Prospect Info: Matthew Tkachuk or PL Dubois (Round 3)

[racerjoe]

Thank you! This is all I have been saying since the start.



Right when I thought you had it, you lose it.

Gaudreau and Boyle aren't close to the same skill level, so why even bring them up? Nothing to do with what I'm saying.

You really didn't read what I wrote did you? Or what I have been saying this entire time.

Fact is Keller is probably more skilled than Brown. This is not to say Keller >Brown (I think he is, but not what I am saying).

Since this is the Tkachuk and Dubois thread lets put it this way, do you think Brown is as skilled as Dubios or Tkachuk? Cause I don't at all. I think the latter two have much better chance of being good NHL players. Not that Brown can't just that he has his own challenges, and they are bigger than Dubios or Tkachuks.

 

[Captain Bowie]

You really didn't read what I wrote did you? Or what I have been saying this entire time.

I suppose this goes both ways.

 

[racerjoe]

Sure, in aggregate both cause problems. But not to the degree or in the direction you are suggesting.

Check this out to see just how rare a 6'6 person is:

https://tall.life/height-percentile-calculator-age-country/

Basically Brown is in the 99th percentile for male height in Canada. He and others his height already are unicorns. The fact that you can even find more than 5-6 players his height in the NHL shows that they are actually punching well above their weight. Statistically we should expect to see only 2 or 3.

Conversely the country is littered with males 5'5-5'9. The average height is only 5'8. People this height are not rare and we should expect the bulk of the NHL to be made up of people this height if size were no matter. This group punches well below its weight class.

The fact that Brown is already considered a top 5-10 prospect speaks to the fact that he has overcome any skill/coordination detriments that may come with his height. If he hadn't, he'd be rated in the 7th round like Mackenzie or Pettit.

And Keller is also rated in the 5-10 range despite his size, which speaks to his rare skill. But the fear with Keller is that he will not overcome the transition to the next level because he is 3-4 inches shorter and 15-30 lbs lighter than most players he will face. His height "risk" has yet to be overcome while for Brown just getting this far speaks to overcoming his height "risk".

This is still too simplistic. I mean how many 5'9" tough guys are in the league, or bruisers? They will have different roles as NHLers to begin with if they are not stars. Jon Scott would be a prime example. Would he be an NHLer if he wasn't huge?

I understand what you are saying, but it's not completely true. Brown still has to see how his skills will translate when players are faster, and his strength can't trump most, and when his reach is a little less longer than others. It's the same jump any player has too learn. It's the best of the best.

It's similar to the argument being made where Keller has played against men in University. Sure, it shows he can but they are still not the best of the best. Its a great sign for both, and probably why they are both ranked so high.

 

[racerjoe]

I suppose this goes both ways.

I really think it does, cause I still don't get what was wrong when I argued: Both players face huge challenges ahead. Despite the fact I do think Keller is better I wasn't saying either was. Just both still face huge challenges ahead. I guess also that they aren't equal in skills too. I mean look at the stats Keller puts up. Much more impressive than Brown at least to me. He still needs to become more engaged and go to the scoring areas more.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I really think it does, cause I still don't get what was wrong when I argued: Both players face huge challenges ahead. Despite the fact I do think Keller is better I wasn't saying either was. Just both still face huge challenges ahead. I guess also that they aren't equal in skills too. I mean look at the stats Keller puts up. Much more impressive than Brown at least to me. He still needs to become more engaged and go to the scoring areas more.

I guess because I wasn't actually comparing Keller and Brown at all. I was comparing two fictional players, one tall and one short, of identical skills and abilities.

 

[Canucker]

My bad, I consider all of those things under "athleticism". Including agility, acceleration, speed, ect...

OK, what about Brandon Reid? Sam Gagner? Jordan Schroeder? There's never been a player at 6'6 as talented as these average NHL players? Not Nik Antropov or Nick Bjugstad?

Not trying to compare the tallest players to some of the most skilled players of all time.

Sure, Nik Antropov and Nick Bjugstad are pretty talented players. Are they the most talented players 6'6"+ forwards ever? I guess I'm not really sure what the argument here is...I think size (in both directions) is one of the most overrated, over discussed pieces of criteria that gets talked about in regard to players. I'll take a team of Brendan Gallaghers over a team of Lucic's any day of the week...I'd also take a team full of Brent Burns' over a team full of Erik Karlsson's....you need the best team to win, not the biggest or smallest.

 

[CanaFan]

This is still too simplistic. I mean how many 5'9" tough guys are in the league, or bruisers? They will have different roles as NHLers to begin with if they are not stars. Jon Scott would be a prime example. Would he be an NHLer if he wasn't huge?

I understand what you are saying, but it's not completely true. Brown still has to see how his skills will translate when players are faster, and his strength can't trump most, and when his reach is a little less longer than others. It's the same jump any player has too learn. It's the best of the best.

It's similar to the argument being made where Keller has played against men in University. Sure, it shows he can but they are still not the best of the best. Its a great sign for both, and probably why they are both ranked so high.

I don't think it's simplistic at all. Even if you throw out "goons" you can still name a half dozen or so "skilled" players who are 6'5+ (this height is also 99th percentile).

