Back to The Hockey News
TomThompson
TomThompson@THNews
0 followers · 0 followings
Activity
The Hockey NewsPublished
Comments
Sidney Crosby Vs. Alex Ovechkin: Which Legend is More Legendary?
Sid & Ovi: they’re once-in-a-lifetime superstars who arrived in the NHL in the same season and have duelled ever since. Both are all-time greats, but who’s greater?
Who belongs on the NHL’s Mount Rushmore in 2020?
Alongside the sculptures of four U.S. presidents, let’s pretend hockey has won the right to carve the faces of four superstars. The hockey gods have awarded the first three spots to Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe and Bobby Orr. They have also eliminated from consideration such worthy candidates as Bobby Hull, Mario Lemieux and Maurice Richard. Connor McDavid is deemed to be too young. It’s down to Sidney Crosby of the Pittsburgh Penguins and Alex Ovechkin of the Washington Capitals. Both have firmly established their positions as all-time greats during their 15-year careers. Both are guaranteed first-ballot Hall of Famers. Which one of them deserves to be the fourth face of hockey on Mount Rushmore?
Career
Both Ovechkin and Crosby have completed 15 NHL seasons. Ovechkin’s Mount Rushmore candidacy is based on his ability to score goals – always the most important attribute in hockey. He has led the NHL in goals nine times, more than any player in history. Ovechkin is a volume shooter who has led the NHL in shots 11 times. He has been incredibly durable, playing in almost 98 percent of his team’s games while being a consistent physical presence. He has a Stanley Cup and Conn Smythe Trophy among his playoff accomplishments, and he’s one of only eight players in NHL history to have won the Hart Trophy at least three times.
Crosby is a two-time NHL scoring champion who has finished among the league’s top three scorers seven times. His 1.28 points-per-game average puts him among the all-time leaders. He has twice been named regular-season MVP and has finished in the top three in Hart Trophy voting on seven occasions. He has two Olympic gold medals, with his dramatic overtime goal deciding the 2010 tournament in Vancouver. Crosby has led the Penguins to four Stanley Cup final appearances, winning three titles. Twice, Crosby has been awarded the Conn Smythe Trophy. There’s no doubt that these illustrious credentials qualify both Ovechkin and Crosby for Mount Rushmore consideration.
Edge: Neither
Playing Style
This is a study in contrasts. Ovechkin has been remarkably consistent throughout his career. The only statistical drop-off occurred in 2011-12 when he clearly did not see eye to eye with coach Dale Hunter. He has been a scoring machine who plays a physical game, and there’s not much variance in his approach from night to night. I’d compare Crosby’s career to that of Muhammad Ali, who was suspended for more than three years during the peak of his career. Ali was a great boxer both before and after the suspension, but he was not the same boxer. Crosby missed the better part of two years at the peak of his career due to concussion-related problems.
Like Ali, Crosby was able to reclaim his position as an elite player, but his present game is significantly different than how he played before the concussions. The young Crosby was a dynamic player who always seemed to be in motion. He was aggressive, averaging more than 70 penalty minutes per season. The post-concussion Crosby is a much more deliberate player. His legs are spread wide, and he’s more conscious of his defensive positioning. Very rarely do you see him in full flight. He protects the puck well in the offensive zone, makes terrific plays and has great hands in tight situations. He is as smart as any player in the league, but he’s not nearly as aggressive as his younger self. He is snarly with his stick – and his mouth – if anybody invades his space, but he has far less aggression pursuing the puck or trying to beat defenders. He now averages around 30 penalty minutes per season.
Edge: Neither
Offense
Ovechkin may be remembered as the greatest goal-scorer in the history of the NHL. He’s a threat to score every time he shoots the puck. Crosby is an elite goal-scorer, but he is not in Ovechkin’s class. The only area in which Crosby may exceed Ovechkin in goal-scoring is his lethal backhand shot – it’s as good as any I have ever seen. However, Ovechkin is not close to Crosby as a playmaker. Crosby’s wide margin in assists makes him a more productive offensive player both in the regular season and the playoffs.
Edge: Crosby
Defense
This category is not close. The pre-concussion Crosby was often an indifferent defender. He was always looking for any chance to take off from the defensive zone. After his concussions, Crosby’s commitment to defensive play improved dramatically. His positional play and anticipation in the defensive zone are excellent. Ovechkin doesn’t lack for effort, but he often can’t figure out where he should be positioned. His anticipation in the defensive zone is average at best. Crosby is used in key defensive situations. Ovechkin is not.
Edge: Crosby
Impact
Hockey is the consummate team game. Even the greatest and best-conditioned players are only on the ice for less than half of the game. Nobody expects one player to lead a mediocre team to a championship. The question I want to address is what if the two teams are relatively equal? Let’s be objective here. Ovechkin and Crosby both entered the NHL in 2005. Each has remained with his original club for his entire 15-year career. Their two teams have attained almost identical regular-season results over this period.
It’s a different story in the playoffs. The Capitals won the 2018 Stanley Cup in their only trip to the final during this period. The team has won a total of 10 playoff series since 2005. Meanwhile, the Penguins won three Cups in their four trips to the final in the past decade-and-a-half, and the team has won a total of 20 playoff series in that time. Let’s also look at the 2010 and 2014 Olympics. Crosby was the hero in the dramatic overtime victory for Canada in 2010 and a key member of an almost flawless Canadian defensive performance in the 2014 Olympics, where the host Russian team, with Ovechkin as the captain, were the pre-tournament favorites and performed poorly. Crosby’s teams have a better track record of success. Edge: Crosby
Conclusion
Ovechkin is truly a generational player. In NHL history, his combination of skill, power and durability is matched only by Howe. He gives the fans full value every time he steps onto the ice and will be enshrined in the Hall of Fame as soon as he’s eligible. However, Crosby has been a better player. He’s more productive offensively, better defensively and has had a greater impact on winning championships.
Crosby and Ovechkin entered the NHL together. It would be fitting if they retire at the same time and then enter the Hall of Fame together. They both deserve the honor. However, Mount Rushmore only has room for one of them. I award Sidney Crosby the vacant position beside Howe, Orr and Gretzky. He has earned it.
See more0
0
0
0
Artemi Panarin vs. Brad Marchand: Who's more valuable?
Two top players, two very different styles. Which of these left wingers would you rather have: Nose Face Killah or Bread Man?
Unlike some of our elected politicians, let’s begin our discussion by finding key areas on which we can agree. Brad Marchand of the Boston Bruins and Artemi Panarin of the New York Rangers are both elite-level NHL players. They are two of the best left wingers in the game. Both are among the league’s scoring leaders and are noticeable in every Bruins or Rangers game you watch. Both are below average size, and neither was considered a top prospect when he was eligible to be drafted. Neither entered the NHL with a sense of entitlement.
Bearing in mind these similarities, it is hard to imagine two top players at the same position whose styles are so different. Neither player is perfect. Both have aspects of their game which cause concern. But who is more valuable?
CAREERS Panarin is 28. He comes from rural Russia and did not play for any Russian national teams until he was 19. When he was eligible for the NHL draft starting in 2010, he went unclaimed each time. He played for three different KHL teams and finally established himself with powerful St. Petersburg in 2013. After two productive seasons, he was signed as a free agent by the Chicago Blackhawks. He quickly became a first-line player with the Hawks and, in 2017, was traded to Columbus in a controversial deal. After two seasons as a top-liner with the Blue Jackets, he signed a mega-bucks UFA deal with the Rangers last summer. He’s a dynamic offensive threat both as a goal-scorer and playmaker. He has registered more than 70 points in each of his five NHL seasons and has averaged almost a point per game in the playoffs, even though his teams have won only one series.
Marchand is 33. He comes from Halifax and was drafted 71st overall from QMJHL Moncton in 2006. After two more seasons of major junior, he played 113 games in the AHL before arriving in Boston for good late in the 2009-10 season. He has been with the Bruins ever since. He did not, however, receive first-line ice time until 2015-16, the same season Panarin arrived in Chicago. During the past five seasons, Marchand has outscored Panarin while receiving votes each year for the Selke Trophy as the league’s best defensive forward. In the playoffs, Marchand has averaged more than a point per game during the past five years, and he co-led the playoffs in scoring last season. His teams have won a Stanley Cup, gone to the final on two other occasions and won 12 playoff series. Panarin has a lot of talent, but he cannot at this stage match what Marchand has done in the NHL.Edge: Marchand
(Just for fun, let’s redo the first round of the 2006 and 2010 drafts. Marchand would likely edge out Claude Giroux and Phil Kessel and battle Nicklas Backstrom for No. 2 overall behind Jonathan Toews in ’06. Panarin would compete with Evgeny Kuznetsov and Vladimir Tarasenko to try to displace the dynamic duo of Taylor Hall and Tyler Seguin at the top of the ’10 class. Both players would undoubtedly be top-five picks. They have certainly beaten the odds.)
ROLES Panarin is a first-line left winger and a key element of the first power-play unit. He virtually never kills penalties and has not recorded a shorthanded point in his five NHL seasons. Marchand plays on the left side on the Bruins’ first line, he’s on the first power-play unit and he gets some time killing penalties, especially in key late-game situations. Over the past five seasons, Marchand has a league-best 25 shorthanded points, including 12 goals.Edge: Marchand
STRENGTHS Panarin is dynamic and exciting. He is one of those rare players who can create something out of nothing. His ability to make plays is amazing, even when he is off-balance and being forced away from his intended target. His shot is not powerful, but he has a quick release and exceptional accuracy. On the power play, he generally plays on the half wall on his off-wing side. From this position, his priority is to serve as a playmaker. Although not physical, Panarin competes hard and is a responsible player in the defensive zone.
Marchand is a strong skater with a remarkable sense of positioning in all areas of the ice. To use a favored expression among coaches, he is exceptional at mirroring the puck. He always seems to be facing the play but still aware of where danger from the opposition is developing. He makes good, crisp passes to his linemates and can make plays off the forecheck. His shot is quick and accurate and often is used in tight quarters close to the net. Although not as creative as Panarin, Marchand has more assists over the past four seasons than Panarin. Marchand also has far more takeaways, blocked shots and hits. He used to play in front of the net on the power play, but he’s now positioned on the half wall on his off-wing. Like Panarin, his primary role from that position is that of a playmaker. Marchand is particularly effective in late-game situations. His combination of sense, positioning and alertness makes him a valuable player when the heat is on.Edge: Marchand
WEAKNESSES
There are no perfect hockey players. Panarin is small. His weight and strength are below that of other elite-level NHL players. On those nights where he does not produce offensively, he looks like a hardworking small player – one among many in the game. He is not used in defensive situations. His departure from Chicago resulted in large part from an ineffective playoff series where he was often pushed off the puck by bigger, stronger opponents. In the past two years in Columbus, he had good moments early in the first playoff round, but, in both years, he appeared gassed by the time the Blue Jackets were eliminated. He has yet to show he can carry a team deep into the playoffs.
Marchand often does not know when to leave well enough alone. He can be provoked into taking retaliation penalties that often cross the line. The results are penalties to one of your star players and the threat of suspensions. His conduct can be obnoxious and often draw the ire of opponents and officials. One aspect of his actual game remains a weakness: for a smart player, he simply tries too many risky plays. Marchand often refuses to accept the fact that a simple dump-in may be the best option. He will try to feather lateral passes through several bodies and sticks in situations where the likelihood of success is remote. The result is an average of almost 75 giveaways a year over the past five seasons – an unacceptable rate.Edge: Neither
CONCLUSION Panarin is an NHL star. He is smart and highly skilled with a consistent work ethic. He is fun to watch. He also lacks breakaway speed and is smaller and weaker physically than other elite-level talents. Marchand usually is not as much fun to watch. He is a strong but not fancy skater who makes the correct play consistently. His conduct can be maddening. However, he can match Panarin in offensive production and outperform him defensively, and Marchand adds a physical dimension that increases the comfort level of his linemates. He has proven he can be a key factor in getting his club to the Stanley Cup final. Panarin is a valuable commodity in today’s NHL, but Marchand is more valuable.
Tom Thompson has been an NHL scout/director/assistant GM since 1985.
This is an updated version of a story that originally appeared in The Hockey News 2020 Superstar Issue. Want more in-depth features, analysis and opinions delivered right to your mailbox? Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.
See more0
0
0
0
Leon Draisaitl Vs Jack Eichel: Who would you rather have?
Trying to decide between these two prime superstars nearly stumped our resident expert. When push comes to shove, who’s your go-to guy?
People love to read The Hockey News because they trust that the stories reflect the honest views of the writers. I want to continue that tradition of integrity with an admission. I have scouted the games for Jack Eichel of the Buffalo Sabres and Leon Draisaitl of the Edmonton Oilers for a month this season, and I spoke with respected NHL scouting personnel and people who have coached these players. Let me state three obvious facts. First, they are two of the top offensive players in the NHL. Second, their styles of play are significantly different. Third, their results are remarkably similar.
For the first time my series of Versus comparisons, I’m really not sure who I should select as the more valuable of the two players. That said, I will not pass the buck. I will make my decision. However, all readers should understand that I do so without a strong conviction that I am correct. Let me describe Eichel and Draisaitl in more detail. This should provide you with a basis for making an informed decision of your own in selecting one over the other.
