Prospect Info: Shakir Mukhamadullin (#20 pick - 2020 draft)

[Lou is God]

I think discussing it is fine and I think some people really attributed some opinions you don't have to what you said (and you should've left it up). That said, I just saw a replay of Colton White trying to break up a 2 on 1 in very similar fashion to Mukhamadullin in the 1st period (and failing also).

Jeez thanks......I think.

What does Colton White have to do with this?

 

[Guttersniped]

Jeez thanks......I think.

What does Colton White have to do with this?

Apparently White and Muk fall down onto the ice in a hauntingly similar fashion? (As opposed to the other men on ice skates?)

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

I think his point was that it wasn't an unusual / clueless strategy to break up a 2 on 1 it just looked embarrassing in part due to great stickhandling by Galimov. In any case my initial description of the goal against was a knee jerk one without doing zapruder film level analysis of the highlight, and my general point was overall he didn't look out of his element in the game, despite the consensus that he had a "bad game" with some penalties and giveaways. That goal against is the type of play that his detractors certainly would amplify for their argument that he was a bad pick and has no chance at making it to the NHL.

Ultimately he looks like a KHL caliber player at age 19 to me and he's trending quite well for being a "reach" pick. He was raw, as we all know, and he's improving with a tantalizing skill set in a 6' 4" body that's not finished developing. I'm excited to see what he becomes.

 

[Triumph]

Apparently White and Muk fall down onto the ice in a hauntingly similar fashion? (As opposed to the other men on ice skates?)

I know we're all getting old here and screens are getting smaller, but falling and failing are still different words even in hockey when usually one leads to the other.

 

[Guttersniped]

My point is we all tend to overreact. If Mukhamadullin has a stretch of six or seven games where he struggles, we can look into it a bit more. I'm a bit defensive of the kid because he has unfairly become polarizing -- as evidenced by last year's WJC, where he arguably received more negative press than any defender in the tourney despite being one of the best handful of defenders in the tourney.

So, it's fair to say my quick defense of Shakir is an overreaction, as well.

But realistically, I'm not sure why Mukhamadullin has done, aside from be drafted higher than his consensus ranking, to become such a lightning rod. The three defensemen drafted immediately after him were Justin Barron, William Wallinder and Helge Grans. One and a half years later, we can argue whether Shakir or Barron should have been drafted ahead of each other, but Wallinder and Grans are nowhere close to either of them. So, I'll continue to defend both Mukhamadullin and the Devils selection of him. I think he's going to become a very good player, though he still has a couple of years of development before he's ready for the NHL rigors.

Barron would have been drafted ahead of him if blood clots hadn’t cut his 2019-20 short and left him with some future health questions.

That’s the only reason he dropped, he was RHD in a draft with little high end defense after the top two guys. He would have been drafted sooner without the health issue, though not sure exactly when (since in this alternate universe he plays a full 2019-20 season).

He can very easily end up becoming a “steal” but I get why GMs might have been put off using an much earlier pick on him, even more so than Lapierre since you can’t look at x-rays here.

@TheUnseenHand can come across as unduly harsh (often lol), but that’s just how they roll. I always get a kick out of it myself, particularly when the piss all over any and all bad passing in GDT. It’s always pretty bracing, but it is specific to the performance they are watching at the time and it’s not they’re hurting the players feeling or something with their comments. It’s usually (very) harsh but fair, whether I agree with all their observations or not. (And I’m just a fan and not a hockey coach/scout so I’m not going to debate takes on specific plays myself but others can have at it.)

It would be different if this was Twitter, and they made general over the top, exceedingly dickish comments based mostly on one past Tournament performance and they ran Elite Prospects. (So I know what you are defensive about and that was weird and bad, considering the position of the people involved and the very likable Muslim Russian teen boy from the boonies that they were dragging for their own amusement as an fun “inside joke”, publicly, on Twitter.)

 

[Guttersniped]

I know we're all getting old here and screens are getting smaller, but falling and failing are still different words even in hockey when usually one leads to the other.

I did misread it as falling. Yep. That happened. Oops.

