That is an incredible description of the video lol, looks like he touches the puck with his skate for about a millisecond.
Prospect Info: Tom Willander: 11th Overall 2023 Draft (Rogle BK J20) - Part 02
- Thread starter Vector
- Start date
That is an incredible description of the video lol, looks like he touches the puck with his skate for about a millisecond.
Sure, but it isn't good if an undrafted prospect, of the same age, is beating out your top ten talent for PP minutes in a pretty poor quality league. Again, this is solely from a production perspective and without making any comment on how much weight to attribute to production in evaluating a prospect like Willander.
But if we are talking about production, it isn't a great excuse that Willander's coach preferred an undrafted prospect that is the same age as Willander given that Willander is a top ten talent.
And the league we are talking about, at least according to this attempted equivalency (NHL Equivalency and Prospect Projection Models: Building the NHL Equivalency Model (Part 2)) , is below the BCHL and AJHL.
So going back to your Makar example, that would be like a defensemen on his AJHL team outscoring him in his draft year, and that didn't happen.
Any number of reasons, including having Willander play PP2 so he can play PK1 like I mentioned, are possible. Tocchet regularly put Kuzmenko on PP1 even though someone like Hoglander was better. Willander was also the highest scoring defenseman on that team, and he wasn't drafted to be a PP QB.
HockeyWooot
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2020
- 2,605
- 2,268
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 24,762
- 9,448
Jason Bukala, who I quite like, was on Canucks Talk the other day and pulled out the comp of a smoother skating, higher IQ, but less physical MacKenzie Weegar for upside based on college tape.
You pointed out a scenario where you claimed Willander was underproducing when getting PP1 minutes, then re-adjusted your argument to "he wasn't good enough for PP1" when presented with evidence that that wasn't the case, so it seems like you just want this guy to be bad.
Consider the scenario where Christian Ehrhoff was given PP1 minutes over Hamhuis or Edler, or when Hughes is used on PP1 but not PK1. The point is that the production doesn't really matter when you're looking at defensemen because it's tied to usage. It only matters if it's egregiously poor production, which isn't the case here, and it also really only matters if Willander is projected to be a PP QB, which again isn't the case here.
No, you have mischaracterized my position. MS initially excused his production because he isn’t currently on the first PP because he’s behind Hutson. That was a fair comment, so I looked at his production in his draft year as that would be relevant in analyzing his ability to produce. I don’t recall ever claiming he was getting first pp time in his draft season. But if he wasn’t, then it wasn’t because he was stuck behind a blue chip prospect, but instead, because he was likely a worse option than a couple of undrafted prospects in a poor quality league.
So ya, I think you are 100% off here and I’m not really sure even what your point is. I think the evidence is pretty clear that he didn’t produce well. Again, and for like the fourth time, I’m not claiming this poor production is a big issue for Willander.
But context is key. It’s one thing to excuse Willander for not having good production because he’s stuck behind a great offensive dynamo prospect in Hutson (whose probably a top 10-20 prospect in the world), it’s entirely a different thing if Willander isn’t producing well because he’s not getting first pp time because the coach prefers two y drafted nothing prospects one of which is the same age as Willander.
Frankly I’m not sure why you are even debating this.
Willander is a late riser, I don’t think he was on the radar until the beginning of the draft calendar year. Probably a giant pain in the ass to look into the stats but prospects that are late risers tend to get more minutes later into the season vs the beginning because they weren’t projected to be the main guy for their team.
I'm confused about where this idea that 15 in 27 isn't good production for a freshman is coming from. If he was a forward yeah you could be concerned but like as a d-men? That seems right in line with guys like Faber, McAvoy and Makar as a freshman. Like who are these mythical d-men that are putting up huge number as freshmen, cause from all the big names I could find from the NCAA have similar stats to Willander. Hughes is about the only outlier but it's not like he was tearing up the NCAA either as a freshman he was just a little higher than the rest, but still well under 1.0 ppg
You're using the wrong statistics (point production) to evaluate a defender who isn't projected to be a one-dimensional offensive defenseman and ignoring countless examples of other top pairing defensemen (McAvoy, Werenski, Makar) who also don't produce "well" in their D+1. You're also saying context is key, which is exactly what I am saying, and then ignoring that context.
