Penguins Prospect Rating #5 2022
- Thread starter Peat
- Start date
Gurglesons
Registered User
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Zohorna's a lot closer to the actual ceiling, if that counts?
But again, what are we basing this on? Going nearly a PPG in the AHL? I just don't really see it at the NHL level with him, and I don't think the AHL is really that relevant to what a player like DOC can do in the NHL. I don't see any real high end potential there.
Again, to put it in perspective, Jankowski was also an NCAA/AHL guy, 1st round draft pick, PPG in the AHL and look how he turned out.
Then pick another big quick two-way guy with 3rd line scoring potential. Although you yourself said it was possible without the pest/fighting thing which I said I wasn't including in the comp as well, so... maybe people could just read rather than jump in?
Besides to a certain extent, DOC is a guy learning to use his body due to his growth spurt, and learning NHL pace, so being more willing to use the body is part of his possible ceiling. Does that mean he's likely to do it? Probably not, but most NHL prospects aren't going to hit their ceiling. That shouldn't be news, that shouldn't be something people are objecting to.
I, uhm, erm
Okay, one, I'm comparing him to a guy who's been on the third line most of his career, what real high end potential am I talking here?
Two, for every prospect, you can find a guy in a similar position who did great and a guy who did awful. Unless you want to do a full list of guys in his position, it means nothing.
Third, he's played 32 NHL games. For a young player that's the sort of sample size where you just don't really know, hence going back to AHL performance.
You don't see it, cool, fair enough. But right now we're on really different pages as how we're talking about this. It feels like you're seeing only studs and duds and wondering why I think he could be a stud, when I'm trying to say he's something in between, but something in between with a near-stud athlete profile that means he should be able to play above his talent level. But his talent level tops out at third line, if that. Maybe it's not even NHL level. Like if you disagree with that, but that is the meat of what I'm seeing. The stuff about Jankowski and whatever is just confusing things.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
But that’s just it @Peat, what are you actually comparing him on? You haven’t told me anything except that he’s a PF and I don’t see that at all. So I don’t get what you’re even seeing here. 
I see a big kid. But so are a lot of prospects.
So explain to me what I’m missing because I think Melmy poisoned the well.
Honestly, I think Zohorna and DOC play very similar games with pretty much identical ceilings.
Also I’m sorry you don’t like Jank, nobody does, but dude had a very similar career path including going nearly a PPG for a decent stretch in the AHL. That’s a much more likely trajectory and ceiling than Foligno, because again, they play similar games from what we’ve seen in the NHL. Not to harp on that but the fighting and the hitting and the being a pest thing is actually what makes Foligno you know not a dime a dozen meh guy.
So if you take away the qualities that make a player unique and successful, yeah I don’t get it.
I see a big kid. But so are a lot of prospects.So explain to me what I’m missing because I think Melmy poisoned the well.
Honestly, I think Zohorna and DOC play very similar games with pretty much identical ceilings.
Also I’m sorry you don’t like Jank, nobody does, but dude had a very similar career path including going nearly a PPG for a decent stretch in the AHL. That’s a much more likely trajectory and ceiling than Foligno, because again, they play similar games from what we’ve seen in the NHL. Not to harp on that but the fighting and the hitting and the being a pest thing is actually what makes Foligno you know not a dime a dozen meh guy.
So if you take away the qualities that make a player unique and successful, yeah I don’t get it.
Last edited:
Gurglesons
Registered User
IMO from what I’ve seen from DOC he projects as a Josh Lievo type.
If we are lucky maybe turns into Scott Laughton.
But that’s just it @Peat, what are you actually comparing him on? You haven’t told me anything except that he’s a PF and I don’t see that at all. So I don’t get what you’re even seeing here.
So explain to me what I’m missing because I think Melmy poisoned the well.
Honestly, I think Zohorna and DOC play very similar games with pretty much identical ceilings.
Also I’m sorry you don’t like Jank, nobody does, but dude had a very similar career path including going nearly a PPG for a decent stretch in the AHL. That’s a much more likely trajectory and ceiling than Foligno, because again, they play similar games from what we’ve seen in the NHL. Not to harp on that but the fighting and the hitting and the being a pest thing is actually what makes Foligno you know not a dime a dozen meh guy.
