Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Wild Prospect Thread 2024-25

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
BagHead said:
For me, it's because I looked at his stat sheet. His statistical performance has been as impressive as my analysis of his game.
Click to expand...
I wish that the NCAA tracked time on ice per game. It would certainly give perspective into the opportunities Stramel was not afforded this past season.
 
Digitalbooya said:
Is this because you sat down and watched Wisconsin games and feel that way or because you looked at his stat sheet?

The reason I ask is because if it is just stat sheet watching, would you have crapped all over Yurov during the 22-23 season when he put up 12 points in 59 games?
Click to expand...
I watched some of him, and never saw much of anything. Certainly not enough to justify his pick level. It was quite obvious that obvious that Yurov was not getting any minutes on his team two years ago - what was it, 3 minutes per game average, or something like that- so I didn't worry.

Again, Stramel has done nothing to justify his pick. The only thing i have seen is size, but it's not like he is some juggernaut that will have NHL'ers quaking in his boots. A poor man's Greenway, maybe?
 
Digitalbooya said:
Is this because you sat down and watched Wisconsin games and feel that way or because you looked at his stat sheet?

The reason I ask is because if it is just stat sheet watching, would you have crapped all over Yurov during the 22-23 season when he put up 12 points in 59 games?
Click to expand...

I had Yurov as an unknown (question mark) after the 22-23 season. I was the limited ToI he got that year kept me from making any judgements.
 
There's a pretty significant difference in the context surrounding Yurov and Stramel and why they had the seasons they had, enough that comparing them is just about 100% meaningless
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Jan Itor
57special said:
I watched some of him, and never saw much of anything. Certainly not enough to justify his pick level. It was quite obvious that obvious that Yurov was not getting any minutes on his team two years ago - what was it, 3 minutes per game average, or something like that- so I didn't worry.

Again, Stramel has done nothing to justify his pick. The only thing i have seen is size, but it's not like he is some juggernaut that will have NHL'ers quaking in his boots. A poor man's Greenway, maybe?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure it was DigitalBooya who first compared Stramel to Greenway, but with a worse shot.

All stat-watchers know that 12 points as a teenager in the world's 2nd best hockey league is better than 8 points as a sophomore in college hockey. It's why they keep stats.
 
57special said:
I watched some of him, and never saw much of anything. Certainly not enough to justify his pick level. It was quite obvious that obvious that Yurov was not getting any minutes on his team two years ago - what was it, 3 minutes per game average, or something like that- so I didn't worry.

Again, Stramel has done nothing to justify his pick. The only thing i have seen is size, but it's not like he is some juggernaut that will have NHL'ers quaking in his boots. A poor man's Greenway, maybe?
Click to expand...
Yurov averaged 8 minutes per game that season. I’m pretty sure if the NCAA tracked TOI that Stramel would be relatively close to that. The point is, it’s hard to produce or look good if you’re not getting minutes or opportunities regardless of the league.
Wabit said:
I had Yurov as an unknown (question mark) after the 22-23 season. I was the limited ToI he got that year kept me from making any judgements.
Click to expand...
And Stramel doesn’t get an unknown status due to his minutes?

Saga of the Elk said:
Pretty sure it was DigitalBooya who first compared Stramel to Greenway, but with a worse shot.

All stat-watchers know that 12 points as a teenager in the world's 2nd best hockey league is better than 8 points as a sophomore in college hockey. It's why they keep stats.
Click to expand...
The point isn’t the league comparison. The point is the usage comparison.
 
I'm not slamming the door on Stramel, but I'm also not sure why I'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt right now either. He had bad numbers with Hastings; he had bad numbers before Hastings; his last really good numbers year, I think he was 14 years old; and the leading scorer on Wisconsin was 6 months older than him.

I don't put blind faith in coaching decisions, but my guess is that Stramel wasn't forcing his hand in practice to move him up the lineup.

KHL is notorious with young players and their ice time, even more so than Hastings is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MuckOG
Dr Jan Itor said:
I'm not slamming the door on Stramel, but I'm also not sure why I'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt right now either. He had bad numbers with Hastings; he had bad numbers before Hastings; his last really good numbers year, I think he was 14 years old; and the leading scorer on Wisconsin was 6 months older than him.

I don't put blind faith in coaching decisions, but my guess is that Stramel wasn't forcing his hand in practice to move him up the lineup.

KHL is notorious with young players and their ice time, even more so than Hastings is.
Click to expand...
Hastings had Silye and Fitzgerald as his top 2 centers, both transfers from Minnesota State where Hastings knew what he was getting. Lindmark was a 5th year player. There was basically zero chance of Stramel playing in the top 9 as a center right from the start.

