30
|
Post by OldTimeHawky on Nov 3, 2022 12:41:54 GMT -6
When you're Max's height every inch matters, he's 5'10", but he's also 194lbs and has a good center of gravity, great for faceoffs. Especially when he's taught from one of the best and listens. Kirby didn't listen and pouted to the media when he was put on the wing. His 1g in 10gms and playing on the wing when the Habs were expecting a top6 C is going to get ugly in Montreal. I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! I was happy it wasn't Turcotte but they should've traded down and took Dach around the 5-6 spot. Byram was a consensus top3. Plus what he did with the #8 pick and Boqvist, another bad pick with a few guys that should've been taken ahead of him, Dobson would've looked good in Chicago. So glad the new hockey minds took a skilled WHL dman with their 1st draft choice, and a 6'4" red head who skates like Brian Campbell and loves to hit, Rinzel, with their 3rd.
|
|
|
Post by nighbor on Nov 3, 2022 12:59:44 GMT -6
Toews is listed at 6'2". But really just pointing at Dachs failure and the fact mentioned that he stands erect. I'm sure there are many centers 6'4" or taller who have been far better at faceoffs. Like I said just above my post, dach should have been taught this stuff when he was in peewee hockey, not the pro's where he gets millions of dollars. I was thinking that his lack of improvement was psychological. He did suffer a severe wrist injury.
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Nov 3, 2022 13:49:42 GMT -6
When you're Max's height every inch matters, he's 5'10", but he's also 194lbs and has a good center of gravity, great for faceoffs. Especially when he's taught from one of the best and listens. Kirby didn't listen and pouted to the media when he was put on the wing. His 1g in 10gms and playing on the wing when the Habs were expecting a top6 C is going to get ugly in Montreal. I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! I am afraid you probably will be right here. It is sad and disappointing because when the pick was made, we heard some many great things about Dach beyond just his numbers and size, his attitude, the willingness to learn, his work ethic, compete level, how he elevated his game in the playoffs his draft year as he was being challenged. Was this all made up? Was Bowman only saying it? Today scouts see and talk to these players, coaches, other scouts multiple and dozens of times, what a shame. I do recall lot of the experts saying Byram should have been the pick as getting #1 D and agree he is still stuck behind all world Maker, a highly underrated Toews who (Sakic) "stole/robbed" from the Islanders, Giradi is a good player and you have a former overall #1 pick in Johnson who adds experience and size. Btw, happy the Blues took him over Toews in 2006 draft so who knows if we have three more cups.
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Nov 3, 2022 13:53:27 GMT -6
I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! I was happy it wasn't Turcotte but they should've traded down and took Dach around the 5-6 spot. Byram was a consensus top3. Plus what he did with the #8 pick and Boqvist, another bad pick with a few guys that should've been taken ahead of him, Dobson would've looked good in Chicago. So glad the new hockey minds took a skilled WHL dman with their 1st draft choice, and a 6'4" red head who skates like Brian Campbell and loves to hit, Rinzel, with their 3rd. Dobson and or Bouchard would look good now. Both from what I recall were ahead of Boqvist with most scouts. Then you do not have to go get Jones, pay him and give up draft capital.
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 3, 2022 14:06:51 GMT -6
When you're Max's height every inch matters, he's 5'10", but he's also 194lbs and has a good center of gravity, great for faceoffs. Especially when he's taught from one of the best and listens. Kirby didn't listen and pouted to the media when he was put on the wing. His 1g in 10gms and playing on the wing when the Habs were expecting a top6 C is going to get ugly in Montreal. I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! We all know that every draft pick is a roll of the dice. There are almost no "sure things." In the Kirby Dach draft, the first two chosen, Hughes and Kakko, were broad consensus picks. Some liked Byram for the third pick especially in the last days leading up to the draft. Many others thought his defensive game would not translate to the pros. The idea of drafting yet another smallish offense-first defenceman did not appeal to me, especially considering the team's draft history the two years prior. Dach and Cozens were talked about for the third pick, but so was Turcotte, the local boy. All the others - including Zegras - were considered too high risk for the third pick. I am no scout. For the Dach draft, I was hoping Bowman would trade down three or four picks. This has always been my philosophy (more picks = more chances in the lottery). I prefer maximizing the statistical odds rather than pretending that "good scouting" can successfully project most amateurs in any real way. Nevertheless, I was also very committed to the idea of taking a big centre with the pick - either Dach (supposedly the next Ryan Getzlaf) or Dylan Cozens (Jeff Carter). The truth is that big centres remain so hard to find. Wingers and small defenders are not. Dach obviously did not pan out. But this team still lacks a big centre (as it has for the majority of my lifetime). Given the choice this summer, I would still encourage the team to pick the big centre if one is available and hope for the best. if the Hawks keep picking big centres, at some point, one will emerge who will dominate the middle of the ice. You can't fill the position without drafting players who could fill the role.