 

[Ripshot 43]

Has he played again since “the incident” as I’m calling it? I would like to know if we should love or hate him for the rest of the week

 

[My3Sons]

It's a shame with a prospect who needs so much development that his cultural background precludes him from ever playing in the AHL. I think that would benefit him if he really comes to North America at the end of this season, but I understand that you cannot argue with hundreds, if not thousands, of years of animus towards minor league hockey.

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

If I were Fitz I would have taken Helge Grans, who I haven't seen play but everything I've read indicates he's not trending as well as Mukhamadullin. If we are really using 20/20 hindsight the right play was probably to not take a dman and instead take Lapierre/Zary/Perreault/Bordeleau or whoever your favorite forward prospect that went after him is. But the team really needed to shore up the d pipeline so I can't fault the pick.

 

[AfroThunder396]

It's very funny because at the time the schools of thought were:

1.) Take a boom-or-bust high ceiling project kind of guy
2.) Trade the pick for a young defenseman

So Fitz drafts a boom-or-bust high ceiling project young defenseman....and everyone hated it. Now here we are, literally one year to the day sine the 2020 draft, and Fitz looks like a genius for getting those three players in the first round.

 

[Blackjack]

It's very funny because at the time the schools of thought were:

1.) Take a boom-or-bust high ceiling project kind of guy
2.) Trade the pick for a young defenseman

So Fitz drafts a boom-or-bust high ceiling project young defenseman....and everyone hated it. Now here we are, literally one year to the day sine the 2020 draft, and Fitz looks like a genius for getting those three players in the first round.

Ehh, I wanted 3.) take a guy that falls, regardless of position. Based on who was still available I would have wanted Lapierre, Perreault, or Gunler. I was definitely against the Muk pick, I'm glad he's off to a good start though.

 

[Stephen Gionta]

If I were Fitz I would have taken Helge Grans, who I haven't seen play but everything I've read indicates he's not trending as well as Mukhamadullin. If we are really using 20/20 hindsight the right play was probably to not take a dman and instead take Lapierre/Zary/Perreault/Bordeleau or whoever your favorite forward prospect that went after him is. But the team really needed to shore up the d pipeline so I can't fault the pick.

The Devils took a RW and a C with their first two 1st rounders. They were 100% going with a defenseman (or goalie) with the third 1st rounder, unless a forward significantly dropped.

 

[Nocashstyle]

Ehh, I wanted 3.) take a guy that falls, regardless of position. Based on who was still available I would have wanted Lapierre, Perreault, or Gunler. I was definitely against the Muk pick, I'm glad he's off to a good start though.

Yeah I wanted Lapierre and he looked great in the preseason game against the Devils. Muk has definitely improved his stock since the draft though, so can’t complain.

 

[TheUnseenHand]

Barron would have been drafted ahead of him if blood clots hadn’t cut his 2019-20 short and left him with some future health questions.

That’s the only reason he dropped, he was RHD in a draft with little high end defense after the top two guys. He would have been drafted sooner without the health issue, though not sure exactly when (since in this alternate universe he plays a full 2019-20 season).

He can very easily end up becoming a “steal” but I get why GMs might have been put off using an much earlier pick on him, even more so than Lapierre since you can’t look at x-rays here.

@TheUnseenHand can come across as unduly harsh (often lol), but that’s just how they roll. I always get a kick out of it myself, particularly when the piss all over any and all bad passing in GDT. It’s always pretty bracing, but it is specific to the performance they are watching at the time and it’s not they’re hurting the players feeling or something with their comments. It’s usually (very) harsh but fair, whether I agree with all their observations or not. (And I’m just a fan and not a hockey coach/scout so I’m not going to debate takes on specific plays myself but others can have at it.)

It would be different if this was Twitter, and they made general over the top, exceedingly dickish comments based mostly on one past Tournament performance and they ran Elite Prospects. (So I know what you are defensive about and that was weird and bad, considering the position of the people involved and the very likable Muslim Russian teen boy from the boonies that they were dragging for their own amusement as an fun “inside joke”, publicly, on Twitter.)