Certainly there are extra guys who are mainly there for their size and bulk no argument, but if you are arguing that being "too tall" fundamentally impedes or lowers a person's coordination then you should expect to see fewer NHLers with that height "problem" than what is in the general population. If you actually see more then it isn't an impediment at all. Otherwise what evidence do you have to support your assertion?

Otherwise Brown has to face all the same obstacles that any prospect faces: consistency, strength, work ethic, coach ability, etc. However these are not height related in any way. The only obstacle that you pointed out as being height related was coordination and skating, both of which Brown is actually well above average in for a junior player. Therefore if he does not make it as an NHLer it likely won't be for those reasons but one of the others (work ethic is the primary concern with him).

 

[Verviticus]

it seems weird to even consider two players that differ by 9 inches "equal in skill". even ignoring presence and weight, one player has functionally different stickhandling by virtue of their reach alone. their battling is different because they have different leverage, etc

if you somehow managed to quantify all of their skills and they scored exactly the same you'd still be hard pressed, in this impossible reality, to prove that these numbers translate to identical results

a more interesting discussion (since the one you're having is going nowhere) is how to gauge two players of disparate heights, but similar circumstances and production. to nobody's surprise, in this case being taller and heavier projects to being a better nhl player

 

[racerjoe]

I guess because I wasn't actually comparing Keller and Brown at all. I was comparing two fictional players, one tall and one short, of identical skills and abilities.

Umm you replied to me when I said this in rely to someone talking about Keller vs Brown.

It is a huge risk, and he has other question marks as well. But I don't think Brown and his size are any less of a question mark. It is just as much of a challenge being 6'6". Neither you can point to as be a sure thing. Rather stick with Dubios.

Also talking about Keller v Brown. So that seems to be the confusion. The clarification earlier may have helped but either way I do enjoy a good debate.

I will settle this by saying I hope we don't go off the board.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Sure, Nik Antropov and Nick Bjugstad are pretty talented players. Are they the most talented players 6'6"+ forwards ever? I guess I'm not really sure what the argument here is...I think size (in both directions) is one of the most overrated, over discussed pieces of criteria that gets talked about in regard to players. I'll take a team of Brendan Gallaghers over a team of Lucic's any day of the week...I'd also take a team full of Brent Burns' over a team full of Erik Karlsson's....you need the best team to win, not the biggest or smallest.

I don't know. I have researched every tall player in league history.

I feel like we've gone in circles so many times I've forgotten the original point. Here it is: If there are two equal players in every facet except size, the taller player will have more advantages. That's it. Full stop.

 

[Verviticus]

ok heres my equally useful contribution: if one player is really good, and the other player is really bad, the first one is a better player to draft. also, if you want to win hockey games, score more goals

yikes, there's a lot of these. anyone else want to contribute to Hockey Truisms? $5.95 at your local book store

 

[clunk]

I can just ****ing feel it...Something about Tkachuk 'scares' Benning (I really don't know what.. Kid's a beast), and he's going to pass on him for Brown.. No. He's not going to trade down to do it... He's going to justify picking Brown at 5 because 'we see him as a 1C of the future for us'...

Calgary is going to get handed the winger they exactly need, and the Canucks once again will be the laughing stock when Brown turns into a gentle giant of a 3C and disappoints us until our future competent GM trades him away for value Benning could never have even dreamed about... Meanwhile, Tkachuk is a staple in Calgary's top 6 and a thorn in our side for 15 years.. It's going to happen, along with a huge, bloated contract to one of the UFA wingers to justify not picking Tkachuk.

"We feel we didn't uh need another winger cause we had 'Lukitch' lined up and uh we feel he can be um a top 6 winger for us'

 

[Captain Bowie]

Umm you replied to me when I said this in rely to someone talking about Keller vs Brown.



Also talking about Keller v Brown. So that seems to be the confusion. The clarification earlier may have helped but either way I do enjoy a good debate.

I will settle this by saying I hope we don't go off the board.

True, but from the start I said : "With the same skillset being 6'6 is a hell of a lot better than being 5'9. Assuming all else is equal."


Anyways, moving on.... I also hope we don't go off the board and take one of Matt or Pierre. Unless someone sweeps us off our feet with an incredibly offer to move up 2-5 spots. I would not want to move outside the top 10 no matter what.

 

[racerjoe]

I don't think it's simplistic at all. Even if you throw out "goons" you can still name a half dozen or so "skilled" players who are 6'5+ (this height is also 99th percentile).

Certainly there are extra guys who are mainly there for their size and bulk no argument, but if you are arguing that being "too tall" fundamentally impedes or lowers a person's coordination then you should expect to see fewer NHLers with that height "problem" than what is in the general population. If you actually see more then it isn't an impediment at all. Otherwise what evidence do you have to support your assertion?

Otherwise Brown has to face all the same obstacles that any prospect faces: consistency, strength, work ethic, coach ability, etc. However these are not height related in any way. The only obstacle that you pointed out as being height related was coordination and skating, both of which Brown is actually well above average in for a junior player. Therefore if he does not make it as an NHLer it likely won't be for those reasons but one of the others (work ethic is the primary concern with him).

