Prospect Info: Tyler Boucher (RW/LW) - Don`t sleep on Tyler Boucher

[Burrowsaurus]

I assume you mean his point totals - every comment I read here is worrying about the guy getting a PPG in junior. I understand the significance but we need to stop evaluating the guy on just goals
And assists. His own dad thinks he could be a 20/20 guy.

He probably ends up a 16-13 guy and if he develops his physicality there will be nothing wrong with that.

I’m stung they we were a few stupid loses away from Mactavish or whatever. Where are all the people who insisted those few 2021 wins would be great for this teams identify?

What’s great for this teams identity is developing players like Stutzle and signing players like Cat and Giroux.

20/20 in the NHL is hard. Guys with 20 goal potentials in the nhl can usually put up points in Junior.

 

[Sweatred]

20/20 in the NHL is hard. Guys with 20 goal potentials in the nhl can usually put up points in Junior.

I agree - his dad (who played in the league) “thinks he could be that guy”….

I think he’ll score 10-20 with us. He’s strong enough around the net and has a hard, heavy shot.

 

[Cosmix]

I assume you mean his point totals - every comment I read here is worrying about the guy getting a PPG in junior. I understand the significance but we need to stop evaluating the guy on just goals
And assists. His own dad thinks he could be a 20/20 guy.

He probably ends up a 16-13 guy and if he develops his physicality there will be nothing wrong with that.

I’m stung they we were a few stupid loses away from Mactavish or whatever. Where are all the people who insisted those few 2021 wins would be great for this teams identify?

What’s great for this teams identity is developing players like Stutzle and signing players like Cat and Giroux.

I am in agreement with respect to the meaningless wins the Senators got at the end of last season costing us a better draft pick, and adding players like Stutzel, Debrincat and Giroux. Would have liked to add Klingberg too.

 

[Cosmix]

The Senators could afford a $7M D if we could get rid of Hamonic and Zaitsev.

 

[Micklebot]

I agree - his dad (who played in the league) “thinks he could be that guy”….

Truly an unbiased opinion if there ever was one...

I think he’ll score 10-20 with us. He’s strong enough around the net and has a hard, heavy shot.

Honestly, I like his skill set, but at some point he's going to have to show he can put all his tools to good use and do more than hit and occasionally be in position to fire off that hard shot of his.

Last year was rough for him, hoping he can turn the page, he should be an impact player for the 67s next year. I'm not ready to write him off, but I'm also not going to pretend things are going as planned and he's on course to be an elite third liner, . Lots of time left though.

 

[Icelevel]

Truly an unbiased opinion if there ever was one...


Honestly, I like his skill set, but at some point he's going to have to show he can put all his tools to good use and do more than hit and occasionally be in position to fire off that hard shot of his.

Last year was rough for him, hoping he can turn the page, he should be an impact player for the 67s next year. I'm not ready to write him off, but I'm also not going to pretend things are going as planned and he's on course to be an elite third liner, . Lots of time left though.

He’s on course to be a good player for us. That’s all at this point. And that’s good enough. The rest has to play out. HOW good he’ll be, how many points and goals he will get….impossible to predict now. And yeah it’s always a possibility a young player doesn’t last.

 

[Sweatred]

Truly an unbiased opinion if there ever was one...


Honestly, I like his skill set, but at some point he's going to have to show he can put all his tools to good use and do more than hit and occasionally be in position to fire off that hard shot of his.

Last year was rough for him, hoping he can turn the page, he should be an impact player for the 67s next year. I'm not ready to write him off, but I'm also not going to pretend things are going as planned and he's on course to be an elite third liner, . Lots of time left though.

Of course it’s biased - why do you think I included “His Dad” as a reference.

 

[OD99]

He’s on course to be a good player for us. That’s all at this point. And that’s good enough. The rest has to play out. HOW good he’ll be, how many points and goals he will get….impossible to predict now. And yeah it’s always a possibility a young player doesn’t last.

How have you determined he is, "on course" to be a good player for us?

In the last 3 years he hasn't played much but when he has his scoring has not been to the level of a prospect expected to make an NHL roster, let alone be some elite 3rd liner.

What are you basing your statement on?

I am in agreement with respect to the meaningless wins the Senators got at the end of last season costing us a better draft pick

Asking a young group of pro athletes to throw games so that the team can have a better draft pick would never happen.

Benching all of the good young players would also draw attention as there are rules against tanking. What exactly was the team supposed to do?

 

[ijif]

I assume you mean his point totals - every comment I read here is worrying about the guy getting a PPG in junior. I understand the significance but we need to stop evaluating the guy on just goals
And assists. His own dad thinks he could be a 20/20 guy.