CAREERS Both players are entering the peak years of their careers. Draisaitl is 24. Eichel is 23. Draisaitl is from Germany and went to Prince Albert of the WHL in 2012. He was taken third overall in the 2014 NHL draft behind Aaron Ekblad and Sam Reinhart. He then played one more season in the WHL, leading Kelowna to the Memorial Cup final. He’s now in his fifth full season with the Oilers. Eichel is from Boston. In 2012, he joined USA Hockey’s National Team Development Program for two seasons and then played one season for Boston University, leading them to the Frozen Four final. He was selected second overall in the 2015 draft behind Connor McDavid. He jumped immediately to the Sabres and just finished his fifth season with the club. Remarkably, Draisaitl has averaged exactly a point per game during his career, while Eichel has averaged 0.95 points per game. EDGE: NEITHER
ROLES This category is interesting. Both players are natural centers. Both have received ice time consistent with being the No. 1 center on their team. They are key components of their team’s top power-play unit but aren’t often used in penalty-killing situations. When Eichel scored a shorthanded goal in December, it was the first shorthanded point either player had produced in the NHL. Draisaitl has a problem in assuming his role. As McDavid’s teammate, he’ll never be the Oilers’ No. 1 center. In most cases, he has performed as the second-line center and, when the Oilers need an offensive jolt, he has played left wing on the first line. Interestingly, when he plays left wing, he’s still used for important faceoffs ahead of McDavid. Eichel is the top player on his team. Because of McDavid, Draisaitl is looked on as the No. 2 player on his team. EDGE: NEITHER
PRODUCTION It is remarkable that in more than 300 NHL games for each player, both at or near a point per game. This puts them in the top echelon of the NHL. Eichel has accumulated a greater percentage of his points on the power play and has a higher rate of assists. Draisaitl has scored more goals, breaking out for 50 last season. EDGE: NEITHER
STYLES It is difficult to imagine two top-level offensive forwards being so different. The most obvious difference is in skating. Eichel’s skating is ahead of every player in the NHL except for McDavid and Nathan MacKinnon. His long, powerful stride may be the best in the league. He reminds me of Paul Coffey as he effortlessly strides past opponents in the open ice. Under Buffalo coach Ralph Krueger, Eichel’s defensive positioning is better, but he still likes to play the game by making big swoops, often with his back to the play. Of all the top players in the NHL, Eichel is most likely to try to beat opponents 1-on-1. On the power play, he often is the player building up speed to carry the puck through the neutral zone, and once the Sabres gain the zone, he plays the half-wall, usually on his off-wing side. His main role is that of a playmaker, with Reinhart the chief beneficiary of his plays. Draisaitl is a stiff-legged skater who seldom tries to beat anybody 1-on-1. He has great stamina and does not labor unless his shift is too long. His game is based upon quick puck movement, finding an open teammate with momentum and moving into position for a return pass. On the power play, he is usually positioned in the slot in the middle of the defensive box. From there, he can take advantage of his quick, accurate release or make quick passes. He is every bit as important as McDavid in forming the top power-play unit in the NHL. Draisaitl never seems to have his back to the play. EDGE: NEITHER
WHAT WOWS YOU Both players combine size, strength, smarts and skill. Watch them come through the neutral zone on their off-wing and, while still in motion, make a backhand pass across the width of the rink to a teammate in flight. Watch them thread passes through a number of bodies and sticks to open teammates in the offensive zone. Watch Draisaitl consistently find an open teammate with momentum in the defensive zone and use a quick pass to exit the zone. Watch him use a quick give-and-go in the offensive zone and then show his great concentration and hands to score from bad angles. Watch Eichel go coast-to-coast in overtime against Edmonton, draw a penalty and then win the game on a penalty shot. Watch him drive to the net against Vegas, protect the puck and score the winner. Both players consistently perform at the elite level with different styles, and they are fun to watch. EDGE: NEITHER
WHY NOT PERFECT Neither player is used in penalty-killing situations. Draisaitl works very hard to be an average NHL skater. Both are risk-takers with the puck. This hurts their numbers in the important takeaway/giveaway ratio. In their careers, Eichel is minus-97 and Draisaitl is minus-105. With their puck skills, both of them should be better in this area. Eichel does not lack hockey sense. What he does lack is a word not used enough in player evaluations: concentration. Pundits would rave about Wayne Gretzky’s ability to visualize what was going to happen. They overlooked the fact Gretzky’s ability to retain his concentration made the rest of his game possible. How many times can you remember Gretzky overskating a puck in a key situation or fanning on a drop pass with the game on the line? It almost never happened. Watch Eichel play. Even on his best nights, he is prone to these types of mental errors. EDGE: NEITHER
CONCLUSION Both Eichel and Draisaitl can be key components of a Stanley Cup contender. So how do I choose who is more valuable? Neither player is perfect. One masks his average skating with great hands, sense and concentration. The other overcomes lapses in concentration with hands, sense and tremendous skating. Their career offensive production is nearly identical. In order to break the stalemate, imagine this situation: it’s late in a crucial game, and we need a goal to keep our playoff hopes alive. I can either put Draisaitl or Eichel on the ice. No more waffling. I choose Draisaitl. He’s a better faceoff man to get the puck. There is less chance he’ll make a sloppy play to lose the puck. His ability to score in tight is a bit better. But I don’t wish to sound bolder than I am. I hate to overlook a skilled player with courage who can skate through the entire opposition. I choose Draisaitl over Eichel because I’m forced to make the call. The key question is: what do you think?
This is an updated version of a feature that first appeared in The Hockey News 2020 Trade Deadline Preview. Want more in-depth features, analysis and opinions delivered right to your mailbox? Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.
See more0
0
0
0
Jonathan Huberdeau Vs. Gabriel Landeskog: Who's more valuable?
We asked longtime NHL exec and scout Tom Thompson to examine how two Calder-winners stacked up. Who comes out on top: the 2012 (Landeskog) or 2013 (Huberdeau) rookie of the year?
Sometimes this job looks easy. Compare two hockey players. They were born six months apart. Both are in the primes of their careers. Both play left wing. They both have solid 6-foot-1 frames. Each of them has played more than 500 NHL games with good durability. Neither of them has any glaring weaknesses. One of the players, Jonathan Huberdeau of the Florida Panthers, has outscored the other player, Gabriel Landeskog of the Colorado Avalanche, by almost 0.10 points per game during his NHL career.
Huberdeau, as the calendar turned to 2020, was having his best season. He was sixth in the NHL scoring race and had been selected to play in his first All-Star Game. Landeskog had fewer than one-third the number of points as Huberdeau after missing 16 games with an injury. It sounds like an automatic choice – Huberdeau over Landeskog. Not so fast.
ROLES
Huberdeau’s role on a Stanley Cup contender is important but limited. He is a productive left winger on an offensive line. If somebody gets the puck to him and he has open ice, he can make top-caliber plays to teammates in scoring position. He is very good on the power play and can be positioned on either wing on the half wall. Playmaking again is his forte. He is not effective playing center, and he has just one short-handed point in his NHL career.
Landeskog has a much more diversified role on a contender. He is an effective left winger on the first line, creating turnovers and getting pucks to his linemates in scoring position. He can also drive to the net, deflect shots, score on rebounds and draw penalties. In addition, he can play either left wing or center on a line more concerned with checking. He is often on the first penalty-killing unit and takes a number of big faceoffs. Edge: Landeskog
SKATING
Until the past two seasons, I would give an edge to Huberdeau. He has always been a quick, fluid, balanced skater who does not possess great speed but overall is above average by NHL standards. Landeskog was a powerful skater with quickness and the ability to make tight turns in confined areas, but in the past two seasons, he has overcome the clunky aspect of his skating in open-ice situations. His speed is fine and is above average in straight-ahead situations. After recently scouting games for both players, I did not notice any real difference in their skating. Edge: Neither
PUCK SKILLS
This category is no contest. Huberdeau is one of the elite puck-handlers in the NHL. His hands are soft and quick. He can make quick, accurate passes on the forehand and backhand. When he does elect to shoot, he has a quick release and an accurate wrist shot. Landeskog has good hands in tight situations. When he causes turnovers, he can keep possession of the puck. He can elevate rebounds effectively and deflect shots. His playmaking is good, but it’s not at the elite level. His shooting can be erratic. If he required to release a shot quickly, his accuracy is inconsistent. Edge: Huberdeau
COMPETITIVENESS
This category is also no contest, but in the other direction. Huberdeau displays characteristics of a top offensive player who is playing on a non-playoff team. He gets points, particularly on the power play, when he can rely more on pure talent than on real effort. In games against good teams, his line with Aleksander Barkov and Evgenii Dadonov was ineffective. Huberdeau began a late-December hot streak when he was moved to a line with Noel Acciari and Vincent Trocheck. His new linemates created turnovers and got the puck to Huberdeau in the offensive zone. He was then able to return the puck to them in good scoring position. Acciari recorded back-to-back hat tricks with Huberdeau assisting on four of the six goals. Meanwhile, Frank Vatrano was more effective than Huberdeau had been with Barkov and Dadonov because he was getting to loose pucks and creating turnovers.
Landeskog displays characteristics of a captain of a legitimate Stanley Cup contender. He is noticeable on virtually every shift of a game. He is the ideal complement to Nathan MacKinnon and Mikko Rantanen on Colorado’s first line. Landeskog can skate with them, get the puck to them and create turnovers to get the puck back to them. He plays the game at a higher tempo than Huberdeau. Landeskog is also very effective centering a line with J.T. Compher and Tyson Jost. Landeskog forechecks diligently and can play whatever role you want in the defensive zone. Even when he is playing left wing, he is used for some key faceoffs. Take a look at the Colorado bench during timeouts or in late-game situations. More often than not, Landeskog is leading the discussions. This guy plays like he means it. Edge: Landeskog
STATSITICS
I love the expression that there are “lies, damned lies and statistics.” However, there are certain numbers that simply cannot be overlooked when comparing Huberdeau and Landeskog. Huberdeau averaged 0.10 points per game more than Landeskog. This is due to one factor: Huberdeau has more assists, particularly on the power play. Huberdeau is a younger version of Joe Thornton – Huberdeau makes good plays from the perimeter, and people are puzzled that his team does not win more often. Landeskog actually has more goals per game than Huberdeau.
Landeskog goes to the greasy areas and gets his nose dirty. In an era that values puck possession, the most compelling statistic is takeaways versus giveaways. Huberdeau has a minus-96 takeaway/giveaway ratio while Landeskog has a plus-136. Landeskog has almost twice as many blocked shots per game and almost three times as many hits per game. Despite Huberdeau’s great hands, Landeskog’s success in the faceoff circle is almost 10 percent better. The numbers make it clear Landeskog plays a much more complete game than Huberdeau. Edge: Landeskog
CONCLUSION
My approach is that of a GM trying to win the Stanley Cup. Huberdeau and Landeskog both have pedigrees that will require top-dollar contracts, and there is only so much money for players at that level. Beware of teams that invest big money in players like Huberdeau. If you give them enough ice time with your top players, especially on the power play, they will put points on the board, but you pay a price for that production, and the team’s makeup and style of play has to fit into their comfort zone.
Landeskog is a top-level player who can enhance the play of his teammates. He can play on an offensive line or a checking line. He is equally effective at left wing and at center. He can be used in all crucial situations in a game. MacKinnon and Rantanen benefit from Landeskog’s ability to create turnovers, his net-front presence and the knowledge he will protect them on the ice. Two of the game’s greatest talents have more value because of Landeskog. This is how you win a championship. Jonathan Huberdeau is a skilled offensive player. Gabriel Landeskog has more value in a quest to claim the Stanley Cup.
Tom Thompson has been an NHL scout/director/assistant GM since 1985.
This feature appeared in The Hockey News 2020 Rookie Issue. Want more in-depth features, analysis and opinions delivered right to your mailbox? Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Hedman or Carlson in a battle of former world junior standouts?
Carlson is the early Norris Trophy favorite after getting off to the best start of his career. But don’t discount Hedman. He can do it all – and do it very well.
As the NHL season passed the quarter mark, the best team was the Washington Capitals, and the best player on the Capitals was John Carlson. He was leading all NHL defensemen in points by a wide margin, he was in the top 10 in the overall scoring race and ranked among the league leaders in ice time per game. He’s playing the best hockey of his career. But how does Carlson stack up in a comparison with Victor Hedman of the Tampa Bay Lightning? Hedman, the 2018 Norris Trophy winner, missed a couple games this season with an injury and only started to display his top form at the end of November. When he is playing at his peak level, he is one of the NHL’s best players. Has Carlson vaulted himself into Hedman’s stratosphere? Let’s break down their games and find out.
CAREERS Hedman grew up in Sweden, Carlson grew up in New Jersey. Both were born in 1990. Hedman turns 29 in December, Carlson turns 30 in January. Both have spent their entire NHL career with one organization. Carlson was drafted 27th overall by Washington in 2008 from the Indiana Ice of the USHL. After one season with OHL London and half a season with AHL Hershey, Carlson joined Washington midway through 2009-10 and has been with the Capitals ever since. Hedman was drafted second overall by Tampa Bay in 2009 from MoDo in Sweden. He joined the Lightning for the start of 2009-10 and has remained with them ever since. Both Carlson and Hedman played their 700th NHL game this season. Statistically speaking, they could not be any closer – they’re virtually tied in career goals, assists and points. Carlson has a reputation as a top-level offensive defenseman, but he has never finished among the top three in Norris Trophy voting. Hedman is respected as a top-flight, all-around defenseman. He has finished in the top three in Norris voting in each of the past three seasons and won the award in 2017-18.Edge: Hedman
ROLES There is not even a subtle distinction between the roles Carlson and Hedman are supposed to fill. They are both being paid big money to be the No. 1 blueliner on a Stanley Cup contender. They’re both relied upon to log a lot of even-strength ice time, serve as the quarterback on the top power-play unit and play on the penalty kill. Both of them are used in all situations. Lots of work, lots of pressure and lots of money.Edge: Neither
OFFENSIVE PRODUCTION It is incredible that two players can be in their 11th NHL season and be so close in goals, assists and points, as well as games played. You would have to be splitting hairs to give either Hedman or Carlson an edge in this category.Edge: Neither
DEFENSIVE PLAY In this category, there is a significant difference. Carlson is no more than an average defensive defenseman. His mobility skating backwards is below average, and he is often beaten on the rush when he cannot pivot quickly enough. In the defensive zone, he is smart and can intercept passes. Once the puck in on his stick, he is elite. However, when the opposition has the puck, Carlson adopts the stance of a sword fighter with one hand on the stick. He is not forceful and seldom engages physically with an opponent. He does not lack courage. He will block shots and defend teammates. His commitment to defensive play is very average. Hedman has remarkable balance and agility for a 6-foot-6 player. He can pivot quickly from forward to backward skating, he’s usually in good position and is forceful in 1-on-1 confrontations. He plays in the face of opponents when they have the puck in Tampa Bay’s zone. Like Carlson, he’s smart enough to intercept passes and is excellent once the puck is on his stick. Unlike Carlson, he looks for chances to lay out big hits and he can intimidate opponents. Edge: Hedman
PUCK SKILLS Carlson and Hedman rival Erik Karlsson as the most consistent D-men handling the puck under pressure in the defensive zone and making quality outlet passes. Washington and Tampa Bay have elite forwards who are capable of keeping the opposition on their heels. In order to accomplish this, the forwards need to receive the puck on the fly in the neutral zone. Both Carlson and Hedman deliver. They are also consistent in making good plays with the puck when they’re joining the rush. The other crucial area for offensive D-men is the ability to generate scoring chances from the point. Carlson and Hedman do that with their heads up. They make excellent plays and have elite-level shots – hard, accurate and released quickly. Carlson has a remarkable ability to receive a pass at the point while off balance and immediately unleash a lethal shot. Other than Brent Burns, I have not seen another D-man with this ability. Edge: Carlson
HOCKEY SENSE Both Hedman and Carlson have elite-level hockey sense in all areas of the game. Their positional play is sound, and their decisions with the puck are top-notch. With the tempo of today’s NHL, the ability of blueliners to close the gap is crucial. These two players are smart enough to close the gap before an opponent receives a pass or before he is able to accelerate. Their anticipation allows them to project where the puck is going and identify who will become the dangerous opponent. In Carlson’s case, this can serve to hide his limited mobility in backward skating. Edge: Neither
CONCLUSION Carlson is an elite-level offensive defenseman. His ability to generate offense overrides his average defensive play. He’s playing the best hockey of his career and is a legitimate candidate for the Norris Trophy. With only a few minor penalties, he could also generate votes for the Lady Byng Trophy for the fourth time in his career, one of the few D-men to do so. Hedman isn’t really a Lady Byng candidate. He combines offensive talent at the same level as Carlson with an aggressive defensive style that makes him elite in all aspects of the game. If he continues at this level, he is a serious threat to win his second Norris. Carlson is a quality NHL player. Hedman is the best overall defenseman in the NHL and one of the five or six most valuable players in hockey. One of the least talked about aspects of Tampa Bay’s demise in last season’s playoffs was the fact Hedman missed two of the four games. There was talk about Nikita Kucherov missing one of the games due to suspension. Media speculated this could be devastating for the Lightning because, after all, Kucherov was their MVP. He was not. Hedman was. Even when Carlson is playing the best hockey of his career, Hedman is better.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Murray or Binnington? Who has the edge in a battle of Cup-winning goaltenders?
