GDT: Super Late Last Minute Prospect Showdown GDT

[TheOrganist]

Great reports on Bolduc. Seems primed to have a really nice first full season with the big club. Funny that he was a throw-in winger to many trade proposals over the last few years. These kids need time to marinate sometimes.

 

[Brian39]

I'm seeing mixed reviews on Dean. After being at both games, I side with the cautious viewpoint. I don't see a player who is developing to be anything other than a JAG at this point. He could be a 4th liner, but he's not particularly big or fast. He's not afraid to try to be physical but he's not very explosive. His offensive game was not noteworthy in either game. I'm not trying to slam him. I just don't see him fitting in with what DA is currently doing with the bottom 6. Yes, he does a lot of little things right, but because he's not particularly dynamic in any area ... he's just a guy at this point.

I don't disagree with the assessment of his toolbox and I won't be surprised if he ultimately winds up being 'just a guy.' However, I think there is still very much upside to be more than that.

I think it is still in the cards for Dean to become a better player than Oskar Sundqvist ever was (and I say that as a big fan of Sunny). He may fall short of that mark and he may fall well short of that mark. But I still see the him with a legit chance to be a 14+ minute a night NHL center and I definitely consider that to be more than just a guy. Generally speaking, 'pretty good at everything, but not great at anything' guys are long term projects who aren't busting down the NHL doors at 21 years old.

Sunny's first NHL game was in his D+4 season just a month before he turned 22. He played 18 games that year and then played 10 games the next year. He came to the Blues in advance of his D+6 season, where he got 42 games as a pure 4th liner. 2018/19 was his D+7 season and he established himself as a legit, jack-of-all trades bottom 6 guy.

Barby got here quicker and had more obvious offensive skill. He played his first NHL game shortly after turning 21 in the middle of his D+3 season. He played 30 NHL games that year and then 53 NHL games in his D+4 season. He stuck around full time in his D+5 season (as a bottom 6 guy on the Cup team), gave us 2 more cheap bottom 6 seasons, and then 1.5 dirt cheap middle-to-top 6 seasons before being traded as a rental for...Zach Dean. Vegas won a Cup with him riding shotgun to Jack Eichel (and middle 6 minutes) and then promptly paid him like a 2nd line caliber guy.

To compare, Dean played his first NHL game shortly after turning 21 in his D+3 season. He played 9 garbage time games for a mediocre team and while he didn't look like a fish out of water, he was kind of just there.

I think Dean's upside falls somewhere in the middle of these two guys. He's already better at the dot than either and I think he is better defensively than either of them were early in their careers. I think that Dean is better suited to play center long term than Sunny or Barby. However, Sunny is noticeably bigger. Barby's shot and offensive instincts were noticeably better at this stage of development.

I don't see 2C upside. I don't see him as a guy who can change/define your franchise and he very well might not have his best success in the NHL for us. However, I could very much see him being the kind of guy that takes 4-6 years post-draft to get ready to contribute in the NHL, but then gives you 4+ cost controlled years where he is giving you quality play on your 3rd and 4th lines. That's definitely more than 'just a guy' status and those cost-controlled years would come right when we're hoping to be in a contention window. There is real value there and I do believe such a guy fits into the front office's plan for the bottom 6 through the mid/late 2020s. I'd move him in the right deal if another team really likes him, but realistically his value to the franchise is to be developed as a Swiss Army Knife bottom 6 center. Army loves those guys and I'd wager Steen does too.

 

[MissouriMook]

I think a lot of us were hoping that Dean would turn out to be every bit the NHL player that Barby was, given the circumstances of the trade and their relative draft position. He can still be a very valuable contributor to this team down the line if he does in fact ascend to a level somewhere between Sunny's peak and Barby's peak.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

I don't disagree with the assessment of his toolbox and I won't be surprised if he ultimately winds up being 'just a guy.' However, I think there is still very much upside to be more than that.

I think it is still in the cards for Dean to become a better player than Oskar Sundqvist ever was (and I say that as a big fan of Sunny). He may fall short of that mark and he may fall well short of that mark. But I still see the him with a legit chance to be a 14+ minute a night NHL center and I definitely consider that to be more than just a guy. Generally speaking, 'pretty good at everything, but not great at anything' guys are long term projects who aren't busting down the NHL doors at 21 years old.

Sunny's first NHL game was in his D+4 season just a month before he turned 22. He played 18 games that year and then played 10 games the next year. He came to the Blues in advance of his D+6 season, where he got 42 games as a pure 4th liner. 2018/19 was his D+7 season and he established himself as a legit, jack-of-all trades bottom 6 guy.

Barby got here quicker and had more obvious offensive skill. He played his first NHL game shortly after turning 21 in the middle of his D+3 season. He played 30 NHL games that year and then 53 NHL games in his D+4 season. He stuck around full time in his D+5 season (as a bottom 6 guy on the Cup team), gave us 2 more cheap bottom 6 seasons, and then 1.5 dirt cheap middle-to-top 6 seasons before being traded as a rental for...Zach Dean. Vegas won a Cup with riding shotgun to Jack Eichel (and middle 6 minutes) and then promptly paid him like a 2nd line caliber guy.

To compare, Dean played his first NHL game shortly after turning 21 in his D+1 season. He played 9 garbage time games for a mediocre team and while he didn't look like a fish out of water, he was kind of just there.

I think Dean's upside falls somewhere in the middle of these two guys. He's already better at the dot than either and I think he is better defensively than either of them were early in their careers. I think that Dean is better suited to play center long term than Sunny or Barby. However, Sunny is noticeably bigger. Barby's shot and offensive instincts were noticeably better at this stage of development.

I don't see 2C upside. I don't see him as a guy who can change/define your franchise and he very well might not have his best success in the NHL for us. However, I could very much see him being the kind of guy that takes 4-6 years post-draft to get ready to contribute in the NHL, but then gives you 4+ cost controlled years where he is giving you quality play on your 3rd and 4th lines. That's definitely more than 'just a guy' status and those cost-controlled years would come right when we're hoping to be in a contention window. There is real value there and I do believe such a guy fits into the front office's plan for the bottom 6 through the mid/late 2020s. I'd move him in the right deal if another team really likes him, but realistically his value to the franchise is to be developed as a Swiss Army Knife bottom 6 center. Army loves those guys and I'd wager Steen does too.

I wouldn't immediately give up on developing him as that middle line center, but after next year I hope they start making that bottom center swiss army knife his role in the AHL and groom him for it.

 

[Brian39]

I wouldn't immediately give up on developing him as that middle line center, but after next year I hope they start making that bottom center swiss army knife his role in the AHL and groom him for it.

I don't think he needs to play a grinding, defensive role in the AHL to develop as the Swiss Army Knife guy. I think his defensive ability is ahead of schedule and it is his offensive development that is going to be critical to becoming a contributing NHL guy. I definitely wouldn't use the AHL to try and develop the defensive/physical elements to his game. I want him playing top 6 minutes in the AHL to develop his offensive toolbox and hopefully have all the tools needed to then stick as a contributing bottom 6 NHL guy.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

I don't think he needs to play a grinding, defensive role in the AHL to develop as the Swiss Army Knife guy. I think his defensive ability is ahead of schedule and it is his offensive development that is going to be critical to becoming a contributing NHL guy. I definitely wouldn't use the AHL to try and develop the defensive/physical elements to his game. I want him playing top 6 minutes in the AHL to develop his offensive toolbox and hopefully have all the tools needed to then stick as a contributing bottom 6 NHL guy.

I would use Ian Cole as a case in point. We made him our number 1 guy and PP guy in the ahl, but used him as everything but that when he came up here. Why not teach him to be a defensive D, if that is what you are expecting him to be. I think that has been a failure in developing players over the years.

If he's going to be Penalty killer/shadow type player, then let him work on and gain confidence in that role in the AHL. It isn't an easy automatic role to just assume. Perhaps a 2nd line center to shutdown the number 1 center on the opposing AHL team.

 

[emptyNedder]

Curious to hear what those of you who watched the prospect games thought of Pekarcik. I thought he was late first/early second talent in the 23 draft. Last year he put up points but seemed to struggle for goals. In the prospect highlights he scores on a rebound and a tip. Did he intentionally play more as a net-front presence? How was his 2-way game?

 

[BleedBlue14]

I would use Ian Cole as a case in point. We made him our number 1 guy and PP guy in the ahl, but used him as everything but that when he came up here. Why not teach him to be a defensive D, if that is what you are expecting him to be. I think that has been a failure in developing players over the years.