He probably ends up a 16-13 guy and if he develops his physicality there will be nothing wrong with that.

I’m stung they we were a few stupid loses away from Mactavish or whatever. Where are all the people who insisted those few 2021 wins would be great for this teams identify?

What’s great for this teams identity is developing players like Stutzle and signing players like Cat and Giroux.

What does it mean to be a 16-13 guy? If you do it once in your career, does it count? Or is it more about prime/peak or career averages?

 

[Sweatred]

What does it mean to be a 16-13 guy? If you do it once in your career, does it count? Or is it more about prime/peak or career averages?

Not sure - same thing as a 20/20 guy but less…

what I mean is his top few years average. I don’t think he will see enough PP time and his ice time will be slanted towards dzone coverage.

He’ll hit some open nets and bang some rebounds in and probably not see 20 goals very many times.

 

[ijif]

Not sure - same thing as a 20/20 guy but less…

what I mean is his top few years average. I don’t think he will see enough PP time and his ice time will be slanted towards dzone coverage.

He’ll hit some open nets and bang some rebounds in and probably not see 20 goals very many times.

Does that mean top few consecutive years or cherry-picked best years? How many years? I'm just asking so you are on record and don't change your definition. I get it is hard to make clear definitions, but I am sure you can do it!

I don't care if he hits or scores points. I care that he helps our team win.

 

[OD99]

His ice time will be slanted towards dzone coverage.

I have seen this referenced on more than a few occasions; usually when degrading Sillinger as a PP3 guy or something like that but where is there any evidence Boucher is a defensively responsible player?

I have looked at a bunch of scouting reports and that seems to consistently be the area he needs the most improvement. What are you seeing that makes you believe he is going to be a checking winger? That seems to be part of the attraction but he doesn't seem to be a trusted defensive player.

 

[BondraTime]

Boucher isn't a defensive player as of now, no clue where that's coming from.

 

[Micklebot]

Boucher isn't a defensive player as of now, no clue where that's coming from.

Wishful thinking would be my guess ...

He has the work ethic and physical tools, but in my admittedly limited viewings plays a bit like a forward version of early days Boroweicki in the d zone, really aggressive on the puck carrier.

 

[BondraTime]

Wishful thinking would be my guess ...

He has the work ethic and physical tools, but in my admittedly limited viewings plays a bit like a forward version of early days Boroweicki in the d zone, really aggressive on the puck carrier.

He's not, or never has been, known as a defensive forward though

He's a puck hound, and he's going to have D looking over their shoulders when he's on the forecheck. He's definitely not a guy you want out defending a lead or against other teams top guys, as of now at least. Maybe he becomes that, but he doesn't seem to be that, or anything close to it, right now.

 

[Micklebot]

He's not, or never has been, known as a defensive forward though

He's a puck hound, and he's going to have D looking over their shoulders when he's on the forecheck. He's definitely not a guy you want out defending a lead or against other teams top guys, as of now at least. Maybe he becomes that, but he doesn't seem to be that, or anything close to it, right now.

Oh, I agree. He's wired to be on an energy line, not a shut down one. I don't think he's going to be a bad defensive player but don't imagine he's going to be shadowing the other teams top players.

 

[jhutter]

Wishful thinking would be my guess ...

He has the work ethic and physical tools, but in my admittedly limited viewings plays a bit like a forward version of early days Boroweicki in the d zone, really aggressive on the puck carrier.

The jokes honestly write themselves. A tenth overall draft pick reminding fans of a young Mark Borowiecki.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Brannstrom's off somewhere reading this comment wondering when he'll be afforded such leeway.

It's the inconsistency with the angle you mentioned that irks me. You can see posters in this thread who have continually pooped on Brannstrom getting defensive about criticisms of Boucher. The conversation around Brann never devolved into saying people are being negative and not supporting the team. Some felt like they'd seen enough and had labelled him a bust, some stressed patience because he was a young defenseman who played through injuries/abnormal seasons/terrible teams.

If we're going to be positive about the players in our system, that should be applied consistently. Some of the posters we see in this thread passionately defending Boucher despite his terrible D+1 season are the same ones who make comments about how Brannstrom isn't an NHL player whenever he makes a mistake. Just ends up coming off as rules for thee but not for me.

Difference being Brannstrom was drafted 4 years earlier.

 

[Icelevel]

The jokes honestly write themselves. A tenth overall draft pick reminding fans of a young Mark Borowiecki.