While both of these netminders have recently won the Cup, it feels like a one-sided debate. But it’s closer than you think – and for reasons that aren’t obvious.
This should be an easy assignment. Compare two NHL goalies who are less than a year apart in age, but one is much bigger and also has an edge in athleticism, the use of his glove hand, rebound control and puckhandling. Case closed? Not so fast. The goalie with all the advantages is Matt Murray of the Pittsburgh Penguins. The other goalie in question is Jordan Binnington of the St. Louis Blues. Despite Murray’s perceived superiority, the values of the two are very close. How can this be? Well, let’s see.
CAREERS This comparison is strange. They were considered to be basically at the same level when they were drafted. Binnington was selected 88th overall in 2011 and Murray was taken 83rd in 2012. Both played two more years of junior after being drafted and were named OHL all-stars, but neither was looked upon as a definite No. 1 NHL goalie. Today, they are both considered good NHL goalies who quickly won Stanley Cups, but nobody is touting them at this point as future Hall of Famers. Their paths after leaving junior were quite different. Binnington had to start in the ECHL and then played four-plus seasons in the AHL before St. Louis brought him up. Murray went directly from junior to the AHL where he starred for a season-and-a-half before his recall to the NHL. Each was a starting goalie on Stanley Cup champion before he had played a full season in the NHL. Murray repeated as a Cup champion following his first full NHL campaign.Edge: Murray
ATHLETICISM In today’s high-tempo NHL, athleticism is a significant requirement for any netminder. A goalie who is athletic has two features in his movements – they are quick and they are fluid. These characteristics describe Murray perfectly. He is very quick moving up and down from his crouch to his knees. When he’s on his knees, he can move fluidly in a lateral direction, all the while remaining square to the puck. His lateral mobility is not at the Andrei Vasilevskiy level, but Murray is in the top group of NHL goalies. Binnington has some quickness to his game, but he realizes his limitations. He does not attempt to move down from his crouch except in scramble situations. His lateral movement is far from fluid. It is often quite herky-jerky, and many times he does not have time to get square to the puck.Edge: Murray
GLOVE HAND This is not close. The only way that an NHL goalie can survive by moving laterally on his knees is if he is tall and has an exceptional glove hand. This describes Murray. He is 6-foot-4, and the quickness of his glove hand is at the elite level. The advantage of making glove saves is that there are no rebounds. Binnington is 6-foot-1. His glove hand is average. He does not attempt to play on his knees and move laterally. Binnington is vulnerable on shots over his catching-hand shoulder. He usually tries to stop shots in this area by quick movements of his upper body. This results in more rebounds.Edge: Murray
REBOUND CONTROLHall of Fame goalie Glenn Hall once explained a goalie’s priorities to me: the first is to stop the puck and the second is to control the rebound. Success in the second priority meant that the goalie had made a save. Being square to the original shot often allows the goalie to “swallow the puck” by absorbing it into his paraphernalia (as Danny Gallivan would say). If the goalie is not square to the original shot, he is often still moving when the puck hits him. This makes rebound control more difficult. Recent performances by Murray and Binnington have confirmed my impression of their styles. Murray fluidly absorbs almost every original shot. There are very few rebounds. For Binnington, most shots are battles. He gets to almost every original shot by means of a quick movement of a body part while he is still in motion. This often leads to rebounds.Edge: Murray
HOCKEY SENSE This is the most underappreciated aspect of a goalie’s game. Murray has good hockey sense. He is seldom caught out of position. His decisions when handling the puck usually are correct. Binnington displays elite-level hockey sense. His anticipation of where the puck is going is uncanny. He reacts very well to cross-ice passes. He seems to read an opponent’s mind as to when they’re going to try a wraparound or to jam the crease from the side. Binnington finds a way to pounce on loose pucks when he senses the need for a line change. He knows when the Blues need an emotional charge and sometimes starts a scuffle with an opponent in order to do so. His puckhandling is awkward, but he’s always in the correct position to make a pass or get the puck out of the defensive zone at key times.Edge: Binnington
X-FACTOR When two players are basically of the same value but one has a much higher skill level, the other player has to possess an X-factor. Binnington does. His contribution to his team is much different than that of Murray. Pittsburgh needed a calm, consistent presence in goal after a number of disappointing playoff performances by Marc-Andre Fleury. Murray provided that. He is skilled and big, but at times appears sloppy and almost lethargic. Binnington put a charge into what was often a docile leadership group in St. Louis. His seemingly cocky, abrasive manner with opponents, officials and the media spurred on his team. Ryan O’Reilly was a deserving Conn Smythe Trophy winner, but I wouldn’t have voted for him. Binnington was the most important player in the Blues’ Cup victory. He gave up some bad goals, and he had a couple bad games, but he emerged from those situations with a snarl on his face and was the key factor in every game where St. Louis faced elimination. He played his best in the biggest games, and his presence raised the play of those around him. This is Binnington’s X-factor.Edge: Binnington
CONCLUSION Here is the ultimate test: if I’m managing the Blues, there is no way I trade Binnington for Murray. If I’m managing the Penguins, I would at least consider trading Murray for Binnington, especially if my team was in the doldrums. One goalie has greater physical attributes. The other goalie has greater hockey sense and the X-factor. I am going with the latter package. In a photo finish, I take Jordan Binnington over Matt Murray.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Hughes or Makar in a showdown of young stud prospects
These two dynamic rookies have captured the imaginations of their fan bases, but which market should get more excited for the future?
My first choice in building a Stanley Cup contender would be an offensive center who consistently ranks among the NHL scoring leaders. After acquiring this center, my next priority would be two good puck-moving defensemen who can generate offense. In order to get this production, I would be prepared to overlook flaws in other aspects of their games like size, backward skating mobility, defensive play. In today’s NHL, the puck must be moved quickly and accurately out of the defensive zone to forwards in full flight, and scoring chances must be generated regularly when handling the puck at the point. Two young D-men who can do just that are Cale Makar of the Colorado Avalanche and Quinn Hughes of the Vancouver Canucks. How do they compare to each other as puck-moving offensive defensemen? Let’s find out.
CAREERS Both players have had remarkable careers to this point. Makar was selected fourth overall in 2017 after a terrific season with Brooks in the Alberta Junior League. He then became one of the top offensive defensemen in recent NCAA history during his two seasons at UMass-Amherst. In 2018-19, he had 49 points in 41 games as he led his team to the national championship game and won the Hobey Baker Award. He then stepped directly into the Colorado lineup in the Stanley Cup playoffs and did not look out of place. Quinn Hughes was drafted seventh overall in 2018 after excelling with USA Hockey’s National Team Development Program. He then went to the University of Michigan and had 33 points in 32 games last season. Both Makar and Hughes have been impressive when representing their countries in international competition. Makar just turned 21. Hughes just turned 20. Hughes has been very good prior to this season. Makar has been a notch better.Edge: Makar
ROLESHughes and Makar are both being counted on as important defensemen on their clubs. Makar is on the first power-play unit on one of the top teams in the NHL. The Avalanche clearly believed he was ready for this role when they traded Tyson Barrie to Toronto during the off-season. Colorado is a team that’s deep in experienced D-men, but Makar gets his share of even-strength ice time and even some time killing penalties, usually in the last shift of the kill. Hughes is on the second power-play unit of an average NHL team. He also gets his share of even-strength ice time but has not been used at all killing penalties. Hughes is one year younger than Makar and deserves another year of development. Both players will get lots of ice time. Both will be used as point men on the first power-play unit of their teams. Both will get lots of ice time when their team is behind. I envision Makar being used in key defensive situations. I do not see Hughes in that role.Edge: Makar
SKATING To be an elite-level offensive defenseman in today’s NHL, you cannot have skating deficiencies. Makar and Hughes pass this part of the test. Both are agile and can accelerate quickly. I love watching these young stars receive the puck while skating backwards and then either move laterally, spin away from their checks, or accelerate forward, all the time carrying the puck with their head up. I have only noticed one difference in their skating: Makar has more speed.Edge: Makar
HOCKEY SENSE Makar’s play in the first month of the season has confirmed my belief that he’s one of the smartest young D-men to come along in recent years. However, Hughes has shown me during his first month that his hockey sense is at the same level. He looks like a prototypical coach’s kid. Watch how he is constantly adjusting his feet before the puck gets to him. He seldom receives the puck or makes a pass while he’s off-balance. Like Makar, Hughes is uncanny in his ability to find open teammates from the point or on a line rush. Coaches stress the importance of closing the gap while defending. Hughes often anticipates where the puck is going to be passed and has already closed the gap before an opponent has received the puck.Edge: Neither
PUCK SKILLSNo sense wasting much time in this category. Hughes and Makar are both at the elite level at handling the puck and making and receiving passes. I knew Makar was an elite-level shooter with a quick, accurate release of both his wrist shot and slapshot, but Hughes’ shot has been a revelation. His first goal, against L.A., was a rocket. I did not realize the power of his shot until this season. It is at Makar’s level.Edge: Neither
DEFENSIVE PLAY Throughout their careers, both of these players will be judged on their offensive production. If this production wanes, their value will decrease quickly. Makar is a far better defensive player than Hughes due to one factor – physical strength. Hughes can be overpowered physically in any sort of 1-on-1 situation. This is why he tries to defend sideways by poking with one hand on his stick. He has no chance of defending territory by skating backwards. Makar lacks tenacity in his 1-on-1 coverage, but he can protect territory and has good agility.Edge: Makar
CONCLUSION Makar and Hughes should both enjoy long, productive NHL careers. I enjoy their styles of play. Both of them are fun to watch. Both are naturally fluid skaters, and they will be able to handle lots of ice time on a consistent basis. They will be responsible for putting the top offensive forwards on their teams in good scoring positions on a nightly basis. They will be the quarterbacks of their teams’ power plays. In modern hockey, those power plays must produce in order for their teams to win. Neither player will get much time to rest when their teams trail in the third period. These are high levels of responsibility. Pressure comes with the territory. Makar and Hughes have exhibited the necessary attributes to handle these situations. They are skilled, smart and poised. Both of them will provide significant value as offensive defensemen. I believe this is one of the most crucial requirements of a championship team.
There is one higher level to which a defenseman can aspire. This is the role of the all-around star. Teams count on these players in all situations. Teams rely upon them just as much when they are trying to protect a lead or survive a crucial penalty kill. Hughes will not reach this level. Right now, he is above average offensively and below average defensively. With his small frame and lack of strength, I do not project any significant improvement in his defensive game. He is already smart, alert and quick, but that is not enough. When you can be overpowered physically, you will never be a quality defensive defenseman. Makar has the potential to be an all-around star. Right now, he is above average offensively and his defensive game is average. With a higher commitment level to his 1-on-1 play, he could easily become an above-average defensive player. Combined with his offensive ability, this would make him a star. Quinn Hughes is very good. Cale Makar is better. The Hall of Fame could be greeting him in 25 years.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: In a battle of veteran keepers, would you take Rinne or Fleury?
Rinne and Fleury are No. 1 goalies on Cup contenders. They’ve had sparkling careers, but they’re in their mid-30s. The clock is ticking. Who has more left in the tank?
Since the NHL introduced the Conn Smythe Trophy in 1965, it has been awarded to a goalie 16 times while the Hart Trophy has gone to a goalie on only four occasions. Goaltending is obviously deemed to be more crucial in the playoffs than in the regular season. The objective of every NHL team is to win the Stanley Cup. In the playoffs, a goalie is often looked upon as the key player in putting his team “over the top.” In rating goalies, the ability to raise one’s game in the playoffs becomes a crucial consideration.
The NHL has become a young man’s league. When they reach their mid-30s, goalies are looked at in the same way as skaters. How long can they continue to perform at their present level? Does a short-term dip indicate a permanent slippage? Two netminders who fit into this category are Nashville’s Pekka Rinne and Vegas’ Marc-Andre Fleury. Both have long-term credentials as Grade-A goalies. But Father Time is catching up with them. And because of the crucial importance of goalkeeping, they will not be cut any slack for imperfections. The key question is, what are the future values of Rinne and Fleury? How do they compare with each other?
