, and he's not been Crouse's linemate all year).

 

[bottomofthefoodchain]

Maybe the team he plays and the style they play factor into point totals. Sam Bennet being injured has really hurt them and they've just sold off Kujawinski so clearly they aren't a strong team this season. He doesn't have the luxury of playing with high end skill that other top draft prospects this year. Go ahead and strictly look at his point totals, his play says otherwise. I think people forget that he's on pace for 39 goals this year on a lower scoring team.

A top 3 pick should be a drivning offensive force in a junior league.

 

[sniper81]

I've actually answered the question about why his production in the OHL may not be that high is numerous times. People just seem to ignore it.

So at the risk of being a broken record...

He's on pace for 34 goals. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his goal scoring production when you compare him to other recent high picks. Ritchie (39 goals), Bennett (36 goals), MDC (39 goals), and Perlini (34 goals) were all top rated players from Last year's draft, and no one seemed to have an issue with their goal scoring production.

Where his production seems low is his assist totals. Kingston has a dreadful time scoring goals, period. And he's generally been playing on a line with two guys who were struggling to score goals early on (Kujawinski and McGlynn). Kind of hard to have big assist totals when the guys on your line aren't burying the puck.

This is where I don't think people are fully aware of the situation in Kingston enough to understand why his totals are low. Kingston is the THIRD LOWEST SCORING TEAM in the entire OHL. They're not even on pace for 200 goals this year. Add to that, they've been hit by a rash of injuries to their select few guys who actually can score goals, and it's no wonder Crouse's production isn't high.

This post will probably be ignored again, and we'll have people asking "why isn't he producing" every single time his name is brought up. But there it is. He plays on a team that struggles to score, and usually on a line with no goal scorers (the only "pure" scorer Kingston has is Spencer Watson, and he's not been Crouse's linemate all year).

Quoted so I don't have to answer this question again either, thank you.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

For the record, I don't necessarily have issue with those who don't think he's a top-5 pick. My issue is with folks who don't actually watch him play and then trot out comments about how he's got 3rd/4th line top end potential only in the NHL.

My player comparison I've used for him is Andrew Ladd. I think he's got a better release on his shot, so I'd predict a better goal scoring version of Ladd as his current ceiling, based on what he's done to this point.

 

[sniper81]

A top 3 pick should be a drivning offensive force in a junior league.

I have Marner 3rd and Crouse 5th. If that's your philosophy then I'm all for it, I rank Crouse where I think he should be picked and that's 5th or 6th. The poster asked for why he isn't a point producing guy in junior and I answered lots of factors. We should objectively take them in instead of just stating he should be scoring more, no?

 

[Bps21*]

I would agree...but the numbers are so paltry that...even with all the caveats and issues on the table... he should still be scoring more.

 

[EON]

I agree with most of what Crouse supporters are saying, all off the great skills he has. Size, strength, skates well, works hard, excellent two-way play, I just don't see elite offensive skills and that's what makes it so hard to see him at #3 over guys like Hanifin, Marner, and Strome.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I would agree...but the numbers are so paltry that...even with all the caveats and issues on the table... he should still be scoring more.

This line of thinking would have resulted in people scoffing at the idea Ryan Getzlaf had the tools to be a potential 90-point star center in the NHL because he only scored 68 points in his draft year.

"What? How the heck is Getzlaf going to score 90 points in the NHL?! He didn't even score 70 points in his draft year! 68 points are paltry numbers for a supposed future NHL superstar"

That's essentially what a lot of people are doing with Crouse. Ignoring the factors behind why his production is lower than expected, and ignore his actual toolset that scouts look at when trying to project a player at the NHL level.

 

[bottomofthefoodchain]

I have Marner 3rd and Crouse 5th. If that's your philosophy then I'm all for it, I rank Crouse where I think he should be picked and that's 5th or 6th. The poster asked for why he isn't a point producing guy in junior and I answered lots of factors. We should objectively take them in instead of just stating he should be scoring more, no?

Was the team much better when Bennett scored 91 points and got picked 4th overall?