So if you take away the qualities that make a player unique and successful, yeah I don’t get it.
Jankowski never went PPG in the AHL outside of a short 6 game stretch.
Laughton's actually a pretty good shout of what I think DOC's ceiling looks like, yeah.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 24,751
- 23,450
I'd be happy with DOC turning into a better Kuhnhackl, tbh. A solid, cheap 4th liner is always welcome on a team that loves spending $2-3.5+ million on 'em. 
Flying Dego
Registered User
- Apr 30, 2013
- 5,252
- 6,433
Why do I have some weird feeling DOC morphs into an exact replica of ZAR?I'd be happy with DOC turning into a better Kuhnhackl, tbh. A solid, cheap 4th liner is always welcome on a team that loves spending $2-3.5+ million on 'em.
Where he loses all offensive sense and just hones in on being a defense first 4th line plugger that Sully falls in love with.
Man I hope this guy figures out his offense against the big boys.
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,948
- 47,270
I understand that's what you're saying, but I just don't think DOC has the elements to his game for him to have that sort of ceiling.
It's like someone asking POJ's ceiling and Ulf Samuelsson is brought up (ie. a defensive minded stay at home defender who can still move the puck). It doesn't seem like a good comparable even in terms of type of ceiling because there are certain elements to Samuelsson's game that made him what he was that POJ simply doesn't possess to ever help him reach that ceiling.
IMO, a guy with a Foligno-like ceiling also possesses elements of the game that make Foligno effective. I've never seen anything from DOC to suggest that his ceiling is that of a powerforward who can dominate the boards or punish the opposition. If you simply meant DOC's ceiling is that of a 3rd liner who can chip in 10-15 goals and do some forechecking, I think that would have been the better thing to say rather than even mention Foligno because mentioning Foligno inevitably makes people think of the things Foligno does that makes him an effective 3rd liner.
Zero Pucks
Size matters
- May 17, 2009
- 4,591
- 308
I envision DoC being a James Neal like player if he hits his stride in the NHL. A bigger guy that relies more on his shot and offense, but can use his size to his advantage at times. Don't think DoC would have quite as much snarl in his game as Neal, but hopefully more of a brain instead.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Guilty as charged.
No you're right, he went 56 in 64, and 27 in 32 and 6 in 8. I should say "almost a PPG" (wait, I did say almost PPG, din't I?) because that's what he does every time he's in the AHL. So, I'm not really sure there's a functional difference from a guy who puts up .88 PPG in the AHL consistently and a guy who's put up .96 over a much smaller sample size (110 GP vs 53). Like I said, I'm not trying to destroy people's DOC dreams here, but the comparison isn't just me being a dick-- you want a guy that came up via the American hockey development leagues, went to American college / NCAA route, and then tore up the AHL with their size? Well, we got a good comparison here.
But how does DOC at all play the game like Neal?
This is what I'm saying.
Last edited:
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
I think I see this comparison a lot more and man, I would be absolutely overjoyed if he manages to somehow realize that.
I'd be happy with DOC turning into a better Kuhnhackl, tbh. A solid, cheap 4th liner is always welcome on a team that loves spending $2-3.5+ million on 'em.
Then you'll be happy, because that's his floor IMO.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
Saw some DOC → ZAR comparisons. Compared their same aged & same league seasons on production. ZAR was better during their age 14 AYHL season. Then DOC was better at their age 20 & 21 NCAA seasons. DOC has also been better in the AHL at the same age.
ZAR produced slightly better in the NHL at the same age but ZAR has had significantly better line mates.
ZAR produced slightly better in the NHL at the same age but ZAR has had significantly better line mates.
Why is it comparisons of physical guys attract so much heat anyway? The Sheary-Puustinen one was just as bad. Puustinen doesn't have Sheary's speed, and is less likely to gain it than DOC is a punishing attitude to physicality tbh. Doesn't have his playmaking either, although I think he does have a better shot. They were always intended to be rough examples of the archetype, as I said at least a couple of times either.