CAREERSOne month into the 2019-20 season, Fleury will be 35 and Rinne 37. Fleury was the No. 1 overall draft pick in 2003. He jumped directly from junior to Pittsburgh for part of the next season and remained a Penguin until being taken by Vegas in the 2017 expansion draft. Rinne was drafted 258th in 2004. He stayed in Finland for one more season and then played three years in the AHL. He played his first full NHL season in 2008-09 and has been with Nashville since. Despite being two years younger than Rinne, Fleury’s NHL career developed much quicker. He probably played his best between 2007 and 2009, when the Penguins made two trips to the final, winning the Cup in ’09. His final eight seasons in Pittsburgh were marked by inconsistency. Fleury did lead the expansion Knights to the Cup final in 2018. However, I think his role was overstated. People did not want to believe an expansion team could outplay its opponents in three consecutive rounds. The Knights did. They did not require outstanding goaltending. In the final, Fleury was outplayed by Washington’s Braden Holtby. In the 2019 playoffs, his inconsistency was noticeable. Rinne has started more than 70 percent of Nashville’s games since 2009-10. He had his best regular season in 2010-11, he won the Vezina Trophy in 2017-18 and has consistently had good stats. Then come the playoffs. His post-season play has been below his regular-season level. Nashville did advance to the Cup final in 2017. Rinne was good in the first three rounds, but he was still beaten for some bad goals. In the Cup final, he was outplayed by Pittsburgh’s Matt Murray. During the past two post-seasons, he was outplayed by Connor Hellebuyck and Ben Bishop. As a result, Nashville has never won more than one series in any playoff year other than 2017.Edge: Fleury
ROLES Both Fleury and Rinne are No. 1 goalies on teams that are Stanley Cup contenders, but I doubt either one of them can carry his team to a Cup championship. Fleury has shown in recent seasons he can be a No. 2 goalie on a Cup champion who can chip in with a few key wins and be a supportive teammate. The Predators went to the final in 2017. The Golden Knights went to the final in 2018. In neither case did I believe that the goaltending of Rinne or Fleury was a key factor in winning a series. They were both OK when called upon, but their respective teams outplayed the opposition decisively. Both goalies have also delivered some playoff clunkers during this time.Edge: Neither
STYLESTheir styles are vastly different. Rinne is huge. He plays what I call a quiet game. He is fundamentally sound, and he anticipates well. He is usually square to the puck, leaving an opponent very little net to shoot at. His rebound control is good. He does not make much use of his stick, and his puckhandling is unremarkable. Fleury has good size, but he isn’t huge. He plays a loud game based on quickness and athleticism. He is often in a low crouch and relies on quick leg movements and a quick glove hand. All of Fleury’s reactions are aggressive. At times, he puts himself out of position with pokechecks and double leg stacks. As a result, his rebound control is inconsistent. He is an aggressive and pretty effective puckhandler. Edge: Neither
STRENGTHSRinne’s strengths are formidable.He’s big and sound fundamentally. His anticipation is good, and he’s square to the puck. With his positioning and size, he usually doesn’t have to make quick movements to stop pucks. His rebound control also avoids the necessity of quick reactions to second shots. Fleury’s strengths are in different areas. His movements are quick and athletic. I’ll never forget his pre-game warmup routine when he was a member of Canada’s world-junior team. He would get into a low crouch and then do a series of rapid-fire split moves with his legs. The only other goalie I ever saw do a similar routine was Soviet great Vladislav Tretiak. Fleury’s glove hand is excellent. He can pokecheck well, and his aggressive puckhandling helps out his D-men.Edge: Neither
CONCERNSFleury’s game is based on reactions and quick movements. Both of these traits deteriorate with age. Fleury is not the goalie he was 10 years ago. He will not get better. The only question is how quickly any further deterioration will take place. Another issue is Fleury’s seeming inability to call a “personal timeout” to stop meltdown situations at key times. Rinne has different concerns. He has not shown the ability to raise his game in big playoff situations. Can he lead his team to a Cup? I don’t see it. There are goalies who have had more playoff success than Rinne who are not as strong fundamentally as he is. Those other goalies seem to have an inner fire burning in big games. Rinne seems to lack this ability. I doubt he’ll develop that at this stage in his career.Edge: Fleury
X-FACTORHockey is the consummate team game. The most valuable players are those who can perform at a top level while, at the same time, raise the level of play of their teammates. I have never heard a bad word about Rinne. He appears to be a consistent performer, and I’m sure he is a good teammate. Fleury has an unusually high reputation in the game. His outgoing, infectious personality has endeared him to teammates in Vegas, Pittsburgh and in junior hockey. His upbeat nature was a key factor in the decision by Vegas to bring him in as one of the pillars in building an expansion franchise. I even look to the people from Humboldt singling him out for his hospitality when they visited Vegas during the 2018 playoffs. Fleury has something special. He has the X-factor. Edge: Fleury
CONCLUSIONRinne recently said he has two years left to win in Nashville. However, I think he’ll be replaced before then by Juuse Saros. At 37, you can’t expect any significant improvement. Regular-season success leading to playoff disappointment is not good for your job security when there’s a viable option available. At 35, I don’t expect any improvement from Fleury, either. With his aggressive style, further injuries are probable. However, his overall athleticism is likely to extend his career beyond that of most goalies. He has shown he can be a useful backup on a Cup champion, and he has a positive, outgoing personality and winning resume. In a choice of “old” goalies, I’ll take Fleury over Rinne.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: In battle between pivots MacKinnon and Barkov, who has the edge?
The first and second overall picks in 2013 may play different styles, but both receive plenty of plaudits for their prowess. But are they being praised for the right things? And when push comes to shove, which one has the bigger impact?
This comparison should be close. Nathan MacKinnon of the Colorado Avalanche and Aleksander Barkov of the Florida Panthers are only one day apart in age. They were the first two selections in the 2013 draft and they immediately entered the NHL. They play the same position. Both players remain with their original teams. Both are high scorers who receive a ton of ice time. Their salaries are relatively equal. However, I do not believe that the comparison is close. One of the players has established a higher value than the other. Let’s take a look at the reasons why.
CAREERSBoth Barkov and MacKinnon have enjoyed a great deal of personal success. They started their NHL careers immediately after their 18th birthdays. Neither of their teams had qualified for the playoffs during the season prior to their arrival. After playing more than 400 NHL games, Barkov has produced at an impressive rate of 0.83 points per game. MacKinnon has been even better, producing at a rate of 0.88 points per game. Both players have been productive in international competition, Barkov for Finland and MacKinnon for Canada. Florida has qualified for the NHL playoffs only once during Barkov’s career. He averaged 0.50 points per game in the post-season. MacKinnon has led Colorado to the playoffs three times, averaging almost 1.2 points per playoff game. Edge: MacKinnon
ROLESThere is no uncertainty in this category. Both Barkov and MacKinnon are used as first-line centers. They play in all situations. They both logged more than 22 minutes per game in the 2018-19 regular season. No forward in the NHL played more than 23 minutes per game. In the 2019 playoffs, MacKinnon averaged almost 24 minutes per game. They are both looked on as more than first-line centers by their respective teams. Both Barkov and MacKinnon are considered to be the best players, the “main men,” in Florida and Colorado. In fact, MacKinnon is the only forward in the NHL to lead his team in ice time per game. Edge: Neither
HOCKEY SENSEMacKinnon’s skating ability, competitiveness, puckhandling at top speed and consistency are all about as good as it gets. But while his hockey sense is good, it’s not at the elite level. He consistently tries to beat opponents 1-on-1 when it is not necessary to do so. He is not a master at buying time to find a trailer on the play. Defensively, his commitment is unquestioned, but while watching replays of several important goals against Colorado in the playoffs, it becomes clear he has a tendency to cover the wrong man, and in some instances, the man he is trying to cover is already marked. Barkov’s hockey sense is so good that it often goes unnoticed. Like other players with elite-level sense, it allows him to produce offensively without much perceived effort. He is like a magician buying time to find open teammates. When his team has control of the puck in the offensive zone, his timing is uncanny – finding a “quiet” area where he can receive a pass for a quick tap-in. Defensively, he is a gambler, but he is one of the best in the league at anticipating blind passes in the defensive zone and sending the play the other way. Edge: Barkov
SKATINGBarkov is an above-average NHL skater. He is agile and fluid, with good acceleration and quickness in tight quarters for a big man. His speed is fine but he can’t keep up with MacKinnon, who plays at a pace matched only by Connor McDavid. In the modern vernacular, MacKinnon is always going at “warp speed.” His agility, quickness and acceleration are all at the ultra-elite level. Edge: MacKinnon
DEFENSIVE PLAYMany pundits laud Barkov’s defensive abilities and promote him for the Selke Trophy. I scouted a number of Panthers games in the second half of 2018-19, and I do not see what they are seeing. Barkov is really smart. He can steal pucks from unsuspecting opponents. His positional play defensively is fine. However, his commitment level is pretty iffy. He is a big, strong man who often does not bend his back and plays in his own end with one hand on the stick. He does not hit people nor force them to hurry their decisions. MacKinnon is not as savvy as Barkov. He sometimes covers the wrong person in the defensive zone. However, his contribution to the Avalanche’s defensive effort is immense. He does not take even a portion of a shift off. His speed and tenacity when pursuing the puck appear to unnerve the opposition. As a result, they make bad decisions and turn the puck over. MacKinnon, who finished seventh overall in the NHL scoring race receives no statistical benefit from these situations, but the Avs certainly do. In the homestretch of the regular season and in the playoffs, he delivered some bone-jarring checks. He also just missed on a number of others as opponents bailed out or hurried their passes. Edge: MacKinnon
CONTRIBUTION TO WINNINGThis is where the comparison is not close. MacKinnon is one of a handful of NHL players who can individually change the nature of a game. His style of play energizes his teammates. What MacKinnon has done in the past two seasons is remarkable. He has carried his team on his back in consecutive stretch runs, and the Avalanche made the playoffs both times. They have also had three very good playoff series in the two years. For a number of key games late in 2018-19, the Avs were missing both of MacKinnon’s regular linemates, Gabriel Landeskog and Mikko Rantanen. Neither MacKinnon nor the team missed a beat as Colorado finished the year with a 7-1-2 run and grabbed a wild-card spot. In a league where sustained tempo of play has become paramount, McDavid and MacKinnon are at the top of the class. Barkov plays the game at a more deliberate pace. He likes to slow down the action, bide his time to create scoring chances and play in a controlled fashion. His team has been a consistent disappointment the past few seasons. They have poor starts, and then play better once they’re out of contention and the pressure is off. Barkov must bear some of this responsibility. He gets a huge amount of ice time. He has shown occasional bursts of speed, but not on a consistent basis. Barkov has yet to show he can carry a team into the playoffs and have some success once they get there. Edge: MacKinnon
CONCLUSIONBarkov is a smarter player than MacKinnon. That is his only edge. MacKinnon is more productive offensively and more valuable defensively. His overall play makes a far higher contribution to his team’s success. Some critics may say that you cannot use MacKinnon’s playoff success to his advantage in this comparison because Barkov has not had similar opportunities. My response is that MacKinnon’s superior play in the regular season was a huge factor in giving his team those playoff opportunities. Barkov is a very good player, but he has not shown that he can do what MacKinnon does. Nathan MacKinnon is a better and more valuable player than Aleksander Barkov.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Who wins the battle of burgeoning blueliners – Heiskanen or Dahlin?
The two best rookie defensemen from last season will be stud No. 1s. But if push comes to shove, which one is the top dog?
I want to share a secret before you read the descriptions and conclusions that I have made on Rasmus Dahlin of the Buffalo Sabres and Miro Heiskanen of the Dallas Stars. As I was scouting these two highly skilled young defensemen, I began to imagine they were both eligible in the same draft. I am the GM of the NHL team with the first pick. My primary objective is to determine which of the two players the team with the second pick prefers. I would then try to make a deal with that team so that I would “pass” on picking their preferred player. In exchange, I would be able to acquire a valuable asset, either a player or another draft pick. My reasoning is simple – I love both Dahlin and Heiskanen. They are two of the most poised defensemen ever to play as teenagers in the NHL, and each will fill the No. 1 role on their NHL team for many years. Bearing this secret in mind, let’s take a closer look at two young stars.
CAREERS Miro Heiskanen was the third overall pick in 2017 from HIFK in the Finnish Liiga. After completing one more season in Finland, he came to Dallas for 2018-19. He established himself immediately as a top-four defenseman at 19, played all 82 games and was selected to play in the NHL All-Star Game. He averaged more than 23 minutes of ice time per game in the regular season, and that increased to more than 25 minutes per game in the playoffs. Rasmus Dahlin is nine months younger than Heiskanen. He was the first overall pick in 2018 from Frolunda in Sweden and came directly to Buffalo. He established himself immediately as a top-four defenseman and also played in all 82 games. Dahlin averaged more than 21 minutes of ice time per game. Both players had previously impressed NHL scouts with their elite-level performances at the world under-18s and world juniors.Edge: Neither
ROLESIn the case of both of these blueliners, their rookie seasons only formed the starting points for their careers. This year, both Heiskanen and Dahlin will be asked to play on the top defensive pair against top opposition forwards and be on the first power-play and penalty-killing units. Both of them will be asked to play big minutes on a nightly basis. They will be given the chance to assume the roles of elite NHL defensemen.Edge: Neither
SKATINGNo player can hope to rise to the elite level in today’s NHL without top-flight skating ability. Dahlin and Heiskanen pass this test easily. Both of them are smooth, effortless skaters who are exceptionally light on their feet. Both have excellent backward agility and pivoting. Dahlin is very good in acceleration and has above-average forward speed. Heiskanen is already at the elite level in both these categories. By the end of the playoffs, I believed his ability to skate the puck out of danger all the way to the offensive zone was as good as any blueliner’s in the NHL.Edge: Heiskanen
DEFENSIVE PLAYHeiskanen received rave reviews for his performance during the playoffs. He was used extensively in all situations and often played against top opposition forwards, including in overtime. He showed skating ability, puck skills and poise. He was also manhandled and knocked off the puck on numerous occasions. This was glossed over because of his age and inexperience. Heiskanen will not be granted this slack in the future. Dahlin was in a much different situation than Heiskanen. Dallas employed a disciplined defensive system and was second in the NHL in goals against. I watched a number of Buffalo games. I really have no idea what their defensive scheme was. Dahlin handled himself well as an 18-year-old coming into this situation. With his skating ability, he was hard to beat on the rush, and he showed some bite in 1-on-1 situations. He maintained his poise even when things looked hopeless for the Sabres.Edge: Dahlin
OFFENSIVE ABILITYIn 2018-19, Dahlin had 44 points compared to 33 by Heiskanen. However, we should take a closer look at that point differential. Dahlin was regularly used on the first-power play unit of a non-playoff team. Dallas had a stronger, veteran team. Heiskanen was on the Stars’ second power-play unit. Dahlin outscored Heiskanen on the power play by a margin of 20-8. In non-power-play situations, Heiskanen actually outscored Dahlin 25-24. Their usual scoring methods are different. Dahlin has a more common approach for a good offensive D-man. He makes plays from the point and has a strong shot. Heiskanen’s shot is not nearly as strong as that of Dahlin. His points are more likely to come from converting passes after he has moved in from the blueline or from joining the rush and converting a pass as the trailer on the play.Edge: Neither
ROOM FOR DEVELOPMENTWhat Dahlin and Heiskanen showed in their rookie seasons was remarkable. They are already playing at a level equal to the top group of defensemen in the NHL. The question to be determined is how much improvement we are likely to see from them. Right now, they are both top-level skaters, with Heiskanen having an edge in speed and acceleration. Both have good puck skills and sense, with Dahlin being the better shooter. Now, let’s take a look at their bodies. Dahlin has a bigger and heavier frame at 6-foot-3 and 190 pounds. Heiskanen is more compact at 6-foot-1 and 185 pounds. Heiskanen is nine months older. Dahlin is more likely to gain actual physical strength and power. If he does, look out. Right now, his physical power is adequate. If his body develops further, Dahlin could become a defensive stud on top of everything else.Edge: Dahlin
CONCLUSIONLet’s return to our secret. If necessary, I will ask the GM of the team with the second pick in the draft which of these two defensemen he prefers. I will take either of them and surrender the other in a heartbeat. That is how highly I think of both of them. But, like any trade, it takes two to tango. That other GM may share my thoughts. He might be so happy to get either player, he will not surrender any assets to ensure that he gets his choice. The choice then falls to me. I will take Rasmus Dahlin. If neither player develops beyond the level they are at right now, I believe their respective values as assets are close to equal. If Dahlin’s younger body does fill out, the additional physical power should make him a slightly more complete defenseman. Dahlin has not had the benefit of NHL coaching at the level Heiskanen has received. Even in a somewhat chaotic situation, Dahlin looked pretty good. In a more organized environment, he could look even better. I would be delighted to have Heiskanen but I would take Dahlin ahead of him in a photo finish.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Mattias Ekholm vs. Roman Josi
They’re the top two defensemen on one of the NHL’s top defensive teams. Josi has led the way in Nashville for years, Ekholm has been a rock on ‘D.’ One is truly elite, while the other is merely very good.
