I-90 W Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 If Buffalo had a legit NHL defense, Antipin wouldn't sniff the top 4 but because they had one of the worst in the league last season he may have a spot. I'm still not sold on a guy that small being able to succeed in the NHL on defense. He's the same size as the best defensemen in the entire world right now, size isn't an issue if he's the only small d. Though if we do sign him, and we keep our #8 pick, I think we should go with Liljegren over Makar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 You take the better player, Makar won't be in the league for 2-3 years. I have spoken to those who think otherwise. Makar is not bound by the CHL rule about returning to jr. he can go straight to the AHL. He chose the route he did because his parents thought he was too small and not good enough to be a pro and steered him to a route of the NCAA. USHL was also an option and they all scouted him. The betting odds are he does a Girgensens and goes straight to the AHL. He may be in the NHL by 2018/19. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 You take the better player, Makar won't be in the league for 2-3 years. But Antipin is only 24 himself. We may want to keep him around if things workout after his 1 year ELC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 (edited) Yes Darth We'ver Edit- took me a minute. I get it now. Edited May 14, 2017 by We've Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 So you're saying there'd be no market for someone like Antipin (were he to work out) to trade at age 26-27 and under contract for a fairly reasonable figure? Also, we're suggesting it would be in some way detrimental for a Junior A defenseman to have an extra year or two to develop before we plug him into the lineup. If he forces his way into the lineup that's a happy problem to have, if not you can wait. Also, we're talking about not drafting a kid because of a player we MIGHT sign who MAY turn out to be decent. Like I said, you take whoever you think the better player is. If it's Makar, fine, if it's Liljegren, fine. You don't make that selection worried about having too many smallish defensemen 2-3 years down the line. Particularly when "too many" equals 2. I never said there wouldn't be a market for him, I didn't even insinuate that lol. What I DID say was you don't want to have two 5-11 174 lb d. Quite frankly I prefer Liljegren over Makar anyway, as did most scouts prior to him getting sick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 He's the same size as the best defensemen in the entire world right now, size isn't an issue if he's the only small d. Though if we do sign him, and we keep our #8 pick, I think we should go with Liljegren over Makar. I'm not sure what Karlsson's size has to do with anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kas23 Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 I'm not sure what Karlsson's size has to do with anything. I'm pretty sure he's trying to make the point that great defensemen can come in any size and not to automatically dismiss a player based on size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 I'm not sure what Karlsson's size has to do with anything. The following are your exact words in which I responded to... "I'm still not sold on a guy that small being able to succeed in the NHL on defense". I then say... "He's the same size as the best defensemen in the entire world right now, size isn't an issue if he's the only small d". You then said... "I'm not sure what Karlsson's size has to do with anything". LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 The following are your exact words in which I responded to... "I'm still not sold on a guy that small being able to succeed in the NHL on defense". I then say... "He's the same size as the best defensemen in the entire world right now, size isn't an issue if he's the only small d". You then said... "I'm not sure what Karlsson's size has to do with anything". LOL Ah, so all 5'11" 175 lbs defenseman will be good NHL defenseman. No wait, by this logic all Dmen this size will become the best player in the game. Thanks for clearing that up. I'm pretty sure he's trying to make the point that great defensemen can come in any size and not to automatically dismiss a player based on size. I can think of lots of other reasons to dismiss Antipin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 Ah, so all 5'11" 175 lbs defenseman will be good NHL defenseman. No wait, by this logic all Dmen this size will become the best player in the game. Thanks for clearing that up. I can think of lots of other reasons to dismiss Antipin By your logic Karlsson's success in the NHL is not reality because of his size. If you're going to debate me please display basic reading comprehension skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 Gorges 6'1", Bogo 6'3", Kulikov 6'1" and Franson 6'5". Height is clearly is not determinative of success on the ice. All we need Antipin to be is a decent NHL puck moving D. We can afford to have one or two smaller D as long as they are quick and move the puck quickly and efficiently. Everything I've read and seen about Antipin says he has those skills. Whether he can make the adjustment to the NHL and the smaller ice has yet to be seen, but for a 925K investment it's a risk well worth taking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 Gorges 6'1", Bogo 6'3", Kulikov 6'1" and Franson 6'5". Height is clearly is not determinative of success on the ice. All we need Antipin to be is a decent NHL puck moving D. We can afford to have one or two smaller D as long as they are quick and move the puck quickly and efficiently. Everything I've read and seen about Antipin says he has those skills. Whether he can make the adjustment to the NHL and the smaller ice has yet to be seen, but for a 925K investment it's a risk well worth taking. Exactly, this. At this point most of the defense needs to be reworked. The depth is abysmal as well. Falk should not be a regular in any top 6. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 any word on signing or after "world championship" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kas23 Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 Ah, so all 5'11" 175 lbs defenseman will be good NHL defenseman. No wait, by this logic all Dmen this size will become the best player in the game. Thanks for clearing that up. That's a strawman argument. He never said that. I would hope you know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 By your logic Karlsson's success in the NHL is not reality because of his size. If you're going to debate me please display basic reading comprehension skills. My point is players achieve success based on skill, even so, most NHL defenseman are 6' or taller. Is that a product of dinosaur GMs not appreciating the new age player where emphasis is on ability or is there a smidgen of reason behind it. Is a certain size required to play against forwards in the crease and along the boards? That's a strawman argument. He never said that. I would hope you know that. But it was the inference. Karlsson is who he is based on skill. Only until the last two seasons has anyone considered his D zone play anything other than a farce. Erik's skating, passing and vision allow him to overcome size, expecting Antipin to do the same is lofty expectations. But if a pseudo dinosaur like EXGMTM can overlook his size, maybe it's becoming less and less a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 My point is players achieve success based on skill, even so, most NHL defenseman are 6' or taller. Is that a product of dinosaur GMs not appreciating the new age player where emphasis is on ability or is there a smidgen of reason behind it. Is a certain size required to play against forwards in the crease and along the boards? But it was the inference. Karlsson is who he is based on skill. Only until the last two seasons has anyone considered his D zone play anything other than a farce. Erik's skating, passing and vision allow him to overcome size, expecting Antipin to do the same is lofty expectations. But if a pseudo dinosaur like EXGMTM can overlook his size, maybe it's becoming less and less a factor. Some good points. My reasoning is that he is a skilled LHD (we will be low on those if Kulikov and Gorges are gone) with proven offensive capability in both the regular season and in big moments in the very skilled KHL. Other NHL teams were also interested in him. I think he will be a solid piece for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 14, 2017 Report Share Posted May 14, 2017 Some good points. My reasoning is that he is a skilled LHD (we will be low on those if Kulikov and Gorges are gone) with proven offensive capability in both the regular season and in big moments in the very skilled KHL. Other NHL teams were also interested in him. I think he will be a solid piece for us. I got many fingers and toes crossed. If I didn't think it would result in permanent damage, I might cross something else too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Some good points. My reasoning is that he is a skilled LHD (we will be low on those if Kulikov and Gorges are gone) with proven offensive capability in both the regular season and in big moments in the very skilled KHL. Other NHL teams were also interested in him. I think he will be a solid piece for us. Skilled LHD does not equal Kulikov and Gorges. Gorges may be left handed, but skilled is not an adjective I would use. Kulikov, while a LHD, loses the moniker of skilled when he produces at Gorges levels as he has done for the last 2 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I-90 W Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Skilled LHD does not equal Kulikov and Gorges. Gorges may be left handed, but skilled is not an adjective I would use. Kulikov, while a LHD, loses the moniker of skilled when he produces at Gorges levels as he has done for the last 2 seasons. I said Antipin is a skilled LHD, we will need those (meaning left handed defense men) if Kulikov and Gorges are gone. I want Antipin because he is skilled, we will need LHD. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I would never describe Gorges as skilled bwahaha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakish Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Ok, I'm going to walk a bit back on Antipin, but not that far. Trying to get a reasonable valuation on Makar, I decided I was crushing 175 pound defensemen too much. So I jiggled those numbers a bit and Antipin went from 50th best defenseman in his draft class, to 37th. As an experiment, I made all heights and weights equal, and Antipin went to 27th. Checking Anitpin, I noticed Casey Nelson (who had a good year in 2016) is now the 22nd best defenseman in his class (one year older) if all the heights and weights are equal. This didn't solve my Makar problem, as the model is still not a big fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Ok, I'm going to walk a bit back on Antipin, but not that far. Trying to get a reasonable valuation on Makar, I decided I was crushing 175 pound defensemen too much. So I jiggled those numbers a bit and Antipin went from 50th best defenseman in his draft class, to 37th. As an experiment, I made all heights and weights equal, and Antipin went to 27th. Checking Anitpin, I noticed Casey Nelson (who had a good year in 2016) is now the 22nd best defenseman in his class (one year older) if all the heights and weights are equal. This didn't solve my Makar problem, as the model is still not a big fan. How does the model compare Valimaki to Makar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Ok, I'm going to walk a bit back on Antipin, but not that far. Trying to get a reasonable valuation on Makar, I decided I was crushing 175 pound defensemen too much. So I jiggled those numbers a bit and Antipin went from 50th best defenseman in his draft class, to 37th. As an experiment, I made all heights and weights equal, and Antipin went to 27th. Checking Anitpin, I noticed Casey Nelson (who had a good year in 2016) is now the 22nd best defenseman in his class (one year older) if all the heights and weights are equal. This didn't solve my Makar problem, as the model is still not a big fan. Isnt Makar the same height and weight as Karlsson was during his draft year? not sure how Karlsson is/was ranked by you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakish Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 How does the model compare Valimaki to Makar? Valimaki's 3rd among defensemen, Makar 17th, haven't figured out why yet, probably AJHL is out of whack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Valimaki's 3rd among defensemen, Makar 17th, haven't figured out why yet, probably AJHL is out of whack Right because as you and I have discussed it is easier to value players in the CJH leagues but harder to compare them to AJHL or USDHL and such because there are less comparable and the leagues fluctuate more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakish Posted May 15, 2017 Report Share Posted May 15, 2017 Isnt Makar the same height and weight as Karlsson was during his draft year? not sure how Karlsson is/was ranked by you. Karlsson was actually much smaller 5-10 158 vs 5-11 179. I think Karlsson is such an outlier that it's a mistake to try to make the model work for everyone, the percentage of 158 lb defensemen who succeed is real small. The model takes the opposite approach, given that a 6'1 200lb player often succeeds, lets look for the 6'1 200lb players and occasionally miss the very small who are the exception. As Ligar notes above, part of the Makar problem might be the how often people succeed from that league, making it more difficult to judge, rather than a more common league with lots of examples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.