Willander projects to be a player like Hronek. He's not projected to be an offensive dynamo from the back-end. As long as he isn't producing a 1 goal 5 assist stat line, there isn't really anything to be worried about until we see him at the AHL level because his production is in line with other prospects of a similar caliber. If he flatlines next year, sure, be worried. He looked good at the WJCs and also didn't produce "well", but was fantastic defensively; I am pretty sure most would take Willander over ASP who outproduced him.
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 24,762
- 9,448
It's not particularly concerning. He was never viewed as a #1 D prospect, he's more of a 2/3 hopefully, with some upside. If he finishes with 20 pts as a freshman and is positive defensive it's a pretty solid season. Then you hope in his second year he's 30+ pts and he'll largely be viewed as on track in terms of development. Hopefully he blows the doors off next year, but solid in improvement would be fine.
Thing with Willander is he looks to have an extremely safe floor, the question is how far he can push that offensive side of the game, which could drive him into complimentary first pairing or strong second pair potential.
It’s crazy that I’ve literally said that his production isn’t a big issue given the type of prospect he is. I think I’ve said this 2-3 times and somehow you are still misrepresenting my position which is very frustrating. I’ve also said multiple times that I am not commenting on or trying to evaluate the importance of production for a player like Willander.
You realize none of my posts are about his D plus 1 year? You are so far out to lunch on this response.
No, this is not happening. You seem to have completely fabricated a straw man that doesn’t at all represent my position.
Ya, I agree. And I have never disagreed with this and have always maintained that I didn’t think his production was a big issue.
You've brought up point production by saying he was outscored on his J20 team (not true), claimed that he wasn't blocked by anybody on PP1 (again, not true), and finished your point about his stats by saying point production doesn't matter despite initially coming up with a list of players who outproduced him at the same age. If points doesn't matter, then why did you bother bringing up his stats on his J20 team? That was the crux of the disagreement.
You also can't really say that I've created a strawman argument you when I am quoting you verbatim: "But context is key".
I also think you're getting unnecessarily combative with me when none of my replies have been in the same tone, so I will drop this. I think we largely agree but you're unhappy with the pushback on your original claim of his draft year. It's fine.
Last edited:
With d-men, it's never about 'goals and points', but the foundation pieces to their games. How well do they skate? How good is their gap control and defensive reactions; and most importantly, how do they 'think the game'.
Wilander gets top marks in all those categories, from what I've seen. It's interesting to note that even Quinn Hughes wasn't a big-time scorer in the NCAA during his two years at the U of Michigan.
He had five goals and 24 assists in 37 games in his first season; and improved to five goals and 29 assists in 33 games his second season. These are solid numbers--but nothing that would have given you total confidence that he'd be a dominant, ppg d-man in the NHL.
So it's still reasonable to project Wilander as a legit top-four d-man in the NHL, particularly because he's a rare right shot defender.
Wilander gets top marks in all those categories, from what I've seen. It's interesting to note that even Quinn Hughes wasn't a big-time scorer in the NCAA during his two years at the U of Michigan.
He had five goals and 24 assists in 37 games in his first season; and improved to five goals and 29 assists in 33 games his second season. These are solid numbers--but nothing that would have given you total confidence that he'd be a dominant, ppg d-man in the NHL.
So it's still reasonable to project Wilander as a legit top-four d-man in the NHL, particularly because he's a rare right shot defender.
Of course! You're only here to bury Caesar!
If you don't think the production matters, why are you bringing it up and calling it "not good."
"it isn't good if an undrafted prospect, of the same age, is beating out your top ten talent for PP minutes in a pretty poor quality league"
Is that you maintaining that the production wasn't an issue?
