RW Tyler Boucher - Belleville Senators, AHL (2021, 10th, OTT)

[DrSense]

This is a pick that will take some time to evaluate. I understand fans criticizing it, wanting to opt for pure skill, but there are lots of examples of bigger athletic players being drafted earlier than their stats warrant, be it a Tom Wilson, Blake Wheeler or Lawson Crouse. People tend to forget Wheeler was seen as one of the biggest reaches of all time back in the day, where he was projected late 1st round and went 5th overall. The year AFTER he was drafted he entered the USHL, and then did 3 years of NCAA, and in all of those years he averaged less than a PPG. He has emerged as a foundational player to build around.

And are these players really massive reaches? When you look at a player like Crouse - perhaps a good comparison to Boucher - he has been a bottom 6 forward for his first few years, but is on pace for 20+ goals this year. Meanwhile, pure "skill guys" like Tyson Jost, Clayton Keller, Mike Mcleod or Logan Brown who were all drafted around the same spot as Boucher, are struggling to establish themselves as impact top 6 players and have yet to score 20 goals themselves - five years after being drafted. To be honest, a guy like Crouse will perhaps have a longer and yes, more productive career, than many of those pure skill guys. And be an important part of a winning team perhaps. The reality is most guys drafted between 10-15 don't become 1st line players. If Boucher winds up as a 20-20 energy and heart & soul guy for a contender (hopefully the Sens) then the pick could look great. Time will tell.

For Boucher as an 18 year old, getting a season or two with the 67s makes more sense at this point. If he is ready next year for the AHL, great, but another year with the 67s and perhaps a crack at the US WJC squad next year also sounds good for his development.

 

[ottawah]

Lets not forget Crouse also led his team in scoring his draft year, beating out many older players yet no o one felt he was going to amount to more than a 20/20 guy in the NHL. Crouse was also a beast at the AAA level and a number 5 OHL draft pick. Boucher was more a middling player at the same level. Their pedigree would indicate Crouse was a more advanced player at the same age, especially as one of the youngest players in his draft, whereas Boucher is one of the oldest in his age group.

All said, if Boucher turns into Crouse, thats a massive relief to Ottawa fans. but it is a long road.

 

[DrSense]

Lets not forget Crouse also led his team in scoring his draft year, beating out many older players yet no o one felt he was going to amount to more than a 20/20 guy in the NHL. Crouse was also a beast at the AAA level and a number 5 OHL draft pick. Boucher was more a middling player at the same level. Their pedigree would indicate Crouse was a more advanced player at the same age, especially as one of the youngest players in his draft, whereas Boucher is one of the oldest in his age group.

All said, if Boucher turns into Crouse, thats a massive relief to Ottawa fans. but it is a long road.

Some fair points, but a bit misleading. Crouse scored less than a PPG in his draft year, albeit on a low scoring team. Compared against other draft eligible players, and just in the OHL, Crouse was 10th among U18 players in PPG, so his production really was on the edge of being even a 1st round pick when you factor this just among OHL draft eligibles, let alone the rest of the CHL and international guys.

Boucher, despite limited PP time, scored a PPG in the USHL and USDP, some of which were played against NCAA opponents. While I acknowledge this is a smaller sample size to go off of, Boucher's offensive production in his limited games in his draft year actually project quite well and really only behind Pastujov on that team (who has major skating issues), and ahead of guys like Duke and Luke Hughes. Again, smaller sample size, but many USDP team mates in draft interviews also referenced Boucher as one of the most dangerously skilled players on the team. And the USDP is basically an allstar team for the 2003 age group, with deeper and more balanced talent - so those kudos add to his offensive street cred at least. While Crouse played with less skilled depth on his team, he was also on the 1st PP unit and got the best linemates, where as Boucher was in and out of the lineup and often didn't play the PP.

In the end, rather comparable other than Crouse did it over a more extended stretch and Crouse had another edge in that he was clearly a great two way player at that age, and while physical, seemed to play in control with leadership traits. Boucher seems a bit less disciplined and with a bit less of a refined edge to his game. All his team mates rave about him - including at BU - but not sure what leadership will be there at this point.

