Zayne Parekh vs Zeev Buium

[Mobiandi]

Buium fell because he’s a flight risk. Pretty obvious

 

[MuckOG]

Buium fell because he’s a flight risk. Pretty obvious

Because he will probably only spend 1 more season at Denver before he is NHL-ready, I don't expect him to be a flight risk. I could be wrong, but the flight risks are usually those that stay in college for their D+3 season, that are the ones to be careful of.

 

[saintunspecified]

I think it is incredibly difficult to compare these players because they play at different levels, and with very different teammates. It's not a big surprise to notice that Buium plays a more structured game, when he's played with a whole bunch of drafted 20 y/os.

For me the WJC is what tips the scales for Buium. He killed it. I'm not saying he's going to be as good as Quinn Hughes (it was evident to the eye during his draft year that Hughes had amazing feet), but like Hughes, he should have been picked 4-5 slots earlier. (Hughes should have been picked either 2nd or 3rd overall, and I'd have taken Buium no later than 7th).

 

[keppel146]

Can’t really speak to Parekh. The knock on Buium was always going to be can he play his style at the NHL level since he’s not big (not saying he’s small) and not an elite skater. I think that’s why he wasn’t top guy after Celebrini.

That said I didn’t want to like Buium this year. Not my style of D. But he blew me away every single game. I think he’s going to be a stud, maybe a star.

I’m sure Spurgeon, Faber, and Brodin can give him a couple tips if needed.

 

[On The Prowl]

Look at OHL defensemen from the last 15 years that had high scoring seasons. It’s not a super impressive list.

Evan Bouchard?

 

[Saga of the Elk]

Evan Bouchard?

Ryan Ellis comes to mind. Bouchard's scoring is more in line with, say, Matt Finn or Stuart Percy. Suffice to say, junior scoring isn't a reliable predictor for many players at the NHL level. Yet, e.g., Brian Rafalski's NCAA output is similar to Buium's and possibly a better point of comparison.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

I'm a homer so I won't vote. But I do like reading the positive opinions on Buium.

 

[BagHead]

I’m sure Spurgeon, Faber, and Brodin can give him a couple tips if needed.

I think his overall game translating to the NHL is a valid concern, and I'm not sure minimizing it by saying that a few pieces of advice will completely negate that concern is equally valid. If his game doesn't translate to the NHL, no amount of advice is going to save him. I say this as a guy who rated Buium 4th overall before the draft.

This is a valid concern for all players to one degree or another, and I think it's even more valid for Parekh, which is why I had him rated lower than Buium. I do think Parekh's upside is higher, though. This makes it very hard for me to vote for either one in this poll.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Buium will be better. Wouldn't be surprised to see Dickinson be better than both though

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

Because he will probably only spend 1 more season at Denver before he is NHL-ready, I don't expect him to be a flight risk. I could be wrong, but the flight risks are usually those that stay in college for their D+3 season, that are the ones to be careful of.

He’s a flight risk for any Canadian team.

There’s enough history of Americans, specifically NcAA players, going back to the states as fast as they’re able.

Calgary and Ottawa aren’t going to waste high picks on players they don’t think they’ll be able to keep for 10-15 years.

 

[GobigorGohome]

Parek is going to get blown up in his own end

 

[PittsburghHustlers]

Give me Parekh. I’d draft him at #3. ELITE offensive potential.

 

[Siignal]

The knock on Karlsson is his defensive game and size. While he is very cool and confident in the offensive zone, he sometimes chooses difficult solutions in the defensive end. He should play easier and be closer on his opponent. While he Karlsson likely will not be much taller, he should definitely add more strength and muscles. The fact that Karlsson likes to get involved physically and can deliver rather good hits is a big plus. With added strength, his physical play would be much more effective.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/38731-erik-karlssona-look-at-the-sens-no1-pick

 

[Neutrinos]

So why did everyone skip Buium? Guessing they all see something they don't like

Guys getting spoken of like a generational talent, do they ever fall like this?

He likes to pee in the zamboni grate...

 

[Volica]

Buium was the better player when Calgary came to pick.
But we clearly couldn't pick the guy.

We're probably 2-3 years away from being able to start making our decision here.

 

[Star Platinum]

I'm a homer so I won't vote. But I do like reading the positive opinions on Buium.

That's Dickie Dunn!! It's got to be true!

 

[Reinhart]

There have been plenty of very smart defenseman who have struggled to play proper defense despite their best efforts. It's not just about a willingness to improve, a lot of it is instinct that can be very hard to overwrite. And assuming you're able to do so, there is the risk that the defensive adjustments needed to be an NHL player significantly handicap the player's offensive game. Parekh makes a living with his ability to walk the blue line and exploit space in the neutral zone - both areas where he'll be asked to make nontrivial adjustments to his decision making.

There can also be aspects of a player's personality that can cause issues - Parekh has all the talent in the world but is extremely soft and passive, is that a switch he'll be able to find? Some players are never able to bring the necessary intensity to their defensive game because its just not in their nature. Dougie Hamilton is a great example of this.

I don't think any of this means that Parekh is condemned to be a weak defender for his entire career, but there are valid questions that he will need to answer that have nothing to do with his willingness to improve.

I have similar concerns with Buium, but these issues stand out much more with Parekh IMO.

Sometimes it is just a lack of willingness to really improve it. Dion Phaneuf is a great example, as both Regehr and Warrener wanted to teach him to play better in his own zone, and his reply was to the effect of: "I get paid to put up points and blow guys up, I don't need to learn defence". Some guys will figure out too late that they need to put a more complete game together.

Also, you really believe he is soft? He is a complete rat out there egging on the opposition. Soft and passive are not words that I would assign in describing Parekh at all. He has a bit of a mean streak in him.
Conroy was asked about Parekh's defensive game, and he point blank said that first and foremost, this kid's offensive game was not something that the Flames want to stifle. Given their track record lately with other offensive-first defencemen, I will bet that they round out his defensive game. Parekh has mentioned this several times even ahead of getting drafted by the Flames, and when you look at his play in the CHL, he really isn't even a quarter as terrible as most people lead you to believe.

The proof will be in the pudding, but it is always - ALWAYS - easier to teach a prospect how to play passable to decent defence than it is to teach offence. The kid needs to have a bit of a brain (which Parekh seems to have), the willingness to learn it (which Parekh thus far seems to want to do, though we will see how strong that want really is as time goes by) and the right environment in which to teach it effectively (based on the Flames already having a bit of a history at it with some other players, that's probably just as good as an environment as one could hope for).

Time will really tell how good Parekh really is (or becomes) at both ends of the ice, but he does seem to possess the required attributes already (size, skating, IQ, willingness, personality and environment). Doesn't necessarily mean squat becuase it could just be lip-service at this point, but I do believe at this point in time, he seems both willing and capable of being at least decent defensively.

 

[Oak]

Parekh is probably my least preferred pick in the top 10. I just dont see this kid making it. He is not special enough offensively to make up for his lack of defense and lackadaisical play.

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

Parekh is probably my least preferred pick in the top 10. I just dont see this kid making it. He is not special enough offensively to make up for his lack of defense and lackadaisical play.

Yeah, he is.

 

[lordtrillson]

Parekh is probably my least preferred pick in the top 10. I just dont see this kid making it. He is not special enough offensively to make up for his lack of defense and lackadaisical play.

How special would he have to be then offensively? The kid just put up 96 points with 33 goals