But fine. DOC doesn't have Foligno's attitude to physicality. I do think he could be as good on the boards, but that's a big shout. But to sum up DOC without references to other players -
I see a player who's big and fast, and fairly engaged and smart. He uses his body well but not punishingly; he goes to the blue paint, he's willing to take punishment to win races; he's effective on the board and on the forecheck, and has room to grow in both areas. He has no obvious issues in his own zone. In fact I see a sure fire NHLer except -
Where's the offence?
30-odd games on the 4th line is a very unsafe sample for assuming a guy has no offence though, so you go back to the AHL and junior and his numbers are those of a guy who almost always has some offence at the next level. You watch what he does as well and it's not just the process of a guy who was bigger than everyone else and now isn't. You look at his NHL highlights, you look at his attributes, he has the ability to blow past people and ability to get to the net that you will get you points and goals without needing to be great. His shot has beaten NHL goalies in pre-season. But at the same time, it's not coming together. Maybe his shot isn't enough for regular season goalies. Maybe the fact he's not great with the puck on his stick will hold him back (counterpoint - we've seen a lot of fast guys who aren't great with the puck on their stick get to 25-30 points regularly).
So the offence is the question.
If you want to compare him to other players - and noting once again that relying on one comparison is just straight up not worth the time of day as a point of argument -
Honestly Jankowski's career out of him would do great. Two good seasons then dump before he goes downhill. I think he's a lot faster and lot more engaged than Jankowski though, even if Jankowski's hands are better from memory.
You could use Derek Grant as another example of his build coming from NCAA. DOC's outpaced him pretty much since he was the same height at every level. I'd say DOC is faster and more engaged than Grant too, and would point out Grant has rolled out plenty of 30 point pacers for Anaheim.
Look at ZAR - once again, faster and more engaged (at least, more engaged than the ZAR that developed after realising he got injured every thirty games when he tried to play physical). Better at the same age bar ZAR's monster last season for Northeastern if I'm reading Randy right. ZAR did flirt a few seasons with the idea he could be a 30 point guy (never played enough games so we're talking point) before falling off. Will probably get there one day if he stays fit and is given the linemates.
Brandon Tanev is another interesting one as an NCAA player who grew late. For once Tanev is the faster and more engaged player, but probably not that much faster. DOC's bigger. I might give Tanev a slight edge of hands. Tanev at the same age DOC is now was headed for his last college year, but he's paced 4 seasons in a row near 30 points since finding his groove.
And Tanev makes me think of Lafferty, who's also a bit faster and more abrasive. Age 24, Lafferty was playing his first full AHL season. Didn't do as well as DOC by a long shot. Remains to be seen what he is, but I think he'll be a 20 point NHLer for a bit since Chicago seem to think it. I'd suggest Archibald as a strong comparable for Lafferty in terms of career path and archetype.
The NHL is littered with guys with his career path and some of his rough athletic attributes who found a good niche as a 2-way 20-30 point player. Those are just the Pens-centric examples. Add Hags as a premium version. Past numbers would project DOC to do better than a lot of them. There are probably plenty of examples of guys with his early NCAA and AHL numbers who didn't stick, but I don't have an archive for looking them up.
And tbh I'd imagine few of them would have his athleticism or defensive responsibility.
From this point he should be a near lock to make it. I don't feel super confident given the eye test but there's good reason to think there's a solid chance we'll look back and see growing pains.
Oh and re the Zohorna comparison - probably not a huge difference between them. DOC is faster, Zohorna a better puck handler. Which tbh bodes well for DOC, as if Zohorna can maintain the conditioning needed he should be an NHLer.
But fine. DOC doesn't have Foligno's attitude to physicality. I do think he could be as good on the boards, but that's a big shout. But to sum up DOC without references to other players -
I see a player who's big and fast, and fairly engaged and smart. He uses his body well but not punishingly; he goes to the blue paint, he's willing to take punishment to win races; he's effective on the board and on the forecheck, and has room to grow in both areas. He has no obvious issues in his own zone. In fact I see a sure fire NHLer except -
Where's the offence?