 

[Korpse]

This pick is going to be looked back on in a couple of years the same way that the Hugh Jessiman and Dylan Mcilrath picks are seen today. Just pants on head stupidity by Ottawa. Pierre Mcguire should know better

Tired of people who have opinions that suck.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

This is a pick that will take some time to evaluate. I understand fans criticizing it, wanting to opt for pure skill, but there are lots of examples of bigger athletic players being drafted earlier than their stats warrant, be it a Tom Wilson, Blake Wheeler or Lawson Crouse. People tend to forget Wheeler was seen as one of the biggest reaches of all time back in the day, where he was projected late 1st round and went 5th overall. The year AFTER he was drafted he entered the USHL, and then did 3 years of NCAA, and in all of those years he averaged less than a PPG. He has emerged as a foundational player to build around.

And are these players really massive reaches? When you look at a player like Crouse - perhaps a good comparison to Boucher - he has been a bottom 6 forward for his first few years, but is on pace for 20+ goals this year. Meanwhile, pure "skill guys" like Tyson Jost, Clayton Keller, Mike Mcleod or Logan Brown who were all drafted around the same spot as Boucher, are struggling to establish themselves as impact top 6 players and have yet to score 20 goals themselves - five years after being drafted. To be honest, a guy like Crouse will perhaps have a longer and yes, more productive career, than many of those pure skill guys. And be an important part of a winning team perhaps. The reality is most guys drafted between 10-15 don't become 1st line players. If Boucher winds up as a 20-20 energy and heart & soul guy for a contender (hopefully the Sens) then the pick could look great. Time will tell.

For Boucher as an 18 year old, getting a season or two with the 67s makes more sense at this point. If he is ready next year for the AHL, great, but another year with the 67s and perhaps a crack at the US WJC squad next year also sounds good for his development.

Scored 23 and had 65 points one year. Doesn't belong in this comparison.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Crouse also doesn’t play that similar to Boucher. Boucher is a pest with some skill. Crouse was a power forward with some pest.

 

[Micklebot]

Boucher's better than his 2 points in 12 games would indicate but it's obvious his offensive upside is limited and nowhere near the traditional forward selected in the top 10.

Still sticking with my Raffi Torres comparison.

I wonder how coveted Raffi Torres would have been had he not been prone to crossing the line and had he not messed up his ACL in Edmonton. Could have been a consistent ~40 pts ~20g power forward that intimidated the opposition with his physicality. If that's what Boucher becomes I'd be pretty happy,

 

[ottawah]

Some fair points, but a bit misleading. Crouse scored less than a PPG in his draft year, albeit on a low scoring team. Compared against other draft eligible players, and just in the OHL, Crouse was 10th among U18 players in PPG, so his production really was on the edge of being even a 1st round pick when you factor this just among OHL draft eligibles, let alone the rest of the CHL and international guys.

Boucher, despite limited PP time, scored a PPG in the USHL and USDP, some of which were played against NCAA opponents. While I acknowledge this is a smaller sample size to go off of, Boucher's offensive production in his limited games in his draft year actually project quite well and really only behind Pastujov on that team (who has major skating issues), and ahead of guys like Duke and Luke Hughes. Again, smaller sample size, but many USDP team mates in draft interviews also referenced Boucher as one of the most dangerously skilled players on the team. And the USDP is basically an allstar team for the 2003 age group, with deeper and more balanced talent - so those kudos add to his offensive street cred at least. While Crouse played with less skilled depth on his team, he was also on the 1st PP unit and got the best linemates, where as Boucher was in and out of the lineup and often didn't play the PP.

In the end, rather comparable other than Crouse did it over a more extended stretch and Crouse had another edge in that he was clearly a great two way player at that age, and while physical, seemed to play in control with leadership traits. Boucher seems a bit less disciplined and with a bit less of a refined edge to his game. All his team mates rave about him - including at BU - but not sure what leadership will be there at this point.

Agreed. but the excuse has been made for Bouchers production at Boston as being the fault of being a bad team and not the player. Crouse had the exact same excuse in his pocket, but did not need to use it. Its hard to imagine that Crouses production would not have gone up if he had better linemates, especially a center. And that team was absolutely stacked at left wing. Foegle, DaColle, Roberston and Crouse. Who would have thought DaColle would have the worst career of all of them ....... The point is, despite being at the stacked position on a low scoring team, crouse did not wilt and stepped up. That is what i want to see with players on my team.

Not just limited to these two players, but I always hear "well, its a stacked team he did not get a chance to produce", or "Its a crap team he needs linemates". When players cannot produce there always seem to be some excuse, most time contradictory. To me great players at that level find ways to score. Good players, they tend to never make it. Production is still the best indicator of "potential" success at the next level, namely those with high production are not guaranteed to make it, but without high production the odds go down really fast.