I think it needs to be understood that observation =\= reaction and observation =\= criticism. It speaks nothing of the past and nothing of the future. It's no different than saying grass is green. That doesn't make grass good to bad. It speaks nothing to my opinion on grass or what the future holds for it.

Observation is simply observation. And that's all I was doing. Muk made some big mistakes. That's it.

It should be known that I was critical of the pick and would have much rather taken Lapierre, but we picked Muk and now I want him to become the best D man ever. I'm absolutely rooting for him.

 

[StevenToddIves]

If I were Fitz I would have taken Helge Grans, who I haven't seen play but everything I've read indicates he's not trending as well as Mukhamadullin. If we are really using 20/20 hindsight the right play was probably to not take a dman and instead take Lapierre/Zary/Perreault/Bordeleau or whoever your favorite forward prospect that went after him is. But the team really needed to shore up the d pipeline so I can't fault the pick.

Helge Grans does not have close to the upside of Mukhamadullin, in my opinion. He is the penultimate example of "big and fast but not that good at hockey". I prefer to stay away from such players, especially on defense. I had Grans ranked light years behind Brock Faber, who would have been my likely pick at #20 overall in 2020.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Ehh, I wanted 3.) take a guy that falls, regardless of position. Based on who was still available I would have wanted Lapierre, Perreault, or Gunler. I was definitely against the Muk pick, I'm glad he's off to a good start though.

The problem with Perreault or Gunler at that point was that Mercer was still seen largely as a RW, which was also obviously Holtz's position. Taking three RWs in the 2020 first round would have been a bit excessive. Though now it looks like Mercer's future might be at center, I would still prefer him eventually as the top line RW alongside Hughes.

In retrospect, I was as high on Perreault as anyone -- I had him ranked neck and neck with Mercer just outside the top 10... and also Lapierre. But in a 2020 redraft, Mercer goes top 10 and neither Lapierre or Perreault do, so the Devils obviously made an outstanding selection at #18 overall.

 

[TBF1972]

If I were Fitz I would have taken Helge Grans, who I haven't seen play but everything I've read indicates he's not trending as well as Mukhamadullin. If we are really using 20/20 hindsight the right play was probably to not take a dman and instead take Lapierre/Zary/Perreault/Bordeleau or whoever your favorite forward prospect that went after him is. But the team really needed to shore up the d pipeline so I can't fault the pick.

if you use hindsight, there is no need for muk as we have hughes.

 

[Buck Dancer]

If I were Fitz I would have taken Helge Grans, who I haven't seen play but everything I've read indicates he's not trending as well as Mukhamadullin. If we are really using 20/20 hindsight the right play was probably to not take a dman and instead take Lapierre/Zary/Perreault/Bordeleau or whoever your favorite forward prospect that went after him is. But the team really needed to shore up the d pipeline so I can't fault the pick.

Lapierre was my pick, especially drafting Mercer a couple of picks before. Both guys have been linked to the hip since Mercer joined Chicoutimi and they’ve been lights out ever since.

With a 3rd pick in the 1st round, we went for the homerun pick I guess in Shaq. Time will tell but Hendrix looked really good against us a couple of days ago.

 

[Call Me Al]

Lapierre had a ton of injuries. He looks good but that was never the question, let’s see how he holds up in the nhl before declaring that a miss in our part

 

[markog]

if you use hindsight, there is no need for muk as we have hughes.

That was f***ed up too, going for the little brother instead of Swede.

 

[Eggtimer]

That was f***ed up too, going for the little brother instead of Swede.

Oh no you didn’t go there .

 

[NjDevsRR]

Hes a 19 year old Dman. Lets calm down and see how he looks when hes 22.

 

[GameSeven]

I thought this nifty little goal by Shak was worthy of a cross-post and a bump

 

[Devils731]

Quick hands; thinking about how to put the puck in the net anyway possible. Good stuff.

 

[Buck Dancer]

That’s some good hand/eye coordination right there… just don’t know what he’s doing in the crease when he’s supposed to be at the blue line lol