If he's going to be Penalty killer/shadow type player, then let him work on and gain confidence in that role in the AHL. It isn't an easy automatic role to just assume. Perhaps a 2nd line center to shutdown the number 1 center on the opposing AHL team.

I get the idea behind it. But why would you want to limit/put a guy that's this young in a box like that? Developing his weaknesses is much more beneficial to him and to the organization.

I'm also not sure you can really develop a true shutdown guy in the AHL. The top end of players in that league are barely bottom six scoring options. I see where your thought process is, but i'm not sure the environment would allow for the outcome you're looking for. Nobody is going to emulate matching up against a top line player in the NHL that's in the AHL. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a situation in which you can reasonably say the skill set of a guy in the AHL is similar to that of a guy in any top 6 in the NHL.

 

[blueper]

Curious to hear what those of you who watched the prospect games thought of Pekarcik. I thought he was late first/early second talent in the 23 draft. Last year he put up points but seemed to struggle for goals. In the prospect highlights he scores on a rebound and a tip. Did he intentionally play more as a net-front presence? How was his 2-way game?

Pekarcik stood out to me in the first game. I thought he was solid in every area, but especially noticeable on the forecheck ... gets his stick on exit passes with his speed and wingspan. In the 2nd game he got clipped a couple times in the head area on 1 shift early in the 2nd period. It rattled him for a bit. Then he came back and was noticeable in the heavy traffic areas. I like his 2 way game. He has the potential with his size, speed, and willingness to be physical to be quite a pain to play against ... and he flashed some offensive ability around the net.

 

[blueper]

I don't disagree with the assessment of his toolbox and I won't be surprised if he ultimately winds up being 'just a guy.' However, I think there is still very much upside to be more than that.

I think it is still in the cards for Dean to become a better player than Oskar Sundqvist ever was (and I say that as a big fan of Sunny). He may fall short of that mark and he may fall well short of that mark. But I still see the him with a legit chance to be a 14+ minute a night NHL center and I definitely consider that to be more than just a guy. Generally speaking, 'pretty good at everything, but not great at anything' guys are long term projects who aren't busting down the NHL doors at 21 years old.

Sunny's first NHL game was in his D+4 season just a month before he turned 22. He played 18 games that year and then played 10 games the next year. He came to the Blues in advance of his D+6 season, where he got 42 games as a pure 4th liner. 2018/19 was his D+7 season and he established himself as a legit, jack-of-all trades bottom 6 guy.

Barby got here quicker and had more obvious offensive skill. He played his first NHL game shortly after turning 21 in the middle of his D+3 season. He played 30 NHL games that year and then 53 NHL games in his D+4 season. He stuck around full time in his D+5 season (as a bottom 6 guy on the Cup team), gave us 2 more cheap bottom 6 seasons, and then 1.5 dirt cheap middle-to-top 6 seasons before being traded as a rental for...Zach Dean. Vegas won a Cup with him riding shotgun to Jack Eichel (and middle 6 minutes) and then promptly paid him like a 2nd line caliber guy.

To compare, Dean played his first NHL game shortly after turning 21 in his D+3 season. He played 9 garbage time games for a mediocre team and while he didn't look like a fish out of water, he was kind of just there.

I think Dean's upside falls somewhere in the middle of these two guys. He's already better at the dot than either and I think he is better defensively than either of them were early in their careers. I think that Dean is better suited to play center long term than Sunny or Barby. However, Sunny is noticeably bigger. Barby's shot and offensive instincts were noticeably better at this stage of development.

I don't see 2C upside. I don't see him as a guy who can change/define your franchise and he very well might not have his best success in the NHL for us. However, I could very much see him being the kind of guy that takes 4-6 years post-draft to get ready to contribute in the NHL, but then gives you 4+ cost controlled years where he is giving you quality play on your 3rd and 4th lines. That's definitely more than 'just a guy' status and those cost-controlled years would come right when we're hoping to be in a contention window. There is real value there and I do believe such a guy fits into the front office's plan for the bottom 6 through the mid/late 2020s. I'd move him in the right deal if another team really likes him, but realistically his value to the franchise is to be developed as a Swiss Army Knife bottom 6 center. Army loves those guys and I'd wager Steen does too.