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Nov 3, 2022 14:19:03 GMT -6
I stand by my pre-draft assessment that he was (and still is) a winger. his refusal to accept that, and to be a physical presence, will ultimately lead to him being in his 40s telling folks how he played in the 'chel, but never amounted to shit because "they held me back"... I hope his brother has a better head on his shoulders...
|
|
|
Post by vadarx on Nov 3, 2022 14:20:35 GMT -6
i think we'd all love a big centerman, mvr, but I hope KD is smart enough to take the best player available when we are on the clock next summer.
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 3, 2022 14:27:16 GMT -6
I always go back to the Brandon Saad draft.
Hawks scouts pat themselves on the back for that "steal."
But they also thought Mark McNeil and Adam Clendening (and Phil Danault) were better choices.
Good scouting = No. Luck = Yes
The Hawks put themselves in the position to get Saad because of the number of high picks they had in the first two rounds. This is the reason they were successful.
In other words, what does it really mean to pick the "best available?" Who knows which player that will be at age 18?
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 3, 2022 14:31:11 GMT -6
I am very hopeful about last year's draft.
But it has nothing to do with the scouting reports of the players chosen.
I believe with the number of high picks, the Hawks' scouts can't help but land on one or two future players.
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Nov 3, 2022 14:34:11 GMT -6
I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! We all know that every draft pick is a roll of the dice. There are almost no "sure things." In the Kirby Dach draft, the first two chosen, Hughes and Kakko, were broad consensus picks. Some liked Byram for the third pick especially in the last days leading up to the draft. Many others thought his defensive game would not translate to the pros. The idea of drafting yet another smallish offense-first defenceman did not appeal to me, especially considering the team's draft history the two years prior. Dach and Cozens were talked about for the third pick, but so was Turcotte, the local boy. All the others - including Zegras - were considered too high risk for the third pick. I am no scout. For the Dach draft, I was hoping Bowman would trade down three or four picks. This has always been my philosophy (more picks = more chances in the lottery). I prefer maximizing the statistical odds rather than pretending that "good scouting" can successfully project most amateurs in any real way. Nevertheless, I was also very committed to the idea of taking a big centre with the pick - either Dach (supposedly the next Ryan Getzlaf) or Dylan Cozens (Jeff Carter). The truth is that big centres remain so hard to find. Wingers and small defenders are not. Dach obviously did not pan out. But this team still lacks a big centre (as it has for the majority of my lifetime). Given the choice this summer, I would still encourage the team to pick the big centre if one is available and hope for the best. if the Hawks keep picking big centres, at some point, one will emerge who will dominate the middle of the ice. You can't fill the position without drafting players who could fill the role. You are right about a roll of the dice. I kept reading and hearing that this draft starts at #3 with the Hawks pick and they were a pool of 3-6 players that could go there. Kakko at #2 right now not looking all that great, although you do not hear much noise regarding disappointment or attitude concerns that I have seen. You would hope that Bowman would have considered trading down to your point collecting more picks, who knows for sure what when on. If indeed the draft did start at #3 one would think GMs would have been calling if they really liked one of those so called 3-6 players more than others.
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Nov 3, 2022 15:17:06 GMT -6
To my eye (and I am no expert), Dach's problem on draws was primarily bad approach/technique. He stood at the faceoff circle far too erect while most of his opponents bent at the knees and seemed much lower to the ice. His feet never seemed planted or far enough apart. I really don't get why the coaches could not get him figured out. Was he a stubborn kid who did not listen, or was it something else? Whatever the case, if Dach could not win a faceoff, he could not play centre. If he could not be a centre, his value to the team collapses. Wingers without a strong power game are not hard to replace. Beat me to it, my good sir. I agree MVR and recall how he stood to erect; you would think if we can see that everyone else should as well. Would seem like a simple thing to correct right. Anyway, he is gone and wish him the best. That should have been corrected in peewee hockey or juniors. Not in pro hockey, there it should be refined. This goes to the mishandling of Dach. He probably could have corrected it in Jr's, but he wasn't given that opportunity. I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! We all know that every draft pick is a roll of the dice. There are almost no "sure things." In the Kirby Dach draft, the first two chosen, Hughes and Kakko, were broad consensus picks. Some liked Byram for the third pick especially in the last days leading up to the draft. Many others thought his defensive game would not translate to the pros. The idea of drafting yet another smallish offense-first defenceman did not appeal to me, especially considering the team's draft history the two years prior. Dach and Cozens were talked about for the third pick, but so was Turcotte, the local boy. All the others - including Zegras - were considered too high risk for the third pick. I am no scout. For the Dach draft, I was hoping Bowman would trade down three or four picks. This has always been my philosophy (more picks = more chances in the lottery). I prefer maximizing the statistical odds rather than pretending that "good scouting" can successfully project most amateurs in any real way. Nevertheless, I was also very committed to the idea of taking a big centre with the pick - either Dach (supposedly the next Ryan Getzlaf) or Dylan Cozens (Jeff Carter). The truth is that big centres remain so hard to find. Wingers and small defenders are not. Dach obviously did not pan out. But this team still lacks a big centre (as it has for the majority of my lifetime). Given the choice this summer, I would still encourage the team to pick the big centre if one is available and hope for the best. if the Hawks keep picking big centres, at some point, one will emerge who will dominate the middle of the ice. You can't fill the position without drafting players who could fill the role. Everything I saw of Byram leading up to that draft was that he had a more-than-reasonable chance of being able to eventually take over a top-2 slot once he was developed. The thing that I am assuming Stan's sticking point was that he had to be developed--as in at least the season following the draft in the Jr's and then the next season in the minors--at the least. This is how I think we should eb developing Korch. I believe Stan wanted a player who he thought could come on in straight from the draft and be the next guy--kinda like Kane did. I also think he hedged his bets that one of Boqvist, Beaudin, or mitchell would take the step into being a top defenseman in the following seasons. I am not trying to negate your assertion of big centers vs. small defenders in the least. I do however still stand by my assertion that your defense is not set until it is, and defensemen take long to develop--longer than centers. Ergo why I thought Byram should have been the choice. Get him, and spend the couple of years developing him. Once the defense starts to look good, then take a look at centers, and then finally wingers. In my opinion, Dach should have been developed in Jr's or the minors as-needed as opposed to thrown to the pros--that might have also made him at least acceptable at the dot. However, I don't think Stan would have done that. I also think if Stan did get Byram, he might have not developed him properly so it was a crapshoot. Hence, I'm hoping KD handles Korch and Nazar better.
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Nov 3, 2022 15:50:41 GMT -6
To my eye (and I am no expert), Dach's problem on draws was primarily bad approach/technique. He stood at the faceoff circle far too erect while most of his opponents bent at the knees and seemed much lower to the ice. His feet never seemed planted or far enough apart. I really don't get why the coaches could not get him figured out. Was he a stubborn kid who did not listen, or was it something else? Whatever the case, if Dach could not win a faceoff, he could not play centre. If he could not be a centre, his value to the team collapses. Wingers without a strong power game are not hard to replace. Beat me to it, my good sir. That should have been corrected in peewee hockey or juniors. Not in pro hockey, there it should be refined. This goes to the mishandling of Dach. He probably could have corrected it in Jr's, but he wasn't given that opportunity. We all know that every draft pick is a roll of the dice. There are almost no "sure things." In the Kirby Dach draft, the first two chosen, Hughes and Kakko, were broad consensus picks. Some liked Byram for the third pick especially in the last days leading up to the draft. Many others thought his defensive game would not translate to the pros. The idea of drafting yet another smallish offense-first defenceman did not appeal to me, especially considering the team's draft history the two years prior. Dach and Cozens were talked about for the third pick, but so was Turcotte, the local boy. All the others - including Zegras - were considered too high risk for the third pick. I am no scout. For the Dach draft, I was hoping Bowman would trade down three or four picks. This has always been my philosophy (more picks = more chances in the lottery). I prefer maximizing the statistical odds rather than pretending that "good scouting" can successfully project most amateurs in any real way. Nevertheless, I was also very committed to the idea of taking a big centre with the pick - either Dach (supposedly the next Ryan Getzlaf) or Dylan Cozens (Jeff Carter). The truth is that big centres remain so hard to find. Wingers and small defenders are not. Dach obviously did not pan out. But this team still lacks a big centre (as it has for the majority of my lifetime). Given the choice this summer, I would still encourage the team to pick the big centre if one is available and hope for the best. if the Hawks keep picking big centres, at some point, one will emerge who will dominate the middle of the ice. You can't fill the position without drafting players who could fill the role. Everything I saw of Byram leading up to that draft was that he had a more-than-reasonable chance of being able to eventually take over a top-2 slot once he was developed. The thing that I am assuming Stan's sticking point was that he had to be developed--as in at least the season following the draft in the Jr's and then the next season in the minors--at the least. This is how I think we should eb developing Korch. I believe Stan wanted a player who he thought could come on in straight from the draft and be the next guy--kinda like Kane did. I also think he hedged his bets that one of Boqvist, Beaudin, or mitchell would take the step into being a top defenseman in the following seasons. I am not trying to negate your assertion of big centers vs. small defenders in the least. I do however still stand by my assertion that your defense is not set until it is, and defensemen take long to develop--longer than centers. Ergo why I thought Byram should have been the choice. Get him, and spend the couple of years developing him. Once the defense starts to look good, then take a look at centers, and then finally wingers. In my opinion, Dach should have been developed in Jr's or the minors as-needed as opposed to thrown to the pros--that might have also made him at least acceptable at the dot. However, I don't think Stan would have done that. I also think if Stan did get Byram, he might have not developed him properly so it was a crapshoot. Hence, I'm hoping KD handles Korch and Nazar better. You might be right on why Bowman decided on Dach Lord looking for a guy to step right in or quickly and thought that one of those trio of dmen would pan out (looks like strike three almost for them). I recall the comparison he made publicly after the pick the last time we drafted at #3 we took a center, although Toews was already committed to North Dakota, played there for 2 seasons and was "schooled" at one of the best high school hockey programs in Shattuck-Saint Mary's. I agree with you and others here hopefully KD handles these high picks much better. I am sure there will be an urge/pressure to get them to the NHL sooner rather later particular if they continue to progress. It will be telling what KD does at that moment.
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 3, 2022 17:13:33 GMT -6
To my eye (and I am no expert), Dach's problem on draws was primarily bad approach/technique. He stood at the faceoff circle far too erect while most of his opponents bent at the knees and seemed much lower to the ice. His feet never seemed planted or far enough apart. I really don't get why the coaches could not get him figured out. Was he a stubborn kid who did not listen, or was it something else? Whatever the case, if Dach could not win a faceoff, he could not play centre. If he could not be a centre, his value to the team collapses. Wingers without a strong power game are not hard to replace. Beat me to it, my good sir. That should have been corrected in peewee hockey or juniors. Not in pro hockey, there it should be refined. This goes to the mishandling of Dach. He probably could have corrected it in Jr's, but he wasn't given that opportunity. We all know that every draft pick is a roll of the dice. There are almost no "sure things." In the Kirby Dach draft, the first two chosen, Hughes and Kakko, were broad consensus picks. Some liked Byram for the third pick especially in the last days leading up to the draft. Many others thought his defensive game would not translate to the pros. The idea of drafting yet another smallish offense-first defenceman did not appeal to me, especially considering the team's draft history the two years prior. Dach and Cozens were talked about for the third pick, but so was Turcotte, the local boy. All the others - including Zegras - were considered too high risk for the third pick. I am no scout. For the Dach draft, I was hoping Bowman would trade down three or four picks. This has always been my philosophy (more picks = more chances in the lottery). I prefer maximizing the statistical odds rather than pretending that "good scouting" can successfully project most amateurs in any real way. Nevertheless, I was also very committed to the idea of taking a big centre with the pick - either Dach (supposedly the next Ryan Getzlaf) or Dylan Cozens (Jeff Carter). The truth is that big centres remain so hard to find. Wingers and small defenders are not. Dach obviously did not pan out. But this team still lacks a big centre (as it has for the majority of my lifetime). Given the choice this summer, I would still encourage the team to pick the big centre if one is available and hope for the best. if the Hawks keep picking big centres, at some point, one will emerge who will dominate the middle of the ice. You can't fill the position without drafting players who could fill the role. Everything I saw of Byram leading up to that draft was that he had a more-than-reasonable chance of being able to eventually take over a top-2 slot once he was developed. The thing that I am assuming Stan's sticking point was that he had to be developed--as in at least the season following the draft in the Jr's and then the next season in the minors--at the least. This is how I think we should eb developing Korch. I believe Stan wanted a player who he thought could come on in straight from the draft and be the next guy--kinda like Kane did. I also think he hedged his bets that one of Boqvist, Beaudin, or mitchell would take the step into being a top defenseman in the following seasons. I am not trying to negate your assertion of big centers vs. small defenders in the least. I do however still stand by my assertion that your defense is not set until it is, and defensemen take long to develop--longer than centers. Ergo why I thought Byram should have been the choice. Get him, and spend the couple of years developing him. Once the defense starts to look good, then take a look at centers, and then finally wingers. In my opinion, Dach should have been developed in Jr's or the minors as-needed as opposed to thrown to the pros--that might have also made him at least acceptable at the dot. However, I don't think Stan would have done that. I also think if Stan did get Byram, he might have not developed him properly so it was a crapshoot. Hence, I'm hoping KD handles Korch and Nazar better. My bias for defenceman is towards defenders who can defend and handle the physical game. I really liked Duncan Keith. I was never keen on Brian Campbell. Clearly, Campbell has value. But I do think these types of players tend to get paid too much and don't provide the same value as other defencemen.
|
|
|
Post by hawks27 on Nov 3, 2022 17:54:41 GMT -6
Toews is 6'4" and he learned when real young. Toews is listed at 6'2". But really just pointing at Dachs failure and the fact mentioned that he stands erect. I'm sure there are many centers 6'4" or taller who have been far better at faceoffs. One of the best face off centers was Joel Otto, of the Flames. He was so good on f/o that the NHL made the rule that the centers' head can not be over the face of dot. Joel was about 6'5" and a very good all-around player.
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Nov 3, 2022 18:49:21 GMT -6
Beat me to it, my good sir. This goes to the mishandling of Dach. He probably could have corrected it in Jr's, but he wasn't given that opportunity. Everything I saw of Byram leading up to that draft was that he had a more-than-reasonable chance of being able to eventually take over a top-2 slot once he was developed. The thing that I am assuming Stan's sticking point was that he had to be developed--as in at least the season following the draft in the Jr's and then the next season in the minors--at the least. This is how I think we should eb developing Korch. I believe Stan wanted a player who he thought could come on in straight from the draft and be the next guy--kinda like Kane did. I also think he hedged his bets that one of Boqvist, Beaudin, or mitchell would take the step into being a top defenseman in the following seasons. I am not trying to negate your assertion of big centers vs. small defenders in the least. I do however still stand by my assertion that your defense is not set until it is, and defensemen take long to develop--longer than centers. Ergo why I thought Byram should have been the choice. Get him, and spend the couple of years developing him. Once the defense starts to look good, then take a look at centers, and then finally wingers. In my opinion, Dach should have been developed in Jr's or the minors as-needed as opposed to thrown to the pros--that might have also made him at least acceptable at the dot. However, I don't think Stan would have done that. I also think if Stan did get Byram, he might have not developed him properly so it was a crapshoot. Hence, I'm hoping KD handles Korch and Nazar better. My bias for defenceman is towards defenders who can defend and handle the physical game. I really liked Duncan Keith. I was never keen on Brian Campbell. Clearly, Campbell has value. But I do think these types of players tend to get paid too much and don't provide the same value as other defencemen. It took a year or two before Keith's defensive game gelled, but it did in spades. He also was developed properly and his chemistry with Seabrook was unreal. Truth be told I don't mind the Campbells as long as they got a Hjammer to go with them... unfortunately we don't have a Hjammer yet, and I think the Hjammer needs to be had before the Campbell ideally. But...at least Campbell could be physical, just ask RJ Umberger 😁
|
|
|
Post by acesandeights on Nov 4, 2022 7:21:13 GMT -6
That should have been corrected in peewee hockey or juniors. Not in pro hockey, there it should be refined. My boy is in peewee minor. So the 1st of 2 years in peewee. There’s not much correcting going on. Most coaches are parents and they’re there to make sure their kid is on the team, first and foremost. I’ve seen my boy do the “Michigan” goal. Make passes that would have Datsyuk come out of his seat. And yet. He sits on the pp due to all 3 coaches kids out there…….. and they get scored on. Like most sports the parents are ruining it. We’re supposed to have a “no parents” approach to coaching. Yet, here we are and the best players are suffering!!! BigT, that is great, and especially at his age. I think I recall you mentioned this one time before. Did it take him very long to learn it and get good at it?
|
|
|
Post by galaxytrash on Nov 4, 2022 7:25:27 GMT -6
not sure why i'm posting this because it's common knowledge that we were horrible this time last year. i guess i just found the numbers interesting.
|
|
|
Post by OldTimeHawky on Nov 4, 2022 7:48:15 GMT -6
not sure why i'm posting this because it's common knowledge that we were horrible this time last year. i guess i just found the numbers interesting. On paper the Hawks were much better last year, I guess a good coach makes a big difference. Especially one who played D for many years and knows the game. I love how the team has a pack mentality and protects the net.
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 4, 2022 7:54:49 GMT -6
For years, I have argued here (and on the old boards), that if the team wanted Jonathan Toews to produce offence, it needed to find a legit third line checking centre.
Finally, one is here.
Last night in overtime, it was Dickinson on the ice to line up against LA's best players. Dickinson held serve, allowing Toews to sub-in on the third rotation and avoid Kopitar.
Toews now looks reinvigorated. But the truth is that his role has changed. He is not always facing the opponent's best players this year (which is a good thing). This means he now has some opportunities to attack rather than always defend and check.
It still enrages me that Bowman never looked for a Dickinson-type after 2015. Toews' career arch could have been much different.
Quality checking centres are not that expensive. I believe the Hawks could have/should have won at least one or two more cups between 2012-17.
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 4, 2022 8:06:58 GMT -6
not sure why i'm posting this because it's common knowledge that we were horrible this time last year. i guess i just found the numbers interesting. On paper the Hawks were much better last year, I guess a good coach makes a big difference. Especially one who played D for many years and knows the game. I love how the team has a pack mentality and protects the net. I believe the actual mix is much better now. Last year, the Hawks had too many of the same type of player. To maximize their effectiveness, specialists like Kubalik, Debrincat, Kane, Gustafsson, Borgstrom and Strome all need to play offensive roles, especially on the powerplay. There are only so many minutes for those type of situations. Now the team has legit checkers, physical players and defenders - specialists for holding leads, defending, wearing the opponent down. It is a much better balance.
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 4, 2022 8:14:54 GMT -6
It is not a surprise to me that Dominik Kubalik has 12 points already in 10 games.
Last year, Kubalik's game was crowded out by Debrincat. The two players both play the same role - and a team only really needs one primary first-line shooter).
This year, Kubalik is being used in Detroit as he should be. He is a good player. So is Debrincat. But a team does not need two of the same type.
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 4, 2022 9:19:01 GMT -6
I hate to say it. But Dach was a shitty pick. If he’s a 3rd liner, that’s a massive bonus. We all know Byram was the guy. He’d be a lot more if not stuck behind the wall of dmen in Colorado!!! We all know that every draft pick is a roll of the dice. There are almost no "sure things." In the Kirby Dach draft, the first two chosen, Hughes and Kakko, were broad consensus picks. Some liked Byram for the third pick especially in the last days leading up to the draft. Many others thought his defensive game would not translate to the pros. The idea of drafting yet another smallish offense-first defenceman did not appeal to me, especially considering the team's draft history the two years prior. Dach and Cozens were talked about for the third pick, but so was Turcotte, the local boy. All the others - including Zegras - were considered too high risk for the third pick. I am no scout. For the Dach draft, I was hoping Bowman would trade down three or four picks. This has always been my philosophy (more picks = more chances in the lottery). I prefer maximizing the statistical odds rather than pretending that "good scouting" can successfully project most amateurs in any real way. Nevertheless, I was also very committed to the idea of taking a big centre with the pick - either Dach (supposedly the next Ryan Getzlaf) or Dylan Cozens (Jeff Carter). The truth is that big centres remain so hard to find. Wingers and small defenders are not. Dach obviously did not pan out. But this team still lacks a big centre (as it has for the majority of my lifetime). Given the choice this summer, I would still encourage the team to pick the big centre if one is available and hope for the best. if the Hawks keep picking big centres, at some point, one will emerge who will dominate the middle of the ice. You can't fill the position without drafting players who could fill the role. No bigger defender of JT and the rigors of the NHL center position than me,I went to the mat for the guy. That doesn't mean that teams like the Hawks and others didn't rely more on their wingers for their success.........Sharp,a winger handled 2LC duties in '10' and again in '13' more often than not,the '15' team with Richards and Vermette was better represented at center position though. Kane,Hossa,Sharp and even Saad at times were the offensive drivers along with a very average sized D-man,Keith. Bickell,Buff and Shaw were power wingers that went to the net but wingers none the less and all impactful. Bolland had impact in both '10' and '13' from the center position but was a true 3LC,wingers Brouwer,Versteeg and Ladd were all multiple 20 goal scores. Madden in '10' and especially Kruger in '13 and 15' really helped solidify the center position from the bottom up to be fair but neither contributed offensively........wingers like Folik and Kopecky played very useful roles also. The Duck's bigger centers were gonna eat us alive in '15'......."no human can handle our physicality" we were warned. Who doesn't want a big,2-way,Selke capable,#1 center who wins important draws with regularity and a big,talented Norris capable,#1 D-man......sign me up! Without a doubt two of the most important positions in hockey but forsake the rest of the roster in an endless hunt for the 1LC and #1 D and that roster will be incomplete. All of a sudden,a winger who scores 30-40 consistently isn't an important piece because he doesn't fit a certain prototype? Cale Makar's listed @5'11" 187lbs @24,which means he was more than likely 5'9"-5'10" 170lbs @18 and coming out of the NCAA on top of it...........would you have passed on the small-framed D-man in the draft?
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Nov 4, 2022 10:08:09 GMT -6
The Cale Maker draft was exceptionally weak. There was little there, especially at the top of the draft. Did Maker drop to fourth pick because of bad scouting? Or were the Avalanche lucky he was still around? I believe the Avalanche got lucky. Would they have picked him higher if they had an earlier pick? Who knows? My guess is they liked the Flyer/NJ picks better just like everyone else.
There was no high end centre that draft. Likely, I would have picked what was there (Maker) or perhaps tried to trade down a few spots to take Vilardi or Necas if my scouts thought they showed legit potential. But it is difficult to speak in hindsight knowing what we know now.