A comparison of Predators defensemen Roman Josi and Mattias Ekholm reminds me of changing running shoes. I like my existing pair, but I want to give my new pair a chance. They feel good. I can almost convince myself they’re better than my old pair. Now it’s time for the big race. The new shoes are good. But when it comes right down to it, my old pair is better. In the big race, I trust them more, I use them, and I do not regret my decision.
Josi has been the Preds’ go-to guy on defense for several years. For the past five seasons, he has led the team in ice time. He’s respected for both his offense and defense. Josi is like the existing pair of running shoes. For the five seasons prior to 2018-19, Ekholm was a regular on the Nashville blueline who, for the most part, was used in a defensive capacity. His play showed steady improvement and in 2018-19 he was used in all situations. In the first half of the season, Ekholm was more productive offensively than he had ever been. Some speculated he had overtaken Josi as Nashville’s best D-man. Then came the stretch run and playoffs. Ekholm was the new pair of running shoes – he was OK, but not as good as the existing pair and not used as much in big situations. Let’s see why.
CAREERS
How many hockey observers realize that Ekholm is actually older than Josi? Ekholm turned 29 on May 24. Josi turned 29 eight days later on June 1. Josi was a second-round selection (38th overall) in 2008 from Switzerland. Ekholm was a fourth-round selection (102nd overall) in 2009 from Sweden. Josi arrived in North America in 2010, played one season in the AHL and became a regular on the Predators’ blueline in 2011. Ekholm arrived in North America in 2012 and also played one season in the AHL. He became a regular in Nashville in 2013. Josi quickly became recognized as a top-flight NHL defenseman, and he has received votes for the all-star team and Norris Trophy every season since 2014-15. Ekholm was recognized as a solid defensive player, but he had never received any support for the NHL all-star teams or Norris Trophy prior to 2018-19. Since 2018, Ekholm has earned his way onto the Predators’ second power-play unit and become more productive offensively. He just posted his first 40-plus point season. Josi has had six in a row. Edge: Josi
ROLES
Josi has averaged more than 25 minutes of ice time per game the past six seasons. He is used in all situations. He has always been on the first unit for both the power play and penalty kill. Over the past five post-seasons, he has averaged almost 27 minutes per game. Josi is the go-to D-man in Nashville. Ekholm has increased his ice time over that same period from less than 17 to more than 23. He was always used to kill penalties, and he’s now on the second PP unit. His ice time usually rises in the playoffs, averaging about 25 minutes per game the past five seasons. Edge: Josi
OFFENSIVE PRODUCTION
This category is not close. Josi’s career points-per-game is almost double that of Ekholm. In the first half of 2018-19, Ekholm was on a hot streak and led Josi in points. But by the end of the season, Josi had 12 more points and was more of an offensive threat in the playoffs. Josi joins the rush more often – and more effectively – and his puckhandling and decision-making at the offensive blueline are quicker and more effective. Both have heavy shots, but Josi has a quicker release. Edge: Josi
DEFENSIVE PLAY
This is the area where Ekholm developed his role on the Predators. After Shea Weber was traded in 2016, the three most prominent defensemen in Nashville were Josi, P.K. Subban and Ryan Ellis. All of them were noted for their offensive production, and both Subban and Ellis had defensive deficiencies. Ekholm’s defensive role became valuable. With his 6-foot-4, 215-pound frame, he had range and strength. His backward mobility is unexceptional, but his size and anticipation make him an effective defender. He can be used against the opposition’s top players. Josi has quicker feet than Ekholm, but his defensive style is different. He is more of a gambler, with one hand on his stick, trying to steal pucks or intercept passes. He has a solid 6-foot-1, 200-pound build but lacks the range of Ekholm. In the defensive zone, his 1-on-1 play is not as good. Edge: Ekholm
SKATING
Josi is an elite skater in the NHL. His mobility is one of his biggest strengths. Although he lacks blinding speed, his pace is above average, and his agility and balance are exceptional. His backward skating is particularly impressive. His feet are light, and he pivots without effort. The most significant aspect of his skating is that he is able to perform every facet of it just as well with the puck as without it. Ekholm is a good skater, but he is not above average in any respect. In particular, Ekholm’s speed, agility, backward skating and pivots are all in the average range. His hockey sense and size often help to make up for a lack of agility or quickness. Late in the regular season and in the playoffs, his slow pivots with the puck resulted in some off-balance giveaways. Edge: Josi
CONCERNS
There are no perfect defensemen. The only flaw I can see with Josi is that he is not forceful in 1-on-1 situations. He jabs with one hand on his stick and he’s usually looking to steal the puck quickly. Despite his high level of ice time, he has averaged less than 30 penalty minutes per season the past six years. Ekholm showed his major shortcomings during the stretch run and in the playoffs. Very simply, he looked gassed. His lack of quickness became more obvious, and his off-balance giveaways were too frequent. He cannot reach the elite group of defensive defensemen in the NHL with his rate of giveaways. He has averaged more than 56 giveaways per season the past six years, including an average of 70 the past two seasons. He took several minor penalties in Nashville’s first-round playoff loss to Dallas because he was too slow reacting to changes in possession. Edge: Josi
CONCLUSION
Ekholm has improved his game significantly the past two seasons. He has upgraded his role from being a No. 4 D-man on a strong NHL team to that of a No. 2. This is impressive. But let’s not overplay his hand because of this improvement. Ekholm is not as good as Josi. Ekholm is a better 1-on-1 defender in the defensive zone when the opposition has the puck. In every other aspect of the game, Josi is superior. When the crucial games took place at the end of the regular season and in the playoffs, the difference between the two was obvious. The new pair of running shoes has been a good investment. Let’s keep them and make use of them. The existing pair of running shoes remains superior. Use them for the big races. Take Roman Josi over Mattias Ekholm.
Tom Thompson has been an NHL scout/director/assistant GM since 1985.
See more0
0
0
0
Ryan O'Reilly vs. Logan Couture: Who has the edge?
The second-line centers for the Blues and Sharks battled head-to-head in the West final with O’Reilly coming out on top. But who is actually more valuable?
Clearly, Logan Couture of the San Jose Sharks and Ryan O’Reilly of the St. Louis Blues have established themselves as vital contributors on Stanley Cup contenders. They have been regulars in the league for a decade, and both impressed in this season’s playoffs. Talk to hockey people and you will not find anyone who has a bad word to say about Couture or O’Reilly on a personal level. They are both dedicated team men who compete hard on a consistent basis. Both have good size, good hands and good hockey sense.
However, neither Couture nor O’Reilly is an elite-level NHL player. Both have flaws that prevent them from achieving superstar status. After watching them go head-to-head for six hard-fought playoff games in the Western Conference final, let’s assess them closely to determine an important question – which of these players is more valuable to a team in the hunt for the Stanley Cup every year?
CAREERSTheir career paths have been different. Couture was a first-round selection (ninth overall) by the Sharks in 2007. San Jose had a strong team. Couture continued to play junior for the next two seasons and then spent half of his first pro season in the AHL. During his 10 seasons with the Sharks, they have been Stanley Cup contenders, only missing the playoffs once. Since his sophomore NHL campaign, Couture has been a second-line center averaging about 18 minutes of ice time per game. In the playoffs, he was used for more than 20 minutes per game. O’Reilly was a second-round selection (33rd overall) by the Avalanche in 2009. Colorado was not a good team. He made the Avs as an 18-year-old in 2009 and played there for six seasons. The team only made the playoffs twice and never won a series. He was then traded to a weak Buffalo Sabres team where he played for three seasons with no playoff appearances. In his first season with the Blues, O’Reilly won the Stanley Cup and was named Conn Smythe Trophy winner. Since his third season in the NHL, he has averaged more than 20 minutes per game. In St. Louis, he centers the second line, but with his special-teams time, he gets first-line minutes. In the 2019 playoffs, he averaged 21 minutes per game. O’Reilly has competed at the World Championship on five occasions for Canada, and he and Couture played on Team Canada in the 2016 World Cup. Edge: Neither
ROLESBoth players have established their appropriate roles on a Cup contender. They are second-line centers who skate on the first power-play unit and who are also employed regularly as penalty-killers. O’Reilly gets more ice time than Couture because O’Reilly is used for virtually every important faceoff in the last half of close games. Edge: O’Reilly
OFFENSIVE PRODUCTIONCouture averages 0.76 points per game in the regular season, with O’Reilly at 0.68. Both players ramped up their production in the playoffs by 0.1 PPG. O’Reilly generated a higher percentage of his points on the power play. Worth noting: in 2018-19, when both were playing for good teams, O’Reilly was more productive than Couture. Edge: Couture
DEFENSIVE PLAYCouture is a solid defensive player. He is alert, smart and always seems to be in a good position. When he is killing penalties, the opposition’s power play always has to be concerned about his ability to turn errant passes into scoring opportunities. Couture is mediocre on faceoffs. O’Reilly is an elite defensive player. He is one of the NHL’s best forecheckers. The key to his effectiveness is his hockey sense. He has the ability to approach at an angle that forces an opponent to one area of the ice. In this way, O’Reilly is able to reduce the speed of his attack. He has an incredible takeaway/giveaway ratio of over 2.5/1. I have long considered Patrice Bergeron of the Boston Bruins to be the NHL’s best faceoff man on important draws. I now believe O’Reilly has surpassed him. On defensive-zone faceoffs, O’Reilly consistently gets clean wins on the backhand and forehand. His well-documented “no whip” hockey stick works magic. Edge: O’Reilly
SKATINGComputer programmers and analytics people have shown me that skating is the category where scouting reports have the greatest divergence. It is often difficult to reconcile style with effectiveness. Couture’s skating confused scouts when he was playing junior. After more than 700 NHL games, it still confuses them. The reality is if you catch Couture on the right night, he shows quickness and his stride is pretty effective. On those nights, his skating looks average by NHL standards. On other nights, he cannot keep up. His effort and hockey sense remains high, but he becomes ineffective. The reason is the dramatic drop-off in his skating. He cannot sustain an average NHL tempo. Every scout I know rated O’Reilly as a below-average skater during his days in junior. After more than 700 NHL games, even his biggest supporters maintain that below-average rating. He has a strange, hunched-over style with a choppy stride and very little glide. A closer look at O’Reilly’s skating does reveal two positive aspects. In tight quarters, he is effective because his first few steps are powerful. More importantly, there isn’t any noticeable deterioration in O’Reilly’s skating during the course of a game or from night to night. What you see is what you get on a pretty consistent basis. On a good night, Couture’s skating is better than that of O’Reilly. However, Couture has a number of bad nights when his skating is worse. What would appear to be an advantage for Couture is actually not. Both he and O’Reilly are below-average NHL skaters. Edge: Neither
ENDURANCEWinning the Stanley Cup is an arduous task. It is not a job for the faint of mind or body. Couture and O’Reilly are both consummate hockey warriors. They compete hard every night and will play hurt. Who will ever forget the sight of Couture returning to action in the 2016 playoffs after incurring a painful facial injury? Since entering the NHL, Couture has played in 91 percent of his team’s games while O’Reilly has played in 93 percent. In the playoffs, they are used more than they are in the regular season. In 2016 and 2019, Couture posted great numbers in the playoffs. However, in both post-seasons, he looked absolutely gassed in the big games where his team was eliminated. In the last two games against St. Louis this spring, Couture was not a factor. He could not move. O’Reilly’s play was remarkably consistent on a nightly basis. In games that went to overtime, he appeared as fresh as anybody on the ice. He was probably the best player in the overtime of Game 2 of the Cup final and he was full value for his Conn Smythe win. Edge: O’Reilly
CONCLUSIONAt 30 and 28, Couture and O’Reilly are basically finished products as players. They have reached their potential. Both are above-average NHL players with good reputations in all intangible areas. Neither of them is an elite player. Neither ever will be. In today’s high-tempo game, every elite player is a better skater than Couture and O’Reilly. Now that both are on contending teams, they fit nicely into their roles as second-line centers who are used on special teams. Couture has been more productive offensively during his career, but that gap is narrowing. O’Reilly is better defensively, a stronger faceoff man and he has better endurance when fatigue sets in. His play is more consistent. The objective is to win the Stanley Cup and O’Reilly has done that. O’Reilly is a more valuable asset than Couture.
Tom Thompson has been an NHL scout/director/assistant GM since 1985.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Is Stamkos or Scheifele a better candidate for playoff MVP?
They’re both elite producers on top-flight teams, but who’s the better bet to be a Conn man in the playoffs?
As the 2019 NHL playoffs approach, it seems like we’re in a time warp. Flash back to the 2018 playoffs after two rounds, with four Stanley Cup contenders remaining. Virtually all pundits had Tampa Bay and Winnipeg advancing to the final. Wrong on both counts. Two key figures on last year’s favored teams were Tampa’s Steven Stamkos and Winnipeg’s Mark Scheifele. Despite decent stats, both players had disappointing conference finals, and these performances were reflected in the play of their respective teams. Flash forward to the eve of this year’s playoffs. The Lightning and Jets are favored once again, and again Stamkos, 29, and Scheifele, 26, are vital components. Last season’s failures have both teams under pressure to perform, and key cogs Stamkos and Scheifele must lead the way. Who is more likely to deliver a Conn Smythe Trophy-caliber effort in 2019: Stamkos or Scheifele? Let’s take a look.
