Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
spndnchz

So #8

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Thorny said:

He's not ready to be a centreman at this point in time. He's very bad defensively and doesn't possess the speed to cover the middle of the ice. At 3C he'd be drowning, and those players aren't going to elevate him. Especially considering they wound't be insulating him with quality centres. 

At this point I'd be attempting to help help him carve out a niche on the left wing. 

I don't think Mitts game would translate well at wing.  He doesn't have tenacity to do the board work.  He's not terribly shifty on his skates to find openings.  He's not a sniper of any sort.  And I don't see him doing any better with what he's got with half the ice closed off to him.  He needs to figure out how to make those hands work at this level and use them to get the puck to the sides.  IMO it is center or bust for that kid.

Edited by Weave
  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Weave said:

I don't think Mitts game would translate well at wing.  He doesn't have tenacity to do the board work.  He's not terribly shifty on his skates to find openings.  He's not a sniper of any sort.  And I don't see him doing any better with what he's got with half the ice closed off to him.  He needs to figure out how to make those hands work at this level and use them to get the puck to the sides.  IMO it is center or bust for that kid.

All of this could have been said for Sam. Wing is just inherently easier to play than centre is. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thorny said:

All of this could have been said for Sam. Wing is just inherently easier to play than centre is. 

Sam lacked NHL caliber center skill sets but does well along the wall and shooting the puck, and did from early on.  Mitts skill sets are center ice skill sets, not wing skill sets.  It's the opposite of Sam, really.

I agree that winger is likely an easier position to play than center, but I also think Mitts doesn't have the needed skills to be proficient at it.  Sam always did.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm seeing Casey's game a little differently. 

Regardless, he wasn't an NHLer last season. It's highly unlikely he's ready to be a 3C this season, which was part of my original point. You could try breaking him in at C, but you'd have to give him the winger responsibilities in the defensive zone for starters.

Ducky mentioned playing him at 3C. Would anyone here consider him a reasonable bet to be our 3C this season, happy to enter into a season with that being the primary plan? Replacing who, Larsson? Would have to go with an offensively sheltered line I suppose and take your chances. 

Scheifele 1C, Lowry checking C, could run Mittelstadt as a 4C by minutes if they can bring in a solid 2-way reliable 2C. Honestly I think Copp could do the job with the wingers they have but me and Ducky differ there. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Connor - Scheifele - Laine

Ehlers - Copp - Wheeler 

Checking UFA - Lowry - Rolovic

Harkins - Mittelstadt - Appleton

 

...I like this lineup. I see what you mean though @Ducky about wanting to upgrade Copp if possible. The thing about Winnipeg is they also don't have an heir apparent (I know, crossing fingers) to the spot like the Sabres do in Cozens, so needing to fill the role both for now AND for the future does make them a target to take a bigger swing at it. Especially because this is a team with Cup aspirations - Copp likely isn't going to give you the offense a Cup team needs. 

But if they do prioritize their big moves for the defense, I still think they could get by with a solid forward lineup like this, with an improved D and a Vezina caliber Hellebuyck. 

 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2020 at 4:50 PM, Weave said:

I don't think Mitts game would translate well at wing.  He doesn't have tenacity to do the board work.  He's not terribly shifty on his skates to find openings.  He's not a sniper of any sort.  And I don't see him doing any better with what he's got with half the ice closed off to him.  He needs to figure out how to make those hands work at this level and use them to get the puck to the sides.  IMO it is center or bust for that kid.

Unfortunately IMHO it is bust no matter what the position is.  He will always be a boy trying to play in a man's league.  He would do much better over in Europe for a career.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2020 at 5:14 PM, Thorny said:

 

Ducky mentioned playing him at 3C. Would anyone here consider him a reasonable bet to be our 3C this season, happy to enter into a season with that being the primary plan? Replacing who, Larsson? Would have to go with an offensively sheltered line I suppose and take your chances. 