One person

 

[Sweatred]

One person

BoroCop would be a better first rounder selection than the type of guys the Sens take mid-late first round

Logan Brown
Colin White
Shane Bowers
Jakob Klepsis
Jim Obrien
Patty Eaves
Curtis Lazar

 

[Dan Patrick]

BoroCop would be a better first rounder selection than the type of guys the Sens take mid-late first round

Logan Brown
Colin White
Shane Bowers
Jakob Klepsis
Jim Obrien
Patty Eaves
Curtis Lazar

I mean Logan Brown was a high skilled Centre, we also selected Puempel who was a high skill boom or bust prospect, also I think you could argue Karlsson, Ceci, Chabot, Thomson were all medium to high skill project type D picks.

To generalize a bit, it would seem to me that we most often use our higher variance 1st round player selections on D and use our lower variance selections on forwards. I can understand the school of thought behind it but you are going to miss out on some high skill forwards in the mid to late rounds if you do that regularly. I also think that the team regularly drafts for positional need in the first which doesnt seem ideal and probably leaves better players available. Boucher, Thomson, and L. Brown seem like good recent examples of this.

 

[Sweatred]

I mean Logan Brown was a high skilled Centre, we also selected Puempel who was a high skill boom or bust prospect, also I think you could argue Karlsson, Ceci, Chabot, Thomson were all medium to high skill project type D picks.

To generalize a bit, it would seem to me that we most often use our higher variance 1st round player selections on D and use our lower variance selections on forwards. I can understand the school of thought behind it but you are going to miss out on some high skill forwards in the mid to late rounds if you do that regularly. I also think that the team regularly drafts for positional need in the first which doesnt seem ideal and probably leaves better players available. Boucher, Thomson, and L. Brown seem like good recent examples of this.

It’s Interesting to see how bad the Sens have been at selecting mid late first rounders.

Re: the Boucher pick.

I think they gave up on trying to:

a)develop mid round talent into scoring top 6 player like White and Lazar and co.

B) trying to convert these guys into good 3rd line type players -

They have 20 years of failing at this … so they took the guy who exudes decent third line talent and they will try to develop some scoring into him (sorta the opposite of their past 1RD forward development).

 

[Dan Patrick]

It’s Interesting to see how bad the Sens have been at selecting mid late first rounders.

Re: the Boucher pick.

I think they gave up on trying to:

a)develop mid round talent into scoring top 6 player like White and Lazar and co.

B) trying to convert these guys into good 3rd line type players -

They have 20 years of failing at this … so they took the guy who exudes decent third line talent and they will try to develop some scoring into him (sorta the opposite of their past 1RD forward development).

Basically, if the Sens are selecting outside the top 5 you want them to take a defencemen. 3/6 selections have become capable to all star players and two more will likely become at the very least decent depth defencemen. Our only miss in D selections in 14 years has been Jared Cowen and that has likely more to do with bad injury luck.

 

[Sweatred]

Basically, if the Sens are selecting outside the top 5 you want them to take a defencemen. 3/6 selections have become capable to all star players and two more will likely become at the very least decent depth defencemen. Our only miss in D selections in 14 years has been Jared Cowen and that has likely more to do with bad injury luck.

That’s their history summed up For sure.

I think it’s important to note they’ve signalled a major change to their mid-late 1RD forward drafting philosophy with Boucher. We will see if it works out. I think we could stomach Boucher if he was a 20-30 pick easier and not so close to Mactavish or Clarke.

Basically everyone of those failed 1RD forwards had decent junior stats that would keep everyone happy and they all failed as picks.

Everyone is mad that Boucher isn’t having a Logan Brown or Colin White junior career. Even Lazar only made the WJC in his last year of eligibility.

 

[Micklebot]

Pronman's most recent writeup on Boucher, from the pipeline article

13. Tyler Boucher, RW

19 years old | 6-foot-1 | 205 pounds | Shoots right

Drafted: No. 10 in 2021
Tier: Projected to play NHL games

Skating: Below NHL average
Puck skills: NHL average
Hockey sense: Below NHL average
Compete: Above NHL average

Analysis: Boucher has had a tough go it at the last two seasons due to various injuries, and a slow start at Boston University that resulted in him leaving to go to major junior. Boucher is a good player, not No. 10 pick good, but someone I think can fill a role in an NHL lineup. His physicality is high end. He’s a big, strong winger who relishes contact and can lay some huge hits. Boucher has some puck skills and can beat checks. He’s not going to score that much, though, due to a lack of offensive IQ and NHL speed, but he could be a “hard to play against” bottom-six winger who plays every day.