30-odd games on the 4th line is a very unsafe sample for assuming a guy has no offence though, so you go back to the AHL and junior and his numbers are those of a guy who almost always has some offence at the next level. You watch what he does as well and it's not just the process of a guy who was bigger than everyone else and now isn't. You look at his NHL highlights, you look at his attributes, he has the ability to blow past people and ability to get to the net that you will get you points and goals without needing to be great. His shot has beaten NHL goalies in pre-season. But at the same time, it's not coming together. Maybe his shot isn't enough for regular season goalies. Maybe the fact he's not great with the puck on his stick will hold him back (counterpoint - we've seen a lot of fast guys who aren't great with the puck on their stick get to 25-30 points regularly).
So the offence is the question.
If you want to compare him to other players - and noting once again that relying on one comparison is just straight up not worth the time of day as a point of argument -
Honestly Jankowski's career out of him would do great. Two good seasons then dump before he goes downhill. I think he's a lot faster and lot more engaged than Jankowski though, even if Jankowski's hands are better from memory.
You could use Derek Grant as another example of his build coming from NCAA. DOC's outpaced him pretty much since he was the same height at every level. I'd say DOC is faster and more engaged than Grant too, and would point out Grant has rolled out plenty of 30 point pacers for Anaheim.
Look at ZAR - once again, faster and more engaged (at least, more engaged than the ZAR that developed after realising he got injured every thirty games when he tried to play physical). Better at the same age bar ZAR's monster last season for Northeastern if I'm reading Randy right. ZAR did flirt a few seasons with the idea he could be a 30 point guy (never played enough games so we're talking point) before falling off. Will probably get there one day if he stays fit and is given the linemates.
Brandon Tanev is another interesting one as an NCAA player who grew late. For once Tanev is the faster and more engaged player, but probably not that much faster. DOC's bigger. I might give Tanev a slight edge of hands. Tanev at the same age DOC is now was headed for his last college year, but he's paced 4 seasons in a row near 30 points since finding his groove.
And Tanev makes me think of Lafferty, who's also a bit faster and more abrasive. Age 24, Lafferty was playing his first full AHL season. Didn't do as well as DOC by a long shot. Remains to be seen what he is, but I think he'll be a 20 point NHLer for a bit since Chicago seem to think it. I'd suggest Archibald as a strong comparable for Lafferty in terms of career path and archetype.
The NHL is littered with guys with his career path and some of his rough athletic attributes who found a good niche as a 2-way 20-30 point player. Those are just the Pens-centric examples. Add Hags as a premium version. Past numbers would project DOC to do better than a lot of them. There are probably plenty of examples of guys with his early NCAA and AHL numbers who didn't stick, but I don't have an archive for looking them up.
And tbh I'd imagine few of them would have his athleticism or defensive responsibility.
From this point he should be a near lock to make it. I don't feel super confident given the eye test but there's good reason to think there's a solid chance we'll look back and see growing pains.
Oh and re the Zohorna comparison - probably not a huge difference between them. DOC is faster, Zohorna a better puck handler. Which tbh bodes well for DOC, as if Zohorna can maintain the conditioning needed he should be an NHLer.
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
Oh yeah, I was writing this last night on my phone but the quote formatting got all messed up. I don't really see the similarities between Zohorna and DOC. Zohorna is more finesse. DOC more straight-line.
Different routes, same probable end point in rough effectiveness. The route matters a lot in terms of who you plug where though.
Gurglesons
Registered User
Not on the same level. To me he looks Blueger or McGinn fast. Sheary was Rust or Zucker fast. To me that's quite a difference.
If Puustinen would like to prove me wrong, that'd be awesome.
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
Yeah, Puus's skating never stood out to me -- neither bad nor good. I think Peat's comp to Blueger/McGinn is apt.
|
I think DOC's upside is considerably higher than Zohorna. Whether he gets there or not remains to be seen, but I don't think it's close.
Randy Butternubs
Registered User
I think both DOC's floor and ceiling are higher than Zohorna. I also think DOC is much more of a sure thing in general, wherever they each top out.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Confirmed with Link: Avs sigh SHL F Jere Innala to 1-Year ELC- Latest: tigervixxxen
Upcoming events
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE WATCH LIVE - WOODBINE RACE 5 - Etobicoke, ONWagers: 2Staked: $3,000.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-