The truth is - if a team (like Bowman's Hawks for most of his reign here) continuously drafts small wingers and defenders, this is the pool they draw from. These players do not retain their trade value over time which means you are not going to get much for any extras you acquire.
Should you focus on big centres, you can always move one or more to the wing if you are fortunate enough to have a surplus.
At times you will get lucky with centres, and at times you won't. But you won't get one if you don't draft one. It is by far the most important position on the ice other than arguably first unit defence.
The 2015 team benefitted with three good centres (Toews at his peak, Richards and Vermette). The 2013 team with Handzus and Bolland were strong down the middle as well. The Hawks this year are better because the centre position is stronger with more diverse types of players who can check and play physical both ways.
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 4, 2022 10:26:15 GMT -6
On paper the Hawks were much better last year, I guess a good coach makes a big difference. Especially one who played D for many years and knows the game. I love how the team has a pack mentality and protects the net. I believe the actual mix is much better now. Last year, the Hawks had too many of the same type of player. To maximize their effectiveness, specialists like Kubalik, Debrincat, Kane, Gustafsson, Borgstrom and Strome all need to play offensive roles, especially on the powerplay. There are only so many minutes for those type of situations. Now the team has legit checkers, physical players and defenders - specialists for holding leads, defending, wearing the opponent down. It is a much better balance. DeBrincat's a specialist on a list with Gus and Borgstrom? Seriously? If goal scoring in a "specialty",than by all means Alex DeBrincat is a "specialist" but one who was on the ice in all situations.......there's clearly nothing the player can do in your eyes that makes him matter......nothing. If averaging 35 goals and never missing a game through five seasons @24 won't do it,nothing will. Paint his last two seasons here any way you want but his 73 goals in only 134 games(22 more than anyone else)was a 45 goal pace along with a point a game pace to match. Only eight great plyers have more goals since the kid came in the league @19 and all eight play on much better teams with other lines that can also score........opponents never had to concern themselves with any other line the entire time D-Cat was here. I knew the moment a team with ZERO expectations overachieved one iota,these comparisons would be made(we'll make more comparisons later in the year for sure) but Strome's playing a big part in Washington for a very demanding coach and has responded with 9pts in his first 12 games......Kubalik's new team is equally pleased. Gus and Borgstrom are what they are but putting them on ANY list with the any of league's top goal scorers is rather asinine. One of the franchise's most prodigious goal scorers ever is easily replaced.......let me know when it happens.
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Nov 4, 2022 10:50:10 GMT -6
The Cale Maker draft was exceptionally weak. There was little there, especially at the top of the draft. Did Maker drop to fourth pick because of bad scouting? Or were the Avalanche lucky he was still around? I believe the Avalanche got lucky. Would they have picked him higher if they had an earlier pick? Who knows? My guess is they liked the Flyer/NJ picks better just like everyone else. There was no high end centre that draft. Likely, I would have picked what was there (Maker) or perhaps tried to trade down a few spots to take Vilardi or Necas if my scouts thought they showed legit potential. But it is difficult to speak in hindsight knowing what we know now. The truth is - if a team (like Bowman's Hawks for most of his reign here) continuously drafts small wingers and defenders, this is the pool they draw from. These players do not retain their trade value over time which means you are not going to get much for any extras you acquire. Should you focus on big centres, you can always move one or more to the wing if you are fortunate enough to have a surplus. At times you will get lucky with centres, and at times you won't. But you won't get one if you don't draft one. It is by far the most important position on the ice other than arguably first unit defence. The 2015 team benefitted with three good centres (Toews at his peak, Richards and Vermette). The 2013 team with Handzus and Bolland were strong down the middle as well. The Hawks this year are better because the centre position is stronger with more diverse types of players who can check and play physical both ways. I wanted bigger players too,drafting even smaller Beaudin after taking Boqvist in 18's first round turned my stomach and then he traded up in the 2nd to take some Swede kid who was smaller than his mother when they showed him celebrating the mis-guided pick. DUMBASS' biggest two flops still might be the big centers he took in the first round though(McNeil and Dach)while some of the smaller forwards in that 'pool' like TT and Schmaltz have forged decent to very good careers and one is ELITE. "Better" for now but why? Why does a rebuilding team leave all of it's early 20 somethings in Rockford and load up on hungry journeymen instead?