CAREERSAt 29, Stamkos is three years older than Scheifele. Stamkos burst into the NHL as an 18-year-old and quickly became a dominant player. For the four seasons from 2009-10 through ’12-13, he averaged more than 50 goals per season and was a two-time Rocket Richard Trophy winner and two-time second-team all-star. In all four seasons, he finished among the top five NHL scorers. Since then, he has had a few major injuries, but he’s still a point-per-game player, though he doesn’t get used much in defensive situations. Scheifele wasn’t an NHL regular until he was 20. He didn’t become a front-line player until he was 23. Since then, his career has taken off. He’s a point-per-gamer who is on his team’s first power-play and penalty-killing units. Right now, Scheifele can match Stamkos’ production and do even more things. But Stamkos’ early years in the league gives him the edge.Edge: Stamkos
ROLES Scheifele is the first-line center on Winnipeg. He plays in all situations and averages 22-plus minutes of ice time, more than any other Jets forward. He played 21-plus minutes per game in the 2018 playoffs, an increase of almost a minute versus the season. Stamkos has centered Tampa’s top line for much of this season but was, at times, shifted to second-line wing in the new year. He plays on the top PP unit but gets little time killing penalties. He averages about 18 minutes per game, third among Tampa forwards. In the 2018 playoffs, his ice time was reduced by more than one minute per game from the season. He played about 17 minutes a night, again third among Tampa forwards. This category isn’t close. Scheifele plays a much more diversified role and in the most recent playoffs, he received almost four minutes of ice time per game more than Stamkos.Edge: Scheifele
PRODUCTION Both players are basically point-per-game producers in the regular season and playoffs. Stamkos gets a higher percentage of his points on goals, particularly on the power play. A top-level finisher on the PP is often essential for playoff success. Scheifele, like Stamkos, is a lethal shooter on the power play. Unlike Stamkos, who positions himself on his off-wing in order to one-time lateral passes, Scheifele works from the slot area and is particularly dangerous converting quick passes from behind the goal line.Edge: Neither
DEFENSIVE PLAY This category is not close. Stamkos is decent defensively, conscious of his positioning and not lazy, but his puck support in the defensive zone is weak, and this may have led to his move from center to right wing. Scheifele is an excellent defensive player. He is a smart forechecker and is strong in his puck support in the defensive zone. Although not as physical as Stamkos, he is much more determined in his 1-on-1 battles. One statistic is compelling: in the past four seasons, Scheifele has been credited with more than twice the number of takeaways as Stamkos.Edge: Scheifele
DURABILITY Stamkos has sustained three serious physical setbacks. After the four monster seasons early in his career, he broke a leg in 2013-14, a blood-clotting condition called Thoracic Outlet Syndrome in 2015-16 and a major knee injury in 2016-17. He is still a powerful straight-line skater but has nowhere close to the agility or flow that he had early in his career. Scheifele has been more fortunate. After his breakout season in 2016-17, he missed 22 games in 2017-18 with what was speculated to be a shoulder injury. When Scheifele returned to the lineup, he performed brilliantly in the playoffs and continued to play elite-level hockey this season. The injury clearly has not hindered his career.Edge: Scheifele
PHYSICAL PLAYScheifele’s agility makes him a more effective forechecker and a better 1-on-1 player defensively. He hounds the puck well and causes a number of turnovers. He uses his large frame to lean on people, but he is not physical and doesn’t have a mean streak. Stamkos no longer is a dogged forechecker and he’s more stationary in the defensive zone. However, he is a proud competitor and displays a mean streak when either he or a teammate is challenged or physically abused. He delivers more hits than Scheifele and an open-ice hit or a “rubdown” on the boards from Stamkos can hurt. His hits are not as frequent as when he used to accumulate more than 100 per season, but they still make him a dangerous presence on the ice.Edge: Stamkos
CONCLUSION The Lightning have been the best team in the NHL this season. Stamkos is one of their best players, and he is a key factor going into the playoffs. But due to injuries, he is no longer the dynamic, powerful skater who could match any goal-scorer in the NHL. He has become a better-than-average sniper with an excellent shot. During last year’s playoffs, Stamkos scored one even-strength goal in 17 games. In tight games against top opponents, he is becoming a power-play specialist. Unless he can find a way to produce regularly at 5-on-5, he must give Tampa Bay a solid two-way game and he must produce big goals on the man advantage. For the second consecutive season, the Jets are legitimate Stanley Cup contenders. Scheifele is their main man. He will finish the regular season among the league leaders in ice time among forwards and is sure to continue at that pace throughout the playoffs. His line will likely start every period, and he will be among the first players on the ice in any special-teams situation. He’ll be relied upon to generate offense and to negate the opposition’s power play. It may be unrealistic for him to match last season’s total of 10 even-strength goals in 17 playoff games, but he must come close for the Jets to be successful. The NHL is ruthless competition. You can’t afford to be sentimental about past accomplishments that are now history. Scheifele is more of a key factor than Stamkos heading into the 2019 playoffs. His current level of play has earned him this edge. Now let’s see how he handles it.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Necas and Tolvanen are two top prospects – but which one has the brighter future?
Martin Necas (No. 4) and Eeli Tolvanen (No. 15) are both near the top in our Future Watch 2019 rankings. But who gets the nod based on this veteran scout’s opinion?
What again transpired at the 2019 World Junior Championship in British Columbia is truly baffling. Martin Necas of the Czech Republic and Eeli Tolvanen of Finland are both quality NHL prospects. Each of them was a first-round pick in the 2017 draft. Both had excellent 2017-18 seasons, highlighted by elite performances at the 2018 WJC. And Tolvanen went on to star at the 2018 Winter Olympics. Both of them started this season in the NHL, Necas with Carolina and Tolvanen with Nashville, before heading to the AHL to continue their development. Their respective countries were delighted when the players were made available for the 2019 WJC. Each player was placed on his team’s first line and top power-play unit. Both saw time killing penalties and were used in all important situations late in games. Unfortunately, neither player lived up to expectations. In both cases, the final verdict would be that their play was “just OK.” Neither came close to matching their performance of a year earlier. Both continued the puzzling tradition of players returning from professional hockey and delivering underwhelming performances at the world juniors. What does this say about Necas and Tolvanen? What happened? And, in light of this chapter in their careers, what does it say about their future as NHL prospects?
CAREERS Until the WJC, there were few bumps on the career paths of either player. Necas was drafted 12th overall in 2017 and continued to play for Brno in the Czech Republic last season. This year he played seven games for the Hurricanes and has since played regularly for Charlotte in the AHL. He has now suited up in three world juniors. In the 2018 tournament, he was a star, recording 11 points in seven games. In this year’s edition, he struggled with four points in five games and, on numerous occasions, appeared too slow to execute normal plays in scoring situations. Tolvanen was drafted 30th in 2017 after playing two seasons for Sioux City in the USHL. In 2017-18, he returned to Finland to play for Jokerit in the KHL. This season, he played four games for the Predators and has since been a regular with AHL Milwaukee. Tolvanen has also played in three world juniors. In each of the first two events, he averaged more than a point per game. In this year’s gold medal-winning tournament for Finland, he had only four points in seven games with no goals, even though he had countless scoring opportunities. In the 2018 Olympics in South Korea, Tolvanen finished second in overall scoring with nine points in five games. He excelled as a goal-scorer and a playmaker and was arguably Finland’s best player. This is a level Necas has yet to reach.Edge: Tolvanen
DEFENSIVE PLAY This category is only close in one aspect. Both Necas and Tolvanen work hard in defensive situations. Tolvanen’s superior strength combined with better body positioning in 1-on-1 confrontations gives him a wide overall edge. Twice against Canada and once against the U.S., Tolvanen saved the day with a strong, perfectly timed stick lift to prevent what looked like sure goals.Edge: Tolvanen
SHOT Necas is a classic playmaking center whose priority is to find teammates in good scoring position. He has a pass-first mentality. Most of his shots are from close in. There is nothing exceptional about his shooting, either in velocity or quickness of release. In the 2019 WJC, there were occasions where he was not able to respond quickly enough when presented with a scoring opportunity. Tolvanen can make plays as well as Necas, but he is also looking to put himself into good scoring position in the offensive zone. When he was playing the point on Finland’s power play, he was eager to blast one-time shots from either side of the ice. His shot is released quickly and with power. But at the WJC, Tolvanen couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn. I lost track of the number of times he put himself into perfect scoring position, quickly took a shot but missed the mark. Regardless, Tolvanen is a powerful NHL shooter. Necas is not.Edge: Tolvanen
ROLES Necas is a tall, lanky, right-handed center who can handle the puck and make plays. Tolvanen is a left-handed winger who can perform effectively on either wing. He has a shorter, thicker body build. The role Necas is looking to fill is more valuable for an NHL team. Centers are your offensive linchpins. Their puckhandling is the key to creating proper puck possession for your team. Right-handed centers are like left-handed pitchers in baseball – they are prized assets and harder to find.Edge: Necas
SKATING Necas has relatively short, choppy strides and lacks strength in his acceleration. He is balanced and his feet are quick, but he sometimes has the “Bambi” look, with wobbly legs when he tries to turn and accelerate at the same time. With added strength and physical maturity, his skating should become adequate. Tolvanen is strong on his skates with quickness, acceleration and good speed. His movements are fluid. He may already be an above-average NHL skater.Edge: Tolvanen
CONCLUSION The 2019 WJC was just one chapter in the career books of Necas and Tolvanen, but it didn’t make for of pleasant reading. For the first time, they were not young players getting credit for whatever they accomplished against older opponents. Now they were the older players returning from higher levels of hockey. The pressure was on them to perform, and the effect of the pressure showed. To their credit, both Necas and Tolvanen continued to compete hard even though they were not enjoying offensive success. Both players have, throughout their careers, demonstrated the potential to become valuable NHL players on contending teams. Necas has average physical attributes but good hockey sense and puck skills. He projects as right-handed playmaker on an offensive line. He has value. Tolvanen is a powerfully built left-handed winger who could play either wing on any type of NHL line. He could complement two good offensive linemates with corner work to get pucks, playmaking and the ability to finish plays with his strong shot. With his strength, skating and competitiveness, Tolvanen could also play a more defensive role. The potential role of Necas is more valuable, but if he does not increase his strength and leg power, he will be an average player in that role. Tolvanen is closer physically to reaching his potential in the NHL. He will, however, never be as valuable as a top-end center. He is a more versatile than Necas, and I would project his chances of success in the NHL as being more likely. In this case, I buck the scouting consensus. I go for the safer choice. Take Eeli Tolvanen over Martin Necas.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Is Shea Weber or P.K. Subban the better defenseman?
Because they were dealt 1-for-1, Weber and Subban will always be compared. So let’s do just that.
There was nothing subtle about the trade. Shea Weber in exchange for P.K. Subban. One for one. Two productive right-handed defensemen in their primes. Both had been named all-stars on multiple occasions and had played for Canada at the Olympics. It is a credit to the two players that the fans in both cities were displeased with the trade. Needless to say, there are far more hockey fans in Montreal than there are in Nashville, and they have never been shy in, as Danny Gallivan would say, “expressing their displeasure.” At the time of the trade, the Canadiens were coming off a disappointing non-playoff season and for the next two seasons struggled to rebuild a contender. This year, they appear to be on the right track. Nashville was just coming off an impressive playoff performance and was moving into the elite group of top NHL teams, where they remain. Weber and Subban have been key members of their new teams. Both have encountered injuries, but for the first time in a year, both appear to be healthy. Fans and media continue to debate the merits of the trade. Your conclusion should be based on answering a simple question: who is a better hockey player, Weber or Subban? Before we answer the question, let’s make sure we clear away the smoke so we can more clearly see the fire.
THE SPORT AND THE GAMEProfessional hockey, like all other professional sports, has two aspects. The first is simply “the sport,” players competing as a team trying to win every game and, ultimately, the Stanley Cup. The second may be called “the game.” Pro hockey is a business. Careers are short. Competition for NHL contracts is fierce. Players want to maximize the revenue they receive during their careers and open up doors for additional revenue aside from their contracts. Subban plays “the game” much better than Weber. He engages the fans at all times, he is always providing fresh material to the media, and he dresses in public in a distinctive style. Weber does none of these things. As a result, there are no major network features on him to publicize the All-Star Game, and I’m not aware of him being in any television commercials as a spokesman for major corporations. His public profile is much lower than that of Subban. For all of this, I say well done for Subban. The attention he creates is good for hockey. But that said, it should not be a factor in comparing how he and Weber perform on the ice.Edge: Subban
ROLESBoth players have been workhorses throughout their careers, each averaging more than 24 minutes per game in the regular season and 25 minutes per game in the playoffs. Obviously, both play a lot at full strength, but their method of usage in those situations is different. Weber throughout his career has consistently been matched against the opposition’s top players. Subban has not been. Both have been on their team’s first power-play units. Weber is on his team’s first penalty-killing unit. Subban is not. Both players are used at times in the game when their team needs to score. Weber is always used in late-game situations when his team is defending a lead. Usually Subban is not. Weber’s role is more versatile.Edge: Weber
PUCK SKILLSBoth Subban and Weber are good playmakers. Subban carries the puck more and joins the rush more frequently. More of his plays are in the offensive zone, resulting in assists. Weber is an exceptional passer in the defensive zone. A significant difference between the two is that Subban gives the puck away to the opposition more than twice as frequently as Weber. It is clear to all hockey fans that there is no comparison in shooting. Subban’s shot is above average. Weber is one of the best point shooters in history. His quick release and accuracy are both at the elite level, and the speed of his shot has been recorded at levels matched only by Zdeno Chara.Edge: Weber
OFFENSIVE PRODUCTION It is interesting to note that over the course of their lengthy NHL careers, Subban and Weber have accumulated points at a similar rate. However, their offensive styles are quite different. Subban carries the puck much more than Weber. He gives head fakes, he stickhandles, he holds opponents off with one hand and often makes smart plays. He has a good shot from the point, but nothing exceptional. Weber carries the puck far less than Subban. He makes excellent first passes in the defensive zone. He does not join the rush as much. In the offensive zone, Weber is always trying to place himself into good shooting position. He is one of the best shooters from the point I have ever seen. His release is quick and the shots are lethal – powerful and accurate. Subban’s top goal-scoring total in a season is 16. Weber has exceeded or matched this total eight times and has twice scored 23 goals. Weber’s top assist total is 33. Subban has exceeded that total four times with his top total being 45.Edge: Neither
SKATING Weber is much better in backward skating and agility. Subban works hard at this part of his game, but it is herky-jerky, and he often has to play opponents at an angle because his pivots are very average. Weber may be the best backward skater for a big man I have seen. He is fluid and balanced and able to use his stick effectively to block passing lanes while skating backward. His pivots are smooth and powerful. Weber does not have blazing speed going forward, but he is fluid with good acceleration. Subban is very determined, driving through opponents and breaking loose from checks. However, he appears to be slower than in past seasons. In a game against Carolina, Sebastian Aho blew by him in an empty-net situation with the game on the line.Edge: Weber
DEFENSIVE PLAYSubban is a good NHL defenseman who has not been used on a regular basis, either in Montreal or in Nashville, against the opposition’s best players. Weber has always been matched on a nightly basis against the best the opposition has to offer. I recently scouted him in consecutive games against Colorado and Boston. He played virtually every shift against the top two scoring lines in the NHL. He was superb. Montreal won both games. Both Nathan MacKinnon and Gabriel Landeskog of Colorado made it clear Weber had been a major impediment to their line throughout the game. Weber’s superior size, strength, aggressiveness and agility put him far ahead of Subban on the defensive side of the puck. Subban works hard defensively, but he often commits penalties in trying to defend. Even though Weber has recorded more than 50 percent more hits than Subban, it is Subban who has more than 50 percent more penalty minutes than Weber.Edge: Weber
CONCLUSIONThe only area in which Subban can match Weber is offensive production, where very different methods produce relatively similar results. Weber may be the best defender in hockey against top offensive players. Subban does not often play against these stars. Subban is a very average physical force. Weber is a behemoth who effectively wears down opponents. Even though he plays a much more aggressive game defensively, Weber takes significantly fewer penalties than Subban. He also gives the puck away to the opposition less frequently. Both defensemen are better than average offensively, but Weber is far superior in all other aspects of his play. Shea Weber is a better defenseman than P.K. Subban.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Is Ferland or Simmonds the better rental option this spring?