I agree with you. My comments were merely about where he is now. Anything else would be me reading into his development ... a lot. Right now he's not an exciting guy for a former late 1st round pick. I think I just had higher hopes for him when we acquired him. Now he projects as a bottom 6 ceiling player. You are probably right in your comparison, but Sunny has gotten every mile out of his ability and that is rare.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Many good comments on Dean.

My main concern for him is that he doesn’t appear to have the upper body frame to add enough of that type of strength to manage a lengthy career in the NHL.

I like Dean as a bottom six center, but he may have to switch to wing to stay in the NHL.

I loved his response when elevated to a scoring line, but he needs to add strength, especially to his core, hips and legs.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

I get the idea behind it. But why would you want to limit/put a guy that's this young in a box like that? Developing his weaknesses is much more beneficial to him and to the organization.

I'm also not sure you can really develop a true shutdown guy in the AHL. The top end of players in that league are barely bottom six scoring options. I see where your thought process is, but i'm not sure the environment would allow for the outcome you're looking for. Nobody is going to emulate matching up against a top line player in the NHL that's in the AHL. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a situation in which you can reasonably say the skill set of a guy in the AHL is similar to that of a guy in any top 6 in the NHL.

Your points are very valid, but how can a player develop his defensive game if his primary role is as an offensive player? I did say after this year...heck maybe 2 if his offensive game shows up. If he is going to be put in a role defensively, then I would hope he would come up here knowing what he needs to do. It is kind of like Jordan Schmaltz being brought up and playing 3rd pair defense. He never had to play defense in college or the AHL. He was the offensive catalyst. Once he had to play defense, he was done.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Your points are very valid, but how can a player develop his defensive game if his primary role is as an offensive player? I did say after this year...heck maybe 2 if his offensive game shows up. If he is going to be put in a role defensively, then I would hope he would come up here knowing what he needs to do. It is kind of like Jordan Schmaltz being brought up and playing 3rd pair defense. He never had to play defense in college or the AHL. He was the offensive catalyst. Once he had to play defense, he was done.

The game has evolved such that 1st line guys are often matched up against other 1st lines. So I think it's reasonable to have Dean playing 1c in Springfield, match him up against top players, and expect him to dominate on both ends of the ice. Not saying he WILL dominate, but I think that is the best role for him in AHL to allow him to develop at both ends. So whether his offensive game exceeds expectations and he can be 2c or he is what he appears and is bottom 6 center, in either role with his size and skills he needs to learn to play a 200' game.

 

[BleedBlue14]

Your points are very valid, but how can a player develop his defensive game if his primary role is as an offensive player? I did say after this year...heck maybe 2 if his offensive game shows up. If he is going to be put in a role defensively, then I would hope he would come up here knowing what he needs to do. It is kind of like Jordan Schmaltz being brought up and playing 3rd pair defense. He never had to play defense in college or the AHL. He was the offensive catalyst. Once he had to play defense, he was done.

The issue is I don't think we as fans or observers view Dean's attention to detail/responsibility as the issue with Dean. I think with some physical maturity you could already pigeon-hole Dean into a situation where he strictly thinks about defense and being responsible. You can put him in offensive roles and still have him available for defensive roles as well he'll just have to justify being given a large amount of ice time.

I don't think you want that in today's NHL necessarily when it comes with virtually 0 offense.

I'm not trying to say that you could put him out there into a 4th line right now and have them matchup with the Crosby's/McDavid's/Mackinnons and expect good things. But if the sole responsibility was that I'm also not sure there's any development that could be done at lower levels to account for that. I think if you do that you ideally need someone that is a large frame, and a very good skater, or at the very least a very good skater and extremely competitive. I think Dean is an alright skater, I don't think he's ever going to be elite to be in that spot. His frame is fine, but it wouldn't be considered on the larger side.

I think the best case outcome for Dean is a 3rd line center who is responsible with some bump in his game that can chip in 30-40 points which is great. You round out his game to get to that point so he can have the opportunities to grow into that defensive specialist at the NHL level. At the very least if you have a guy that can be a reasonable 3rd line player it doesn't look near as bad when he's failing in a role like that as it would if he's only getting 10-15 points with the ice time doing the same thing.

I really think he'll be up for some time this year and next year he'll probably break camp in that 4C role. I think Faksa is a bridge for him so we don't have as many growing pains as we probably already likely will.