Didn’t Sennecke still put up close to 1.5 PPG? That’s awesome regardless. As for Dickinson, I think it’s safe to say he’s not defensive at a PPG during season and better than Sennecke in the playoffs
We’ll take you in the 9th round
Dickinson played 5 more games than Sennecke. He didn’t outproduce him in terms of PPG. Don’t know why he said Dickinson outproduced him lol.
FYI in the draft thread it was mentioned the heights and weights have not been updated yet. They will be re-issuing measurements as the players get measured later on this week
Maybe because he did in fact outproduce him in absolute terms. And the p/gp between the two is 1.08 vs 1.03. One gets called a defensive D with limited offensive upside, and the other gets called a creative offensive winger with sky high potential. It doesn’t jive, but people here are biased toward forwards and will push whatever narratives suit that agenda.
You're ignoring the jump in production in his 2nd half, whereas Dickinson was essentially the same player throughout the year.
Sennecke's stock rose given how his production exploded in the 2nd half of the year and playoffs. That being said, I don't think it's a stretch at all to like Dickinson more. There are a lot of good dmen we will be passing up on so we better get it right with the forward we pick.
Not only fixed, but fixed like a professional lawyer language
Players have ups and down during the season; that’s not anything to get too excited about. Most forwards have a higher production in the second half of the season, especially on playoff teams or teams gunning for the playoffs. Someone posted a breakdown of the top forwards in the second half, and most had significantly higher production. It’s obviously not a bad thing that his production was higher, but many other players did too. You could go the piecemeal route with any player’s production and chop it up and spin it any way you want to suit whatever narrative you want, really. Overall production is still the primary indicator, if that’s what is being considered.
But there are obvious extenuating circumstances like him growing 5 inches in a short amount of time. Most guys take years to get used to a growth spurt like that, why would it not be taken into consideration that he's been on an upward trajectory since he started getting used to his new range?
Weren’t you the poster trying to push a Kotkaniemi narrative on him.
It is taken into consideration. If he produced like he did in the first half of the season all year, he would’ve finished with like ~40 points and wouldn’t even be rated in the first round. Instead, he’s getting talked about like a top 10, and even top 5 pick by some people, even though he’s an offensive winger who produced the same as a player the same people are calling a defensive D with limited offensive upside. He’s gotten full credit and more for his performance this season. I’d say that’s more than taking it into consideration and is actually overrating him, imo, but I digress. What if he doesn’t resume his 2nd half production and it was simply a hot stretch? That’s just as valid as assuming it will continue.
Actually, I wasn’t the one who initially made the Kotkaniemi comparison, I just agreed that there are some similarities. I’ve actually been saying his best comparison is Benoit Pouliot.
So in other words, only the production you judge worthy is considered.
No, in other words, his production as a whole is what’s considered. I’m not the one taking a piecemeal approach to his production and trying to chop it up and spin it to suit my agenda. Your post here is pretty ironic, actually.
"The poster assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions in the content of the combine invitee post, published at an earlier juncture in these presents.Not only fixed, but fixed like a professional lawyer language
Because that’s what anyone who disagrees with you must be saying for your narrative to hold up, right? Reality be damned.
And Mailloux was better offensively with London.
I think I will make this post my avatar."The poster assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions in the content of the combine invitee post, published at an earlier juncture in these presents.
The information contained in said post is provided on an "as is" basis with no guarantees of completeness, accuracy, usefulness or timeliness.
Any amendment, modification or change of whatever nature to said post shall not constitute an admission of responsibility or liability and shall be relied upon or consumed at reader’s sole risk and peril.”