Many teams are looking to add a player who can to bring some sandpaper when the going gets rough. Ferland and Simmonds are two good options, but which is the best?
The month approaching the trade deadline may be the most pressure-packed time of the season for NHL GMs. Parity and the frequency of three-point games combine to bunch the majority of the teams together in the standings. In spite of this, fans and media insist all 31 teams must fall into one of two categories – those teams that can win the Stanley Cup this season (buyers) and those teams that have no chance (sellers). If a team is considered to be a contender, it is expected to go all out to add that final piece of the puzzle that will put it over the top. For the most part, the best players made available prior to the trading deadline are those who will be UFAs at the end of the season (rental players). This approach involves high risks for the GMs of buyer teams. There is a long list of organizations that have mortgaged their future for rental players, only to be eliminated early in the playoffs and then watch their rental depart for another team.
Attractive rental players can usually fit into a defined role. Most Cup contenders want to add a bit of “grit” up front for the playoffs, as long as the grit has enough skill to play with good offensive linemates. Two potential rentals are attractive fits for this role. Micheal Ferland of the Carolina Hurricanes and Wayne Simmonds of the Philadelphia Flyers are big, powerful wingers who have put points on the board. How attractive are they as rental players? What factors should you consider when dealing for them? How do they compare to each other? Let’s take a look.
CAREERS Simmonds is in his 11th NHL season. Ferland is in his fifth. Ferland’s best single-season goal total is 21, and his top year in points is 41. Simmonds has exceeded each of these totals six times. Both players are well above NHL average in hit totals, but Simmonds is a better battler to drive to the net and to obtain net-front presence. Ferland has had concussion problems.Edge: Simmonds
SKATING This category is not close. Simmonds has become an adequate skater through hard work and conditioning. He has no smoothness in his stride. His agility and acceleration have both improved since he came into the league. The first thing you notice about Ferland is that he is so light on his feet for a big man. He has very good speed, agility and acceleration. All of his movements are fluid.Edge: Ferland
PUCK SKILLS In games I scouted, both players impressed me with their ability to handle the puck in tight situations. Ferland was able to execute some difficult passes to Sebastian Aho and Teuvo Teravainen in sequences when any delay on Ferland’s part would eliminate his linemates’ scoring opportunity. Simmonds was able to manipulate his stick and body quickly when off balance to get away dangerous shots. This is the area where Simmonds has the edge. Simmonds is a more dangerous shooter and I believe will always be a superior scorer as long as he is able to get to the “greasy” areas in front of the net.Edge: Simmonds
HOCKEY SENSE Both players have good but not elite-level offensive hockey sense. They see the basic plays and are able to execute them. Simmonds shows better awareness getting into good scoring position. He is especially effective as a net-front presence on the Flyers’ power play. He is a decent shot deflector but is especially adept at screening the goalie and showing quick hands on rebounds. Both players work hard defensively, but Simmonds shows much better defensive awareness. He is always conscious of remaining high when he is the third forward, and he can recognize where he is needed quickly in the defensive zone. Ferland is OK in these areas but not at the same level as Simmonds. They show their sense as tough guys in different ways. Ferland senses when his team needs a lift and will look for a big hit. He will fight a heavyweight if necessary. He turned around a recent game against Nashville by going right after Austin Watson and getting the best of him in a “real old-time battle.” Simmonds is not as noticeable with big hits or heavyweight fights. He senses when opponents are off balance and can drive to the net against them. He has good body positioning in 1-on-1 confrontations and often has his opponent off balance. He can sometime coax a retaliation from an opponent with a “slew foot” at a faceoff or a post-whistle face wash. His toughness is less dramatic but more consistent than Ferland. Overall, both players have good sense, but Simmonds has a clear edge in his defensive game.Edge: Simmonds
DETERMINATION AND CONDITIONING According to Iconic football coach Vince Lombardi, “Fatigue makes cowards of us all.” This may apply to Ferland. In the games I watched, he was playing with Teravainen and either Aho or Lucas Wallmark at center. Inevitably, Ferland left the ice first, and his linemates were not taking especially long shifts. This follows the same pattern he established with the Calgary Flames. During that time, there were whispers about his less-than-ideal physical conditioning. Perhaps, he simply tires out and has to leave the ice. Perhaps Lombardi was correct. Simmonds is a consummate warrior on the ice. He battles every moment of every shift. He clearly is in the elite level in these categories.Edge: Simmonds
FACTORS AS RENTAL PLAYERS I realize Ferland is four years younger than Simmonds. However, let’s remember that Ferland will turn 27 during the first round of this year’s playoffs. Do not expect any significant improvement in his game from what you see right now. From all reports, he is looking for a home-run pay day. As a player in his prime, you will have to surrender significant assets to acquire him. If you do so, you had better be prepared to pay him his asking price. Otherwise, somebody else likely will in the July 1 free agency sweepstakes. I have admired Simmonds for a number of years. However, when I see him now, I believe that, to use a golf analogy, he is “playing the back nine.” His body has a lot of miles on it as he has played with reckless abandon throughout his career and was never a fluid natural skater. He is now past his 30th birthday. That said, the price to obtain him should be a lot lower than Ferland’s, and Simmonds’ short-term contribution in the upcoming playoffs could be larger, depending on a team’s needs. Therefore, his attraction as a rental player may be more enticing for some.Edge: Simmonds
CONCLUSION Both Ferland and Simmonds are legitimate power wingers who should be able to contribute to a Stanley Cup contender. Simmonds has been more productive in his career, a more consistent physical presence and more durable. Ferland is younger and should be able to retain his level of play for a longer period of time. His skills package is better than that of Simmonds. I would not be comfortable signing either player to a long-term, big-ticket contract. Simmonds is more likely to assume an effective role quicker with new teammates, and the cost of acquiring him should be lower. For those reasons, take Wayne Simmonds over Micheal Ferland as a rental.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Gaudreau, Marner the NHL's premiere diminutive wingers – but who has the edge?
Size didn’t stop them from reaching NHL stardom, but it’s the little things that make one rise above the other.
Prototypes. Each hockey fan has a picture in his or her mind of what a particular type of player can do. Centers are the quarterbacks of hockey. They control the puck and often score goals, but, more importantly, the good ones make their teammates better. In modern lingo, they “dish” the puck to goal-scoring wingers or offensive defensemen who are “joining the play.” The good wingers are essentially goal-scorers who can finish the opportunities their centers create. Some, like Alex Ovechkin, are always visible. Others, like Patrik Laine, are often invisible until they are in a position to do immediate damage. Like Ovechkin and Laine, top NHL wingers are expected to have enough size and strength to win board battles for the puck.
When the prototypes are broken, fans become confused. Good players who don’t fit the mold are admired, but fans aren’t sure what to make of them. Calgary’s Johnny Gaudreau and Toronto’s Mitch Marner have been two of the top wingers, indeed two of the top players, in the NHL this season. Both are considerably below average size. Neither player is going to win many physical battles. Although both can score goals, their prime value is to make plays to goal-scoring centers and offensive defensemen. Fans respect their accomplishments, but they look at them and…gulp. Can these players be cornerstones of legitimate Stanley Cup contenders? Can either Gaudreau or Marner be that good? Let’s look at how these players are attempting to beat the hockey odds, and how they compare to each other.
CAREERSBoth players have had great career starts. Both were standouts in amateur hockey and have continued to be elite in the NHL. Gaudreau was the top player in the NCAA in his last year at Boston College. Marner was the best player on a Memorial Cup team in his last season of major junior with OHL London. Both have averaged almost a point per game in the NHL. Gaudreau is almost four years older than Marner and is in his fifth NHL season while Marner is in his third.Edge: Neither
SKATING‘Johnny Hockey’ can carry the puck skating backwards and laterally better than most players can carry it going forward. I don’t see blinding speed from Gaudreau, but his balance, quickness and change of pace are at the elite level. Marner’s skating is deceptive. It doesn’t appear to have much power, but his balance, pivoting and acceleration are top-notch. He also lacks blinding speed. Marner’s skating is above average, but it is not at Gaudreau’s level.Edge: Gaudreau
HOCKEY SENSE AND COMPETITIVENESSFor wingers the size of these two, their hockey sense must be at the elite level for them to be impact players. Whatever grade you want to give for the highest level of hockey sense, both achieve it on a nightly basis. I can’t question their judgment for decisions on the ice. Like all players, their execution is not always perfect, but their “thinking of the game” is as close to perfect as you’re going to find. Neither player ever takes a shift off. Their effort and alertness remain at a high level throughout a game, even when they are fatigued.Edge: Neither
PHYSICAL STRENGTHMarner’s edge in this category became evident to me while watching him and through some of the statistical material I studied. Neither player relies on brute strength in 1-on-1 confrontations or during board battles. Both resort to body and stick positioning and timing. The reality is that, although Marner is below average NHL size (six-foot, 175 pounds), Gaudreau is tiny (5-foot-9, 165 pounds). In some situations along the boards, Gaudreau can get bowled over by a bigger opponent. If he is in tight quarters when he’s pivoting with the puck, a good push can often put him off-balance. Marner has exceptional body positioning during any 1-on-1 situation and makes great use of his stick to steal pucks or keep pucks in his possession. He is much more effective than Gaudreau in tight quarters. Two statistical comparisons back up my point. These are takeaways and giveaways. Any giveaways from these two players do not arise from bad puck decisions. The only times they give the puck away are when they are stripped of it. At last count, since entering the NHL in 2016, Marner has 135 giveaways. In that same period of time in slightly fewer games, Gaudreau has 230 giveaways. Marner has 191 takeaways since 2016; Gaudreau has 113. The two players are equally smart. Marner just has more power to get pucks from the opposition.Edge: Marner
ROLESBoth players are expected to be first-line wingers, take extra shifts – especially when their teams are behind – and play on the first power-play unit, often on the point. Because of his superior strength, Marner is more valuable as a penalty killer and in defensive situations. In fact, he is becoming as versatile as any of the top players in the NHL. He can be used effectively in virtually any situation. Gaudreau is great in his role, but so is Marner, and the latter can do more things.Edge: Marner
GOING FOR THE CUPThese players will be relied upon to be leaders of Stanley Cup contenders. Can they meet the challenge? Gaudreau is very consistent. His game does not vary much from night to night. He just dares you to beat him at it. Marner adjusts his game according to the circumstances. Like Gaudreau, he is an excellent playmaker. My only concern about Marner was whether he could score goals under pressure. The Dec. 15 game in Florida answered my concerns. The entire Maple Leafs team looked tired and ragged. The ice conditions were poor. Cute finesse passes weren’t working. Marner took matters into his own hands. Late in the third period, he faked passes and absolutely wired two shots past a red-hot Roberto Luongo to send the game into overtime. Marner can make plays, he can score and he can be used in defensive situations. He is stronger than Gaudreau and he is durable. I would value him more highly for a long playoff run.Edge: Marner
CONCLUSIONTwo small first-line wingers who are basically playmakers have become legitimate NHL stars. I am biased in that they are two of my favorite hockey players. Both are smaller than ideal. Gaudreau, as mentioned, is tiny. Marner is stronger and durable and that makes him more versatile. He is more valuable than Gaudreau in a run for the 2019 Stanley Cup. Nevertheless, the brain trust in Toronto has a problem. Pundits keep pointing out that Marner is a better player than William Nylander. I’ll take that a step further: he is a better player than John Tavares. How much money is there to go around? Oh well, let’s ignore the business aspects and enjoy the terrific entertainment that Marner, and Gaudreau, can offer to all hockey fans.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Rantanen and Pastrnak in a battle of right wingers
Either of these 22-year-old phenoms would have any GM salivating. But if you could only have one?
In the past few seasons, thinking in hockey has changed. Instead of balancing your offensive talent on different lines, teams are now eager to load up their scoring talent on one line. They are looking for three legitimate scoring threats to play together. As this strategy evolved, there was a strong consensus the Boston Bruins had the top line in the NHL, with Patrice Bergeron between Brad Marchand and David Pastrnak. All three of these players seem better than ever. However, their position at the top of the NHL totem pole is in jeopardy. The Colorado Avalanche have put together a line of Gabriel Landeskog and Mikko Rantanen flanking Nathan MacKinnon that has been terrorizing the league for the past year and challenging the Boston line as the best in hockey. Each line is centered by a dominant player, two-way veteran Bergeron and turbocharged MacKinnon. Each line has a left winger with a physical and agitating presence: Marchand and Landeskog. And on each line, the right winger is the least experienced member. Pastrnak, 22, was leading the league in goals through late November. Rantanen, also 22, led NHLers in assists and points. Obviously, these are two of the top young players in hockey. How do they compare?