Take a few example of equivalent type players. Lucic D+1 led his team in scoring. wilson led his team point per game (aside from a mid season pickup). Tkachuk was 4th at BU by only 4 points. Wayne Simmonds was 1st point per game/2nd as he split his last season evenly between two teams. Matt Tkachuk was third, but that was one heck of a team at the top end. Players we are told Boucher is supposed to emulate all found a way to be at the top of their respective teams regardless of how good or bad the team was. The 67's are not a great offensive team this year, I certainly Boucher can step in and be their top offensive player for the rest of the year. There are no more excuses ......

It does not mean Boucher cannot make it, but the time has come in my mind to say that he is far behind what other "equivalent" players have shown at this stage in their career. It is a long way to go.

 

[DrSense]

Agreed. but the excuse has been made for Bouchers production at Boston as being the fault of being a bad team and not the player. Crouse had the exact same excuse in his pocket, but did not need to use it. Its hard to imagine that Crouses production would not have gone up if he had better linemates, especially a center. And that team was absolutely stacked at left wing. Foegle, DaColle, Roberston and Crouse. Who would have thought DaColle would have the worst career of all of them ....... The point is, despite being at the stacked position on a low scoring team, crouse did not wilt and stepped up. That is what i want to see with players on my team.

Not just limited to these two players, but I always hear "well, its a stacked team he did not get a chance to produce", or "Its a crap team he needs linemates". When players cannot produce there always seem to be some excuse, most time contradictory. To me great players at that level find ways to score. Good players, they tend to never make it. Production is still the best indicator of "potential" success at the next level, namely those with high production are not guaranteed to make it, but without high production the odds go down really fast.

Take a few example of equivalent type players. Lucic D+1 led his team in scoring. wilson led his team point per game (aside from a mid season pickup). Tkachuk was 4th at BU by only 4 points. Wayne Simmonds was 1st point per game/2nd as he split his last season evenly between two teams. Matt Tkachuk was third, but that was one heck of a team at the top end. Players we are told Boucher is supposed to emulate all found a way to be at the top of their respective teams regardless of how good or bad the team was. The 67's are not a great offensive team this year, I certainly Boucher can step in and be their top offensive player for the rest of the year. There are no more excuses ......

It does not mean Boucher cannot make it, but the time has come in my mind to say that he is far behind what other "equivalent" players have shown at this stage in their career. It is a long way to go.

I hear what you are saying, and fair points regarding Boucher's lack of production this season. Excuses only go so far. But keep in mind you are essentially judging him over a 60 day period as an 18 year older against player mostly 2o-24. Crouse never walked that path, and if he did, I don't expect he would have produced much at the NCAA level. But that's just my guess, so who knows.

But let's also remember that Crouse spent his D+1 and D+2 years in the OHL with a career high of 62 points in the OHL. We now get to see if Boucher can match that type of production over what's left of the next two seasons in the OHL. Can he be a PPG game in the OHL this year, and slightly better next year? That is what Crouse did, so we will see.

The main point is, as the Coyotes were with Crouse, the Sens need to be just as patient with Boucher. Let him soak in the OHL for a good spell, and let's also not over judge him one way or another in his first 15 games.

 

[majormajor]

I wonder how coveted Raffi Torres would have been had he not been prone to crossing the line and had he not messed up his ACL in Edmonton. Could have been a consistent ~40 pts ~20g power forward that intimidated the opposition with his physicality. If that's what Boucher becomes I'd be pretty happy,

I think that's pretty much what the Sens are looking for: a 25 goal scorer who can throw bone-crunching hits. The Sens probably didn't shudder at the thought that Boucher might only be a Raffi Torres level player.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Really don't know much about the player.... I just don't get how they made this pick without trading down.

I can't see how there was absolutely no interest in any of the picks below them to move up to #10. They probably could've dropped a whole ten spots and still made this pick.

 

[DJB]

Headed to the OHL 67's.

 

[Peasy]

Has there been many successful prospects to leave the NCAA after playing in it to play in the CHL?

I know both Biggs and Bracco did this and clearly did not work out.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Has there been many successful prospects to leave the NCAA after playing in it to play in the CHL?

I know both Biggs and Bracco did this and clearly did not work out.

I don't think the development path was the issue with those players. For someone like Boucher he plays a game that is probably better suited for the CHL. That doesn't mean his warts will magically be cured though. He's still a project.

 

[Peasy]

I don't think the development path was the issue with those players. For someone like Boucher he plays a game that is probably better suited for the CHL. That doesn't mean his warts will magically be cured though. He's still a project.