Chiripa20
Registered User
canuckking1
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2015
- 12,952
- 14,095
Bumped down to the 3rd pair and then gets scored on, followed by getting promoted back to the 2nd pair... interesting coaching
Coffee
Take one step towards the direction you want to go
- Nov 12, 2021
- 9,271
- 8,124
It’s the same coach who has previously won 5 straight bantam championships, im not too worried
The Iron Goalie
Formally 'OEL for Norris'
ihaveyuidonttouchme
MrShiftbyShiftGuy
lol maybe he saw all the shittalk on his poor ppg and decided to take matters into his own hands
Jason Bukala had a nice bit on Willander on the CanucksTalk podcast yesterday…
He seems very high on him and how his game has progressed this year.
I think his quote was he already projects at a #4 and had the upside to be a 2 and 1/2 (not full time #2, but can jump up and play as your #2 at times).
That is based on how what he’s seen of him this season and he seems to leave room for a higher projection if he can show more offensively next season.
Interestingly, he said just as Willander was a late riser last season, he’s seeing the same type of progression from him in His first NCAA season and it has him excited.
Bukala was very high on Willander before the draft and seems to really know and like the player. It’s nice to see he seems even more confident about him now than he was last summer before the draft.
Sorry, when did I say this exactly? I posted that he was third in points per game among defensemen on his team in my first post. I’ve always been talking about points per game and this is pretty obvious if you read my post.
I claimed that he wasn’t blocked by anyone good and that’s 100% true. You realize there is a huge difference between being beaten out by a top prospect and being beaten out by a nothing prospect. And these two guys played only 26 games, and some of those may have been together, so about half of the time or so they weren’t even on the team.
I’ve already explained this to you, and frankly, shouldn’t have to again. MS initially made the point, which I agree with, that being critical of Willamder’s production this year was not fair given that an offensive dynamo prospect in Hutson was blocking him. So, I decided to look into his previous year to see how well he produced since that is obviously relevant in evaluating his production which was the subject I was replying to. That is the context of this. And throughout this whole exchange I’ve maintained that I don’t think his production is a big issue for several reasons.
You have basically never quoted me verbatim and continually misrepresent my position.
My “context is key” was in reference to two bad examples you used “Ehrhoff and Hughes” since obviously top draft picks in their draft year, in a league worse than the BCHL, are usually going to be all situation players, and I would say that a player that isn’t is the exception, not the rule.
I’m frustrated because you are continually misrepresenting my position. Go back and reread my posts, and if you still think I am saying something I am telling you I am not, then provide direct quotes with context.
I’ve explained why I brought it up a couple of times including the above post.
Ya, that production is not good. But if you are a player being drafted for your two way game like Willander, and your meteoric rise in your draft year, then your production isn’t necessarily an issue.
I am not going to go point by point there but this message is what I was replying to.
You seem to agree with that point, but you were hyperfocused on his production anyway, so why bother? If you agree that production isn't relevant for a prospect like Willander, then it shouldn't matter. I'm simply pointing out that horrific production would be a 0-0-0 stat line or whatever, and it's not a doomsday scenario that requires a microdissection of stats.
And if you personally go through the entire list of J20 defensemen who outscored Willander, say that his production is poor based on where he's drafted, then yeah, the discussion is regarding his production. Everything points to it being at a level that is in line with NHL players and non-NHL players, because again, production by defensemen is dependent on context.
You seem to agree with that point, but you were hyperfocused on his production anyway, so why bother? If you agree that production isn't relevant for a prospect like Willander, then it shouldn't matter. I'm simply pointing out that horrific production would be a 0-0-0 stat line or whatever, and it's not a doomsday scenario that requires a microdissection of stats.
But you can’t quote this out of context ignoring why I made this post and then get upset that I’m overly focused on production or something. I wasn’t the one who brought up production. I brought up production because there was an ongoing debate about his current quality of production so last year’s could help shed some light.