ROLES Veteran NHL coach Jacques Lemaire had an interesting way of analyzing the value of a good offensive player. If he was matched with other good offensive players, did he make them better? If he did not have offensive players as gifted as he was, could he “stand alone” and be productive? With his dynamic skating and stickhandling, Pastrnak can certainly stand alone and produce goals if necessary. He can fit in on a good line and make enough good plays to make Bergeron and Marchand better. Pastrnak passes Lemaire’s test. However, Rantanen excels in the test. He is the perfect complement for MacKinnon. Rantanen’s playmaking skills are as good as any winger’s in hockey. He is not looking to stand alone, but some of his goals at key points this year have been outstanding. His stand-alone ability at this time may not be quite at Pastrnak’s level, but Rantanen’s ability to maximize his linemates’ talents is so good that it tilts the balance in his favor.Edge: Rantanen
CAREERSPastrnak came to North America immediately after being drafted in the first round in 2014. After 25 games in the AHL, he was ready for the NHL. He is now in his fourth full season with the Bruins, averaging almost 0.85 points per game over his career. Rantanen also came to North America right away after being drafted in the first round in 2015. He required a full season in the AHL and is now in his third full NHL season. Since the start of 2017-18, his numbers have been better than those of Pastrnak. At this point, Pastrnak has better career totals, including an impressive Stanley Cup playoffs last spring.Edge: Pastrnak
SKATINGThis comparison is not close. Pastrnak was a dynamic skater in his draft year, and he is clearly an above-average skater at the NHL level. He has speed and quickness, balance and agility. Rantanen’s skating was in the “iffy” category in his draft year. He lacked speed and acceleration, and he looked a bit like Bambi on some of his turns. By last season, his skating had improved enough that he could perform well on a line with skaters like Landeskog and MacKinnon. Rantanen is much stronger on his skates, and his balance and turns are good. His speed and acceleration, however, are not close to Pastrnak’s.Edge: Pastrnak
HOCKEY SENSEThis comparison is also not close. Pastrnak has above-average hockey sense, particularly in offensive situations. He still at times tries to stickhandle and beat people 1-on-1, but I attribute those situations to immaturity. He makes good plays on a consistent basis and is even being used on the point on the power play. Defensively, he is sometimes confused on who the dangerous opponent may be in defensive zone coverage and can lose his man when backchecking. A close look at Rantanen shows me a player whose hockey sense is at the top of the charts. I am on record in THN as rating the top three NHLers as Connor McDavid, Sidney Crosby and Auston Matthews. Rantanen has hockey sense as good as any of them. The only difference between him and these generational talents is he cannot come close to matching them in skating. You can watch Rantanen play an entire game and not find fault with his decisions. His puck management is as good as anyone’s, and his plays are smart and often innovative. What I did not see until putting him “under the microscope” in recent games is that his defensive positioning is flawless. Rantanen is as smart a player as you can find.Edge: Rantanen
PUCK SKILLSPastrnak can really dangle with the puck. He can beat players 1-on-1, he can make plays, and he has a quick, powerful shot that is accurate. He can also be sloppy, as evidenced by his 76 giveaways last season. Rantanen manages the puck as well as anybody, controlling it for good parts of every shift, and he made some incredible passes while I was scouting him. They ranged from saucer passes to MacKinnon in full flight to a no-look backhand pass to Landeskog in perfect scoring position. A significant statistic to me is that last season he had only 30 giveaways while controlling the puck so much.Edge: Rantanen
SHOOTINGBefore closely observing games, I would have given Pastrnak the edge in large part because he was leading the NHL in goals and Rantanen was recording three assists for every goal scored. Now my opinion is different. Pastrnak has a very good release and a quick, powerful shot. Rantanen is looking pass first. However, when the game is on the line, his shooting is lethal. His quick pivot and bullet wrist shot against Boston Nov. 15 was something very few players could have accomplished. Then there’s his winner against Anaheim Nov. 18 with 1.3 seconds remaining in overtime. It brought me out of my chair. When he one-timed the slapshot from the high slot, his body was directed to the goalie’s left. However, his stick was open and he slapped the puck to the goalie’s right and beat him cleanly. It was the same type of shot Wayne Gretzky perfected. Rantanen can shoot at the same level as Pastrnak. Rantanen just does not do it as often.Edge: Neither
CONCLUSIONThese two players are two of the hottest commodities in the NHL at this time. Pastrnak can bring a jolt of speed and scoring to any team that needs it, and he plays with passion. Rantanen has improved his skating dramatically, but the tempo of his game is not close to that of Pastrnak. Scoring is secondary to Rantanen at this time but, when required, he can produce. His offensive sense and his defensive awareness are both at the top of the chart. Pastrnak can be one of the best scorers in the NHL for a number of years. Rantanen can be something special. This guy could be at the top of the charts in every category except skating. I would hate to pass on Pastrnak, but I would do so to get Rantanen. Mikko Rantanen is that good. And the scary part is, he is getting better.
This story appears in the January 28, 2019 of The Hockey News magazine.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: Hellebuyck and Vasilevskiy are NHL's young standouts — but who has the edge?
They’re big, young and were both Vezina Trophy finalists last year. But when it comes to Connor Hellebuyck and Andrei Vasilevskiy, it’s a tough call on who to take right now.
Every major hockey media outlet, including The Hockey News, established the Winnipeg Jets and Tampa Bay Lightning as top contenders for the Stanley Cup this season. Analysts point to their depth of offensive talent, relative youth and the high tempo of play each team employs. Another factor enhances the high expectations for the Jets and Lightning: they both have one of the top young goalies. Connor Hellebuyck in Winnipeg and Andrei Vasilevskiy in Tampa Bay enjoyed splendid seasons in 2017-18 and elevated their performances in the playoffs. Both teams advanced to the final four. Neither team’s demise in the conference final was due to goaltending difficulties. Hellebuyck and Vasilevskiy are big, athletic, smart and competitive. Every NHL team would be pleased to have either. But if you could only choose one to take a run at the 2019 Stanley Cup, who would you pick?
CAREERS Siberia and suburban Michigan have not been traditional breeding grounds for NHL goalies. Their pre-draft careers were also unlikely. Vasilevskiy was drafted in 2012 after playing junior in isolated Ufa, Russia. Hellebuyck was selected in the same draft from the Odessa (Texas) Jackalopes of the NAHL. After developing in the AHL, both goalies became NHL regulars in 2016-17. They’re both entering their third full NHL seasons. Their statistics are similar in terms of games, wins, goals-against average and save percentage.Edge: Neither
STYLES Further to their similar careers, Hellebuyck and Vasilevskiy are only one year apart in age, one inch different in height, and their weights are identical. However, their playing styles are dramatically different. Hellebuyck’s style is based on anticipation and size. He plays a “vertical” game, moving laterally to emphasize his size and intimidate opponents. He relies on positioning to make the save, rather than reflexes and reactions. Vasilevskiy’s style is based on quickness and agility. He plays a “horizontal” game, moving rapidly from post to post in a crouched position. His leg action is the key. He seeks to take away the bottom of the net and dares opponents to shoot at openings in the upper part of the net. He relies on quick movements with his upper body and glove to make saves. Very few goalies have the ability to eliminate the bottom of the net as effectively as Vasilevskiy.Edge: Vasilevskiy
VULNERABILITY Every goalie’s style leaves him vulnerable to certain types of shots. Hellebuyck is as technically sound as any goalie. He is big, plays square to the puck and keeps his body erect. His footwork and athleticism are good but not great. Look back to last year’s playoffs and the opening month of 2018-19. He can sometimes give up goals that seem to “go right through him.” He’s in proper position but doesn’t react to the shot. His footwork to move his big body is not fluid, and he is vulnerable between the legs. Vasilevskiy goes from post to post better than any goalie, and his reactions to shots are probably the best. At times he guesses and begins lateral movement too quickly. This leaves the upper part of the net on the short side unguarded. The worst goals allowed by Vasilevskiy can arise from this situation, but they occur less frequently than Hellebuyck’s weak goals.Edge: Vasilevskiy
REBOUND CONTROLHall of Fame icon Glenn Hall describes rebound control as “the difference between stopping a puck and making a save.” Other than preventing the original shot from entering the net, rebound control is the single most important element in goaltending. Instructors tell goalies to make themselves “big and soft.” Hellebuyck and Vasilevskiy are top-end performers in this area. Very few goals are scored on them because of bad rebounds off initial shots. When their teams are under significant pressure, they have the ability to smother difficult shots in order to get a stoppage in play.Edge: Neither
COMPETITIVENESS All the physical talent in the world goes for naught if a goalie does not have the proper mental makeup. Goaltending has to rank among the most psychologically challenging positions in sports. How do netminders respond in big games? In particular, how do they respond to the important situations in those games? No goalie is perfect. What is their response to a bad goal? The Jets and Lightning owe much of their success to the play of Hellebuyck and Vasilevskiy in big games throughout 2017-18. Both were “tigers” when the game was on the line. Both were even better during last season’s playoffs. Neither goalie was perfect. Their ability to respond positively to the rare bad goals that they allowed spoke volumes about their fierce competitive instincts.Edge: Neither
ATHLETICISM This comparison is not close. Hellebuyck is above average in every goaltending category, including skating and puckhandling. So is Vasilevskiy. The difference is that Vasilevskiy has some outstanding physical attributes. His leg movements are as quick as any goalie I have ever seen. I love to watch him warm up. His leg exercises remind me of a young Vladislav Tretiak’s. No other big goalie has ever been as quick in the lower body. The reactions of Vasilevskiy with his catching hand and upper body are also exceptional. Because of their size and positioning, Hellebuyck and Vasilevskiy may on many occasions be equal in defending original shots. The athleticism of Vasilevskiy makes him better able to defend rebounds and multi-shot barrages.Edge: Vasilevskiy
CONCLUSIONThis is an interesting comparison. I have nothing negative to say about either goalie. Both are above average in every major category. In order to be an elite goalie in today’s NHL, you need a combination of size, athleticism, hockey sense and competitiveness. These attributes allow a goalie to establish proper positioning, fight to find pucks, react quickly to shots and control rebounds. Hellebuyck meets all these criteria. He has all the attributes to be an elite NHL goalie. He’s good enough to be a cornerstone on a Stanley Cup contender. Vasilevskiy can match Hellebuyck in all major categories, and he can exceed him in one. Vasilevskiy is the most athletic goalie in the NHL. His quick reactions, especially with his legs, are unmatched. His performance in last season’s playoffs was the most dominant of any goalie. He stole several big games for his team. His high-level play in goal masked a subpar performance by a talented Tampa Bay team. In a world of “good, better, best,” Hellebuyck fits into the “better” category. He can be the No. 1 goalie on a Stanley Cup champion. Vasilevskiy’s athleticism makes him the “best.” He can steal games which his team has no business winning and be the principal figure in winning the Cup. Vasilevskiy is my first choice for a goalie in building a 2018-19 Stanley Cup champion.
This story appears in the January 7, 2019 of The Hockey News magazine.
See more0
0
0
0
Versus: The Toronto Maple Leafs' two superstars square off
The Leafs have a first-world NHL problem: two first-line centers. So who’s the premier pivot: the young buck or the wily veteran? It’s not nearly as close as you might think.
Let’s face it. Toronto is the media capital of the hockey world. The Toronto Maple Leafs have a large national and international following. Despite 50 seasons without a Stanley Cup, their name is still magical throughout the hockey world. Members of the Toronto media, underneath their surface cynicism, definitely want the Leafs to do well and to have a roster and front office full of celebrities who their audience wants to know about on a daily basis.
On July 1, the Leafs signed John Tavares. In typical Toronto overkill, it was referred to as “the greatest free-agent signing of all-time.” Tavares was hailed as the savior of the franchise, the biggest piece in the puzzle of a Stanley Cup champion. He would become the focal point of the team and take the pressure off the young stars, especially Auston Matthews. The Leafs’ brain trust gave Tavares first-line status since the start of the season by virtue of his pairing with star winger Mitch Marner. And Tavares has delivered. He is without doubt a quality first-line center in the NHL. He may be a great candidate to be captain of a Stanley Cup champion in the immediate future. However, he is not the best center on the Maple Leafs. When you put him beside Matthews, the comparison is not even close.
CAREERSTavares and Matthews have both had splendid careers. They excelled on their amateur teams and at the under-18s and world juniors. Matthews also starred playing pro in Switzerland prior to being drafted. Both have been prolific scorers at the World Championship and both performed well at the 2016 World Cup. Tavares, who was injured in his only Olympic experience, is seven years older than Matthews. His career has been longer. That’s the only difference so far.Edge: Neither
ROLESThis is an easy comparison. Both players are considered first-line centers for a Stanley Cup contender. They are first and foremost looked upon to generate offense. Both can score goals and make plays at an elite level. Both will be asked to assume heavy workloads, kill penalties if necessary and take important faceoffs. Both will be expected to make their teammates better. In effect, both players will be asked to perform like the best player on the team.Edge: Neither
PUCK SKILLSIf this category was close at one time, it is no longer. Matthews has gone from a really good shooter to a physical marvel. Only Alex Ovechkin and Patrik Laine are in his category, and Matthews may be the best in the league at quickly converting a pass that he receives while off-balance into a lethal shot under the crossbar. His playmaking skills are also elite. His off-balance lead pass to give Kasperi Kapanen a breakaway against Chicago in mid-October could only be accomplished by the best players in the league. Tavares has excellent vision and almost always attempts the correct play. He does not have the same strength on his skates as Matthews and is unable to make the same types of plays while off-balance. Tavares is a quick, accurate shooter with great hands around the net, but there is nothing exceptional about his shot.Edge: Matthews
SKATINGOnce we consider the physical attributes of the two players, the close comparison ends. Tavares is an average skater who labors noticeably when he’s fatigued. In the Leafs’ road win over Washington in mid-October, there were a couple of lengthy shifts where he actually looked dysfunctional. Matthews is a beautiful natural skater who is quicker and faster than Tavares and maintains his stride much better when tired. Matthews is also stronger on his feet and able to drive to the front of the net and remain there more effectively than Tavares can.Edge: Matthews
INTANGIBLESI have nothing bad to say about Matthews in this area. My only concern was the second half of last season and the playoffs when he appeared to be playing without emotion. We know now he was playing injured and that may have been a big factor in his demeanor. This season, the emotion and passion have returned. This is an area where Tavares is elite. In his draft interviews, I was as impressed by him as I have ever been by a player. His teammates from junior to the NHL speak glowingly of him. Officials with Team Canada raved about him. He is an exceptional player and person in all intangible categories.Edge: Tavares
PHYSICAL POWERWith the elimination of “cheating” on faceoffs, raw physical strength has become crucial. Both players were very average on faceoffs in their rookie seasons. Like Tavares, Matthews improved considerably in his sophomore campaign. Matthews last season was more effective than Tavares on faceoffs and, during an early four-game road trip this season, was was used consistently to win defensive-zone draws. Both of them have been effective this season on draws. There is a big difference in other areas governed by strength. Tavares bases his offensive game on quick puck movement, and his defensive game is based on positioning and persistence. Matthews can control the puck for long periods of time with his size and strength. Defensively, he has been able to strip opponents of the puck with ease, amassing a remarkable number of takeaways.Edge: Matthews
DANGER TO OPPOSITIONBoth chicago and washington played their top lines and best defensemen against the Matthews line when they faced Toronto this season. I prefer the judgment of the opposing teams to the judgment of the media on this question.Edge: Matthews
CONCLUSIONSigning Tavares as a free agent was a wise move by the Leafs. They got a first-line center without giving up anything. He can serve as a mentor to Matthews and provide the Leafs with a 1-2 center combination that they hope will have the success of Crosby-Malkin, Sakic-Forsberg and even Gretzky-Messier. Tavares is skilled, smart and competitive, but he’s an average skater. To use the modern lingo, Matthews is a “beast.” He’s strong as an ox and a powerful skater. He has top-end hockey sense and has become a shooter in the Ovechkin/Laine category as the NHL’s best. Matthews can hold on to the puck for long stretches and retrieve it almost effortlessly from the opposition. Tavares has earned a spot in the second tier of top NHL centers. If you were picking one player to take a run at the Stanley Cup this season, I believe Connor McDavid would be the first choice and Sidney Crosby the second. After that Matthews could very well be the next player picked. He’s that good. Matthews is clearly the Leafs’ best center. He’s No. 1.
Tom Thompson has been an NHL scout/director/assistant GM since 1985.
See more0
0
0
0