I'm just curious if there are any successful examples because I can't personally think of one. Jay o'brien is another guy that left NCAA after a year of struggling.

Usually not a good sign if a prospect is completely switching to an entirely different league, especially mid season. Things are clearly not panning out the way he expected.

 

[returnofthemack29]

I'm just curious if there are any successful examples because I can't personally think of one. Jay o'brien is another guy that left NCAA after a year of struggling.

Usually not a good sign if a prospect is completely switching to an entirely different league, especially mid season. Things are clearly not panning out the way he expected.

Another example is A.J. Greer with the Avs switched from the NCAA to the CHL mid season. He’s now with his third organization and toiling away on the Devils AHL squad.

Definitely not a promising list of players. And same here, I can’t think of any successful examples.

 

[Coaches Coroner]

Has there been many successful prospects to leave the NCAA after playing in it to play in the CHL?

I know both Biggs and Bracco did this and clearly did not work out.

Bracco's failing were a result of on ice stagnation and off-ice problems that would have been just as prevalent had he stayed at BC from what I've gathered.
Biggs I thought either should have been OHL from the start, or stayed with NCAA...looking back, maybe a couple extra years developing in college instead of pro would have helped him develop the sub-par areas of his game.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Has there been many successful prospects to leave the NCAA after playing in it to play in the CHL?

I know both Biggs and Bracco did this and clearly did not work out.

Main success story was Keith in 2002-2003 - moved from Michigan State to Kelowna midseason, went to the Mem Cup, then turned pro with Rockford the following season. Other players who had some success include Charlie Coyle, Jamie Oleksiak. Tyler Pitlick, Chuck Kobasew, Jujhar Khaira & Kevin Connauton.

Also noteworthy, although not entirely relevant, was in 2011, where every 1st rounder who was NCAA-committed at the time of the draft decommitted for the CHL. JT Miller & Connor Murphy decommitted before ever joining their programs & Oleksiak & Biggs left after 1yr.

Really don't know much about the player.... I just don't get how they made this pick without trading down.

I can't see how there was absolutely no interest in any of the picks below them to move up to #10. They probably could've dropped a whole ten spots and still made this pick.

Probably not. Lots of speculation that CLB (11) and NYR (15) had him at or near the top of their list. His father, who is both tapped in and generally realistic when talking about his son, said they were pretty sure he'd go in the 15-20 range (maybe 15-25? Can't remember the exact wording).

Should the Sens have had Boucher (at least) 10th on their list? Probably not. Given that they did, was it realistic that they could move down to 20th OV and still get the guy they had ranked top 10? Almost certainly not.

Maybe they could have leveraged 10OV into Boucher + a 3rd rounder, but they might have lost him and not gained much. Again, this all rests on the fact that they had Boucher top 10 - a position that I will not argue in favour of, but a reality of the situation.

 

[NHL Dude 120]

I'm just curious if there are any successful examples because I can't personally think of one. Jay o'brien is another guy that left NCAA after a year of struggling.

Usually not a good sign if a prospect is completely switching to an entirely different league, especially mid season. Things are clearly not panning out the way he expected.

Charlie Coyle

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Oliver Wahlstrom is another to add to the list.

All these situations are different though, so grouping them together probably doesn’t make sense.

 

[StreetHawk]

Up to the kid and team to decide where he will develop best, but it's a risk given the stricter regulations for sporting events in Canada vs the NCAA right now in terms of him getting into games.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Oliver Wahlstrom is another to add to the list.

All these situations are different though, so grouping them together probably doesn’t make sense.

Yeah, I'd be much more interested in seeing guys who struggled in the first half of their draft season and then moved teams. How did they do with their new team, and how did they transition to pro/NHL? Still wouldnt tell you much of relevance, but slightly less nebulous than evaluating others who moved from NCAA to CHL.

 

[Peasy]

Oliver Wahlstrom is another to add to the list.

All these situations are different though, so grouping them together probably doesn’t make sense.

Wahlstrom played one year in the NCAA then went to the AHL during the same season. I think you're thinking of bellows.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Wahlstrom played one year in the NCAA then went to the AHL during the same season. I think you're thinking of bellows.

I probably am, but I think Wahlstrom was also a guy that struggled and jumped ship due to lack of success/usage.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Wahlstrom played one year in the NCAA then went to the AHL during the same season. I think you're thinking of bellows.

FWIW, there is a possibility that Boucher will play in Belleville at some point this season/for the entire season (if AHL starts up before the O and he looks good or if OHL gets cancelled/shortened)