I now am just confused by what you are arguing. I mean I understand what you are saying, using percentages earlier, but then in the end, how does this change my statement on both large players and small players having a hard road ahead?

I mean yes Brown is ahead of the curve, but so is any player being drafted in the top ten. You keep trying to bring this to small portion of what I am saying. He will have trouble because even if his hands are as fast as Keller's his stick will move much slower. Moving up to more skilled comp is where he will have to learn to adjust.

Just as Keller will have to learn to adjust to the size and strength difference.

it seems weird to even consider two players that differ by 9 inches "equal in skill". even ignoring presence and weight, one player has functionally different stickhandling by virtue of their reach alone. their battling is different because they have different leverage, etc

if you somehow managed to quantify all of their skills and they scored exactly the same you'd still be hard pressed, in this impossible reality, to prove that these numbers translate to identical results

a more interesting discussion (since the one you're having is going nowhere) is how to gauge two players of disparate heights, but similar circumstances and production. to nobody's surprise, in this case being taller and heavier projects to being a better nhl player

I agree with most all of this. I don't completely understand the argument I am in being honest.

 

[Canucker]

I don't know. I have researched every tall player in league history.

I feel like we've gone in circles so many times I've forgotten the original point. Here it is: If there are two equal players in every facet except size, the taller player will have more advantages. That's it. Full stop.

Ok, fair enough...I think that is the general feeling but I don't necessarily agree or disagree with it. To me its not that simple, it's power vs. elusiveness...one doesn't always win over the other, but I think generally your point is the one that a lot of people in the hockey community go with.

 

[The Drop]

Buddy of mine of who works for a scout for a WHL team believes Dubois is going to be the best player in this draft year. said a couple scouts agree with him.

 

[Verviticus]

theres a good chance he'll be the best NA player drafted but i think the odds are against him compared to the europeans and matthews

 

[Bankerguy]

Would you guys sacrifice Ben Hutton to move up two spots and draft J. Puljujarvi ?

 

[The Drop]

theres a good chance he'll be the best NA player drafted but i think the odds are against him compared to the europeans and matthews

I'd agree with this as well but he seems pretty big on Dubois.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Buddy of mine of who works for a scout for a WHL team believes Dubois is going to be the best player in this draft year. said a couple scouts agree with him.

...thereby guaranteeing we don't get him.

 

[Canucker]

Would you guys sacrifice Ben Hutton to move up two spots and draft J. Puljujarvi ?

Nope....3 spots, maybe.

 

[clunk]

Would you guys sacrifice Ben Hutton to move up two spots and draft J. Puljujarvi ?

Nope. Kid's going to be a star. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind. Thank you Mike Gillis... Oh ****... He was a Gillis pick.. Well... He's going to be traded anyways and become another team's top d-man while we get the next Kyle Beach in a trade back anyways... So why not.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Would you guys sacrifice Ben Hutton to move up two spots and draft J. Puljujarvi ?

Matthews yes, Laine no.

 

[CanaFan]

I now am just confused by what you are arguing. I mean I understand what you are saying, using percentages earlier, but then in the end, how does this change my statement on both large players and small players having a hard road ahead?

I mean yes Brown is ahead of the curve, but so is any player being drafted in the top ten. You keep trying to bring this to small portion of what I am saying. He will have trouble because even if his hands are as fast as Keller's his stick will move much slower. Moving up to more skilled comp is where he will have to learn to adjust.

Just as Keller will have to learn to adjust to the size and strength difference.

I am (and have this entire time) been responding to your initial post on the subject about two pages back. Here's a recap with the crucial pieces bolded:

It's not that simple though. There is a reason why there is not a lot more 6'6" skill players in the league. It is so much harder to be so. It is a lot harder to have the same hand eye, even having a quick stick when your stick is so much longer is more difficult. You look at the top skilled guys, and they are all in the middle of the two. Both will have hard times transitioning to the next level, for opposite reasons.

My post addresses a) There are reasons why there are so few 6'6 players in the NHL and these reasons are largely population driven and not because "it is so much harder to be so" as well as b) Both players will have trouble transitioning to the next level but not necessarily for opposite reasons. Brown's challenges will not be due to his excessive size but will be fairly "typical" challenges i.e. consistency and work ethic. Things like having good hand eye, a quick stick, etc will not be reasons why he does not make it to the NHL since he already has excellent hand eye, a quick stick, etc. If you watch his U18's you will see he is far from a lumbering, plodding beast out on the ice but is actually quite nimble and quick (period, not just for his size) and possesses insane vision and passing ability. His size gives him extra reach and puck protection ability but otherwise he actually plays almost like a "small" player. There is no argument that he faces any extra adversity due to his massive height.

 

[Josepho]

Nope. Kid's going to be a star. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind. Thank you Mike Gillis... Oh ****... He was a Gillis pick.. Well... He's going to be traded anyways and become another team's top d-man while we get the next Kyle Beach in a trade back anyways... So why not.

Benning has made it clear that Ben Hutton is going to be a part of "the core", has he not?