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Nov 4, 2022 12:02:58 GMT -6
My boy is in peewee minor. So the 1st of 2 years in peewee. There’s not much correcting going on. Most coaches are parents and they’re there to make sure their kid is on the team, first and foremost. I’ve seen my boy do the “Michigan” goal. Make passes that would have Datsyuk come out of his seat. And yet. He sits on the pp due to all 3 coaches kids out there…….. and they get scored on. Like most sports the parents are ruining it. We’re supposed to have a “no parents” approach to coaching. Yet, here we are and the best players are suffering!!! BigT, that is great, and especially at his age. I think I recall you mentioned this one time before. Did it take him very long to learn it and get good at it? Thanks! Honestly, he picked that up really quickly. I posted a video of it in the NHL hockey talk forum (I believe). Or maybe it was fantasy league? I forget. But the skill today is unreal. I haven’t seen another kid do it. The ref congratulated him after the game. He said that he seen many attempt it, but never get it. And the best part was he was in motion behind the net and was going almost full speed when he did it. Personally, I love the skilled game. It’s very fun to watch. Anyways, here’s the video of it. My buddy took the video but he was filming his kid. But he still got it!!! youtube.com/channel/UCHpemyrHCVlMf6av1TEJqAg
|
|
|
Post by tincup on Nov 4, 2022 12:56:56 GMT -6
BigT, that is great, and especially at his age. I think I recall you mentioned this one time before. Did it take him very long to learn it and get good at it? Thanks! Honestly, he picked that up really quickly. I posted a video of it in the NHL hockey talk forum (I believe). Or maybe it was fantasy league? I forget. But the skill today is unreal. I haven’t seen another kid do it. The ref congratulated him after the game. He said that he seen many attempt it, but never get it. And the best part was he was in motion behind the net and was going almost full speed when he did it. Personally, I love the skilled game. It’s very fun to watch. Anyways, here’s the video of it. My buddy took the video but he was filming his kid. But he still got it!!! youtube.com/channel/UCHpemyrHCVlMf6av1TEJqAgPretty impressive. Goalie played for the wraparound just fine but didn’t expect that. So when do we see your son out here at the Brick?
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Nov 4, 2022 13:07:30 GMT -6
Thanks! Honestly, he picked that up really quickly. I posted a video of it in the NHL hockey talk forum (I believe). Or maybe it was fantasy league? I forget. But the skill today is unreal. I haven’t seen another kid do it. The ref congratulated him after the game. He said that he seen many attempt it, but never get it. And the best part was he was in motion behind the net and was going almost full speed when he did it. Personally, I love the skilled game. It’s very fun to watch. Anyways, here’s the video of it. My buddy took the video but he was filming his kid. But he still got it!!! youtube.com/channel/UCHpemyrHCVlMf6av1TEJqAgPretty impressive. Goalie played for the wraparound just fine but didn’t expect that. So when do we see your son out here at the Brick? His old team went to Chicago this weekend and got pumped 9-0 vs Chicago Mission. Probably could a used him! We left and went to Windsor this year. We’re 5-2 on the year. Still lots of work to be done. Their getting used to each other still. Unfortunately they don’t get stats down very good. Especially assists. I believe my boy has 9 assists and 3 goals so far in 7 games. But the official stats say 2 goals and 3 assists. They gave on of his goals to #6. We don’t have a #6. My boy is #16. But they screw things up. Oh well. As they get older, we’ll see them all over the place. We went out to Calgary in 2021 for a tourney. We finished 2nd in the Detroit CCM tourney a couple weeks back. That gawd dam tourney was basically a street fight. No penalties called and it was flat out hitting and fighting. Refs never called anything. Many many kids got hurt. They’re only 11. And checking doesn’t start till 13. I couldn’t believe it. But we didn’t play our starting goalie for the ship. Just upsetting. Hopefully in a couple years he’ll still be relevant and then it gets interesting!!!
|
|
|
Post by bigbarn27 on Nov 4, 2022 21:11:21 GMT -6
BigT, that is great, and especially at his age. I think I recall you mentioned this one time before. Did it take him very long to learn it and get good at it? Thanks! Honestly, he picked that up really quickly. I posted a video of it in the NHL hockey talk forum (I believe). Or maybe it was fantasy league? I forget. But the skill today is unreal. I haven’t seen another kid do it. The ref congratulated him after the game. He said that he seen many attempt it, but never get it. And the best part was he was in motion behind the net and was going almost full speed when he did it. Personally, I love the skilled game. It’s very fun to watch. Anyways, here’s the video of it. My buddy took the video but he was filming his kid. But he still got it!!! youtube.com/channel/UCHpemyrHCVlMf6av1TEJqAgVery jealous T as a dad of 2 girls there were just weekends of dance competition and show choir . Would not trade it but….
|
|
|
Post by steamer on Nov 5, 2022 0:40:52 GMT -6
The amazing Patrick Kane - 10 points in 11 games playing with almost all new forwards. What a steady point producer regardless of changed linemates, changed coaches, management etc. Remarkable hall of famer.
|
|