 

IMO, no. 
 

From what I saw in Rochester this season, he’s nowhere near ready for any NHL role. He looked to need at least a full year in the AHL, if not longer. 
 

I would trade him now while other teams still see “potential and upside.” Who knows, maybe there’s something that a team like TBL or whoever with a “different culture” can unlock, but I don’t see it happening here. 

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Athletic today -- an anonymous poll of 8 NHL scouts:  https://theathletic.com/2054516/2020/09/16/nhl-scouts-poll-2020-byfield-vs-stutzle-video-views-and-an-exceptional-crop/

 
Quote
This draft has been labelled as exceptional in terms of the depth of talent — do you agree? Where do you see the talent dropping off?
  • Yes, it’s one of the better ones over the last few years. Too early to tell if it matches the 2003 or the 2015 drafts. Around 20, the differences in talent become more minute.
  • It’s always tricky to label a draft as exceptional or not, but yes, I guess this draft has the chance to “produce” more high-end talent than an average draft, I think roughly the top-8 players are really very interesting and could become players to help their franchises move forward.
  • Seems to be a pretty solid first round and given this year I think some very good players will be drafted late on the first day.
  • Yes, I think this is a very good draft. I see it dropping off around the fourth round in terms of our own list.
  • Good draft in comparison to other years. Should be a very solid first round.
  • I think the top 12-15 are really good and then the next 30 players will be quite the range difference on teams list. You will still have a chance to get a good player in the second and third rounds.
  • They say that every year. Middle second round.
  • Yes, excellent depth. Drops mid-third round.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

My interpretation of these answers.  

-No, not exceptional, but good.  Probably a little above average.

-“Where do you see the talent dropping off?”  is a really bad question that everyone will interpret differently.  The correct answer is obviously after #1 overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ducky said:

I wonder where LaPierre goes...top 10?

I would be surprised. Major injury concerns and limited viewings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha I like the guy that said "they say that every year". Cause they really do. 

I also like the guy that said his team's list drops not until the 4th round lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lapierre goes to the first team that:

a) is comfortable that the injuries aren't a long-term concern,

and b) thinks he is a full tier ahead of their other options.

Or at 16 to Montreal because they decide they are desperate for a French star.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I like drafting players with compete. 

You know from the little snippets Adams has given us into the type of player he likes, coupled with team needs, who else might be available, and the general sense that this group wants to buck NHL convention, I wouldn't be too surprised if we did go off the board a bit and pick Jarvis.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Compete as a noun, love to see it. 

I hate that word so much.  What in the blazes does it even mean?  Anything?  I think it's just made up.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I hate that word so much.  What in the blazes does it even mean?  Anything?  I think it's just made up.

Ted Nolan lived off it😀

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I hate that word so much.  What in the blazes does it even mean?  Anything?  I think it's just made up.

It's "competitiveness" when the internet consisted of 400 baud modems.

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

You know from the little snippets Adams has given us into the type of player he likes, coupled with team needs, who else might be available, and the general sense that this group wants to buck NHL convention, I wouldn't be too surprised if we did go off the board a bit and pick Jarvis.

If that's the consensus and we don't trade the pick, I think he takes either Jarvis or Lundell.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm much more interested in the later rounds. I want to see if they draft differently with Botterill gone. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Thorny said:

I'm much more interested in the later rounds. I want to see if they draft differently with Botterill gone. 

Well, Crowe was a pro scout, Nightingale's team wasn't integrated with the amateur department and Adams made them re-do their draft board.

So we gotta expect different, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Well, Crowe was a pro scout, Nightingale's team wasn't integrated with the amateur department and Adams made them re-do their draft board.

So we gotta expect different, right?

Expect? No. We'll see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dudacek said:

Well, Crowe was a pro scout, Nightingale's team wasn't integrated with the amateur department and Adams made them re-do their draft board.

So we gotta expect different, right?

Yes. I fully expect 100% different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...