I’ll definitely give him the benefit of the doubt even now after he has transferred away from Wisconsin. I would not be surprised to see him do well with opportunity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Slotski
Digitalbooya said:
Hastings had Silye and Fitzgerald as his top 2 centers, both transfers from Minnesota State where Hastings knew what he was getting. Lindmark was a 5th year player. There was basically zero chance of Stramel playing in the top 9 as a center right from the start.

I’ll definitely give him the benefit of the doubt even now after he has transferred away from Wisconsin. I would not be surprised to see him do well with opportunity.
Click to expand...
Didn't we hear the same excuse last year when Granato was fired? Stramel should do better and he actually played worse.
 
Digitalbooya said:
And Stramel doesn’t get an unknown status due to his minutes?
Click to expand...

No because he wasn't getting only 2 random shifts a game as the 13th FWD like Yurov was.

Stramel wasn't getting top-6 usage, but he was getting regular bottom-6 usage. His linemates weren't anything special and cost him a few assists on the season.

I have Stamel as a future bottom-6 NHLer, and probably higher than anyone else here in the prospect rankings. With the caveat that he embraces the physical side of the game. He just seemed so passive every time I watched him on the ice last year.

I think this season will tell a lot more about him as a player than last year. Being injured to start the season and having a new coach who didn't recruit him played against him last year, so I am giving him some benefit of the doubt.
 
Wabit said:
No because he wasn't getting only 2 random shifts a game as the 13th FWD like Yurov was.

Stramel wasn't getting top-6 usage, but he was getting regular bottom-6 usage. His linemates weren't anything special and cost him a few assists on the season.

I have Stamel as a future bottom-6 NHLer, and probably higher than anyone else here in the prospect rankings. With the caveat that he embraces the physical side of the game. He just seemed so passive every time I watched him on the ice last year.

I think this season will tell a lot more about him as a player than last year. Being injured to start the season and having a new coach who didn't recruit him played against him last year, so I am giving him some benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...
In the season I referenced, Yurov averaged 8 minutes per game. So while there were some games where he did get really low ice time, there were also plenty of games where he played well over 10 minutes.

Describing his usage as bottom 6 is a disservice. He was stapled to the 4th line with 4th line minutes. He had maybe 2 or 3 games all year where he was elevated onto the 3rd line.
 
Digitalbooya said:
In the season I referenced, Yurov averaged 8 minutes per game. So while there were some games where he did get really low ice time, there were also plenty of games where he played well over 10 minutes.

Describing his usage as bottom 6 is a disservice. He was stapled to the 4th line with 4th line minutes. He had maybe 2 or 3 games all year where he was elevated onto the 3rd line.
Click to expand...

Okay I'm out. I've lost the narrative at this point.

I'm also not someone who is slobbers over prospects. They will either turn into something or they will not. I figure most won't turn into anything, so there is that.
 
Wabit said:
Okay I'm out. I've lost the narrative at this point.

I'm also not someone who is slobbers over prospects. They will either turn into something or they will not. I figure most won't turn into anything, so there is that.
Click to expand...
The narrative that it’s hard to produce without ice time and opportunities?
 
Digitalbooya said:
The narrative that it’s hard to produce without ice time and opportunities?
Click to expand...

Dude you watched most every UW game with some of them live. Even your feedback was that he wasn't doing much. He did nothing to force himself higher into the lineup.

Players should be buried if there are better options on the team. He didn't get the opportunities because he didn't earn/deserve it.
 
Wabit said:
Dude you watched most every UW game with some of them live. Even your feedback was that he wasn't doing much. He did nothing to force himself higher into the lineup.

Players should be buried if there are better options on the team. He didn't get the opportunities because he didn't earn/deserve it.
Click to expand...

Even the "highlights" posted of the points he got were the most basic hockey plays that literally every player at that level should be able to do on a regular basis. He just didn't stand out at all in any positive way.
 
Well, as i said on the Main Board thread about him, let's at least wait till we're a few games into next season before we start declaring him a bust. So far, he has merely been disappointing. I do like the two other picks after him in that draft year, Heidt and Kumpulainen.
 
Probably be some rust tonight, especially in the first period, but I'd hope to see Bankier/Milne/Topo on a line. Banks and Topo looked dangerous together in the AHL, so would think they could really show up in this tournament. Add in Milne who was best Iowa player last two weeks (yes, even offensively), and should do well. Haight and Heidt together like last year should also do damage.

In short, with the amount of Iowa guys returning + Heidt/Haight, I think they should take care of business this weekend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obvious Fabertism
Heidt with a goal...cleaned up a rebound. His superpower is definitely his passing. Nothing fancy, but he moves the puck quickly and accurately. A bit of a pest, also.

Peart looks good, as does Lambos, and Masters was ok. Bankier ... just sort of there.

If Leskovar can play just decent D then he might have a job on an NHL bottom pairing in a few years. Size, and likes to hit.

oh, I like the goalie, too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Minnesota
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom