Nolan Patrick

[jjgallow]

Well, 

 

We need some positivity.   

 

So, how good is Nolan Patrick?

 

Normally,  I write about two pages here.    This time, I will simply state my assessment, and wait for your responses:

 

Of all the recent generational talents, I believe that Nolan Patrick is the Most under-rated of them all.  By a long shot.  So much, that most don't even consider him a Generational talent.

 

I believe:   Nolan Patrick is on par with, and possibly better, than Connor McDavid.  Specifically:

 

There are three:  Connor McDavid, Sidney Crosby, and Nolan Patrick.    ( in no particular order.  Too close to rank until the end of their careers).

 

Then, there is everyone else.  Auston Matthews, Nathan Mackinnon, Jack Eichel, etc.

 

Let the Gong Show Begin!

 

p.s...

I've made pre-draft threads for Nathan Mackinnon, Connor McDavid, and Auston Matthews.   Surprisingly, I recieved the most flack for "Hyping" Connor MacDavid lol...for making "ridiculous comparisons to Crosby", etc.....it's funny what time does.   I can get overly positive on prospects (possibly to counteract my negativity with the veterans...).   But sometimes, you just see a winner.  Connor McDavid was one of those.   And by rights, we were in the right stage of the rebuild to claim him.  But, somehow, we didn't due to a "miracle comeback".   

 

I am sooo sick of the "miracle comebacks" that allow an unprecedented number of generational talents to pass us by :(.     But, there we have ONE ... MORE.. CHANCE.

 

[travel_dude]

LV will get as much chance as the Flames for drafting 1st overall, assuming we are a lotto team with more than an outside chance of winning it.  

For perspective sake, let's take a brief look at how those three teams managed to draft 1st overall:

1) Crosby - miracle lotto pick after tanking full on.  Some would argue it was rigged to ensure that Pitts stays in the league after a shaky arena deal.

2) McD - almost a perfect tank season - sell off as many things without improving the team.  Eerily similar to Pitts that a shaky arena deal precedes it.

3) Matthews - Toronto was taking no chances and talked as hard as possible.

 

Fill your boots on Patrick.  If you think we have a chance at drafting him, better to get hold of Ken King and get the arena deal finalized.  Nothing wrong with tracking the progress of a special player.  

[cross16]

Nolan Patrick is not a generational talent, not IMO. He is a couple steps behind McDavid and IMO is even behind Mathews. Both were better, and not by a coin flip either, at the same age. Patrick is the total package and will have the upside of a number 1 center but I don't see a franchise changing player like you had/have in those 2. Nothing wrong with that, as its simply very rare to have that much talent infusion year after year in young talent like the league has had.

 

I also don't think for a second Flames will be in the conversation unless then win the lottery. There is simply too much talent on this team to wind up a bottom 1-2 team for me. This will get turned around.

[Crzydrvr]

Connor McDavid is the most dominant skater the OHL has seen since Eric Lindros. Nolan Patrick is good, but he's multiple steps behind McDavid at every step of his development. Not only production-wise, but in terms of the tools that he shows on the ice on any given night. McDavid was the best skater, stickhandler, and passer in his junior league without question as an 18 year old.

 

It's not a shame or an undersell to say Nolan Patrick is behind the generational players of recent years, that is a very high threshold that is unattainable for all but the very best. He is without question a very complete package however, and the kind of player who will step into an NHL lineup next year as a top scoring threat because he plays a very pro-friendly game.

 

The league has been blessed with a decade-plus of strong drafts, and the end result is that a guy like Patrick, who looks like he'll be a consistent ~70-point big two-way center a la Anze Kopitar, is merely "average" among 1st overall picks. That's a good thing.

[jjgallow]

Thanks for the comments everyone, I really appreciate it.

 

I shot pretty high with my opening post, and none of you burned me too badly for it, thank you for that

 

We gotta have some positives this year, right?   (even, as TD points out...it's still a toss of the dice).

 

So... Maybe I can gently steer this towards some of the areas which lead me to think he's the Most under-rated generational player (so much so, that he's not considered one):

 

My first question:

 

When is the last time a Generational Talent came out of the WHL, and was ranked as one at that time?

[travel_dude]

 

He's injured.  He had a sports henria op in the summer.  Would you like to wait a bit before you project him to be the best in the draft?  A lot of things can happen.

[Crzydrvr]

46 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

When is the last time a Generational Talent came out of the WHL, and was ranked as one at that time?

 

Never. Whatever the reason, no NHL-drafted player out of the WHL has been considered a potential generational player.

 

Greg Joly, Mel Bridgman and Chris Phillips were all at the top of weak and lightly thought of draft classes. Gord Kluzak was injured in his draft year and was a surprise, being ranked 2nd or 3rd by most people. Wendel Clark, while good, was A. drafted as a defenseman and B. at the top of another fairly lightly-regarded draft class, which happened the year after a legitimate generational player appeared in Lemieux who clearly was notches above anybody in 1985. Ryan Nugent-Hopkins was part of a fairly normal draft class, but he wasn't the clear-cut 1st overall pick for most of the year.

 

Mike Modano was part of the best WHL draft class in terms of high-end picks, with the WHL going 1-2-3 in 1988 and the draft itself being fairly highly regarded (and it would turn out to be exactly that with names like Linden, Roenick, Brind'Amour and Selanne in the top 10 and sleepers like Amonte, Rob Blake and Mark Recchi in the mid-rounds). But Modano himself, while highly regarded was not considered a generational prospect like Lemieux or Lindros later, he was closer to the tier that people put Eichel on in comparison to McDavid (that is, a potential elite player for sure, but not "best in the world" type potential).

 

Out of the 8 1st overall WHL draft picks (I'm including the old WCHL in this), the closest draft prospect to such a status was probably Doug Wickenheiser, who never lived up to expectations. People forget, but he was a heavy favorite for 1st overall pick in a draft with Denis Savard of all players. He wasn't quite Lemieux-level hype or play either, however, which is why I say he wasn't a generational prospect, but he was as close as the WHL has gotten.

 

The WHL is the junior league closest to the NHL in terms of emphasis on good two-way play and a heavy board-based offensive metagame. This makes it easier to "get down" on a player's offensive potential, as the number of offensive dynamos that appear are few and far between and the ones that do appear end up putting up less impressive numbers compared to more open leagues. And while having such a style of play can help with quick acclimation to the NHL, it also has a tendency to stunt offensive growth because good offensive players are expected to work on their defense before being granted top minutes to a higher extent than seen in the QMJHL (where just being a good scorer tends to get you force-fed minutes) and the OHL (where as long as you aren't a complete liability defensively you'll do fine). The focus on board play means that skaters like McDavid are less emphasized and teams look for slower, maybe less purely skilled but bigger and stronger centers instead for their franchise stars, because they can consistently put up points in such a metagame.

 

The end result is that the WHL's best scorers in the NHL have historically tended to be drafted later than their OHL or QMJHL counterparts, such as Joe Sakic going 15th. So it's a two-pronged system of "not developing enough pure-skill players to have one considered a generational player" and "because they don't develop any generational players, their best players aren't considered to have the same kind of upside as their CHL equivalents".

 

Not saying that the WHL can't produce a generational player, but to do so would require a dramatic shift in mindset for 22 teams in the league which is unlikely to happen anytime soon. And Patrick falls into the "less-pure skill but bigger and stronger" category, which while good is the complete opposite of prior generational players. Guys like Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux, Lindros and now McDavid and Crosby aren't special because they're strong, they're special because they maximize their puck skills and hockey sense to the extent where they could be whatever size they want and still be without question the most dominant player in their junior and pro leagues.

[jjgallow]

40 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

He's injured.  He had a sports henria op in the summer.  Would you like to wait a bit before you project him to be the best in the draft?  A lot of things can happen.

 

that would be a no....we know he's injured, it's had zero effect on his rankings...quite frankly he could miss the whole season and he'd still go first overall.   The gap is Massive.

 

Yes, a lot can happen, but everyone else is projecting him first overall now, so that's not really saying much or surprising anyone.  Nothing me or you can do about it, that is already his unanimous projection.

 

I'm trying to take things a  step further, fyi.   I'm trying to say he's Still under-rated.  So THAT is what you should be disagreeing with me on, lol

[travel_dude]

17 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

that would be a no....we know he's injured, it's had zero effect on his rankings...quite frankly he could miss the whole season and he'd still go first overall.   The gap is Massive.

 

Yes, a lot can happen, but everyone else is projecting him first overall now, so that's not really saying much or surprising anyone.  Nothing me or you can do about it, that is already his unanimous projection.

 

I'm trying to take things a  step further, fyi.   I'm trying to say he's Still under-rated.  So THAT is what you should be disagreeing with me on, lol

 

The gap between a forward and a defenseman may be "massive" for now, but that could change.  Not saying it will but it's not as "massive" as the McDavid draft. 

[Crzydrvr]

5 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

that would be a no....we know he's injured, it's had zero effect on his rankings...quite frankly he could miss the whole season and he'd still go first overall.   The gap is Massive.

 

Yes, a lot can happen, but everyone else is projecting him first overall now, so that's not really saying much or surprising anyone.  Nothing me or you can do about it, that is already his unanimous projection.

 

I'm trying to take things a  step further, fyi.   I'm trying to say he's Still under-rated.  So THAT is what you should be disagreeing with me on, lol

 

I think he's fairly accurately placed as far as draft rankings compared to his peers, both in his draft class and historically. The only way he could get any higher is by posting generational scoring numbers, which he hasn't shown to be capable of at any point in his junior or minor hockey career. The reason I say numbers is because unlike a legitimate generational talent, most people are not jawdropped by Nolan Patrick's vision, his shot, his sense of timing, his awareness of open space and scoring areas, or his ability to carry the puck. All tools by which a generational player should possess in freakish levels. Patrick impresses a lot, but when Crosby/McDavid were around, the common word was "I didn't even think that what he did was POSSIBLE." Generational players tend to be players who transcend the limits of what players are expected to be because they're that ahead of the curve; Orr was the best skater and an offensive defenseman in an era of big lumbering defenders, Gretzky was a pure playmaker when the era he first broke into the league with expected centers to be big netfront presences who shot first, Lemieux was a big guy with the puck skills of the best players half a foot shorter, Lindros was the first "throwback" big skilled center with snarl and set the trend for the rest of the DPE, and Crosby grinds the boards and works behind the net so hard that you're afraid ads will scratch off after he's done (and now every team does it).

 

Nolan Patrick doesn't strike as the kind of player who will threaten to score 100+ points in the NHL on a consistent basis the way Crosby and McDavid did. Those guys stepped in as 16 year olds and were immediately the best player in their leagues without a doubt. Patrick on the other hand has had a regular development curve for the average top prospect; he had a good/great season for a WHL rookie with growing pains, and then once he had the bulk and confidence he put up top prospect number as a 17-year old trusted with big minutes.

 

If he missed the whole season he'd definitely drop, injury concerns do play a factor in the draft process. More importantly, he hasn't dominated the WHL when he has been playing like he's (unfairly) expected to as an older prospect.

[jjgallow]

49 minutes ago, Crzydrvr said:

 

Never. Whatever the reason, no NHL-drafted player out of the WHL has been considered a potential generational player.

 

.....

 And Patrick falls into the "less-pure skill but bigger and stronger" category, which while good is the complete opposite of prior generational players. 

..

 

Thank you Crzydrvr, that was an incredible synopsis, I loved reading every line.  (But had to shorten the quote for aesthetics, sorry).  And Yeah...What was up with Wickenheiser?   Not that he was a bad player, but yeah, just never translated all that skill :/  Sad story, regardless.

 

You provided the Perfect, Perfect explanation of why Patrick is Not considered a generational player.  Exactly what I hoped for, with a level of expertise I couldn't dream of.

 

So...imagine... a world....where....  you were wrong    (along with basically every other expert alive)

 

This would of course, be, an alternate universe, as it would be for me

 

I don't mean, that you were wrong about anything that you wrote, actually.  But imagine, for a second, that maybe the league is more viable now for superstars than we think it is.  Imagine that it might be Just as possible for a WHLer to translate to the NHL as an OHLer, offensively.

 

Where we might be able to take Mike Modano's stats at the same age, for instance (as per your example), and compare them.

 

Ie:   Modano's Season before the Pre-draft:   70 games, 32 goals, 62 points.

        Patrick's  Season before the Pre-draft:   72 games, 41 gaols, 102 points. 

 

Then, factor in the fact that Modano's WHL was an easier WHL to score in than Patrick's.

 

Where does that put Patrick?

 

 

Then, consider their similar sizes, but differently in their example.   Consider that at 6'3, it may be Easier for Patrick to translate his skills to the NHL, than smaller players.

 

Then, consider that Patrick, like Lindros, is a RH shot.   This, alone, from my experience, has an extremely high translation rate to the NHL.  And we could have a whole other thread on that.  But I do seem to notice that RH shots translate to the NHL much more favourably.   And I would personally put more emphasis on this, just this alone, than which CHL league he came out of imho.  Obviously up for debate.

 

Then, consider his blood line.  Again, I put a lot of weight on this, personally.

 

Then, consider his plus/minus.   I look for this to determine if a center can translate....(this part gets complicated...I don't just look at the number, but separate discussion).... and again...no room for the explanation here, but this is another massive check for me.

 

Then, consider his Linemates.   He's had less to work with than other generational talents of late.  Ie, far less to work with than McDavid, and others, at similar ages.

 

And then, yes, consider McDavid.

Ie:   McDavid's Season before the Pre-draft:   56 games, 28 goals, 99 points.

         Patrick's  Season before the Pre-draft:   72 games, 41 goals, 102 points. 

 

        (remember we're in a parallel universe)

•          Points-wise, McDavid had the edge (although he was on a far more stacked team)
•          Goals-wise, Patrick had the edge
•          When I have to pick between the two, at this stage of their development, I always go with the Goals (especially when the other player's team was more stacked).

 

So, now we're exiting the Parallel Universe.

 

If it could be shown, potentially, that a generational player could translate the same way (or better) from the WHL than the OHL, would this not be cause for comparisons to McDavid, etc?    At least, until we get more data from this season?

[jjgallow]

30 minutes ago, Crzydrvr said:

 

The only way he could get any higher is by posting generational scoring numbers, which he hasn't shown to be capable of at any point in his junior or minor hockey career...

 

I either agree with, or understand, everything you've said so far, except for this one particular line.  

 

1.   If he's ranked number one, then...no, he can't get ranked any higher....or maybe we're talking about different things?

 

2.   IMHO he Has posted generational scoring numbers, depending on how you translate WHL numbers within the CHL.   Everything else you wrote is fair enough, and up for debate..the wow factor...etc...   (keep in mind that OHL players get WAY more of that kind of media coverage too)....   But the pure statistical numbers, imho, are undeniably generational, unless you significantly deduct for being in the WHL.  Which, really, every expert is doing...rightly or wrongly.    

 

• As you've said, we've Never had a generational player in the WHL.   
• Also, we've never had anyone with this kind of scoring production in modern WHL times, at his age.

      So, those two points counteract each other in a way that can be hard to interpret.  We have, perhaps.... A Dilemma

 

p.s...(ok...and also that line where you said McDavid was the best player in the OHL when he was 16.  So...  two lines ).

[Crzydrvr]

50 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I either agree with, or understand, everything you've said so far, except for this one particular line.  

 

1.   If he's ranked number one, then...no, he can't get ranked any higher....or maybe we're talking about different things?

 

2.   IMHO he Has posted generational scoring numbers, depending on how you translate WHL numbers within the CHL.   Everything else you wrote is fair enough, and up for debate..the wow factor...etc...   (keep in mind that OHL players get WAY more of that kind of media coverage too)....   But the pure statistical numbers, imho, are undeniably generational, unless you significantly deduct for being in the WHL.  Which, really, every expert is doing...rightly or wrongly.    

 

• As you've said, we've Never had a generational player in the WHL.   
• Also, we've never had anyone with this kind of scoring production in modern WHL times, at his age.

      So, those two points counteract each other in a way that can be hard to interpret.  We have, perhaps.... A Dilemma

 

p.s...(ok...and also that line where you said McDavid was the best player in the OHL when he was 16.  So...  two lines ).

 

Nolan Patrick's a late birthday, so comparing Modano's pre-draft year to Patrick's pre-draft year fails to take into account experience differences. Modano was 16 turning 17 in his pre-draft year while Patrick turned 17 a few games in. Similarly, a guy like Sam Reinhart's pre-draft year was 85 points, but because he's also a late-birthday, you have to consider that he should be compared with players from his bantam draft year.

 

If we're comparing Patrick to Modano based on year of birth, then Modano's 16-year old season should be compared to Patrick's, where he had 55 points and 30 goals in 56 games. Again, fairly typical for a potential elite prospect's first junior season regardless of late-birthday status.

 

Patrick being born 4 days earlier puts him in last year's draft, and as Bob McKenzie states, most scouts would have had him behind the two Finns and Matthews and some even preferred Dubois over Patrick.

 

If we're comparing 17-turning 18-year old seasons, Patrick scored 41 goals and 102 points in 72 games. Connor McDavid, on the other hand, had 44 goals and 120 points in 47 games. We can break this down further into chunks since you might argue that McDavid being born in January gives him an edge in physical development: Patrick's production from January onward of last season, when he was firmly a 17-year old for a few months by that point, was 59 points in 35 games and 30 points in 21 playoff games. If we compare that to McDavid's, his pre-draft season's playoffs as a fresh 17-year old he had 19 points in 14 games and his first games in 2014, after a few months of being 17 and prior to breaking his hand, he had 51 points in 18 games.

 

You would be likely the only person to believe Patrick is anywhere near McDavid, let alone equivalent or better, as a draft prospect. It really isn't close. Patrick is a blue chip player and it hurts me to downplay him because he's really good, but your stats are misinforming and misleading you to believe he's generational, when the context and underlying details of Patrick's stats show that, while still good, he's very much closer in equivalency to a guy like Nugent-Hopkins in terms of junior production at the same age as opposed to a McDavid.

 

McDavid stepped in as a 15 year old, and while he suffered physically and seemed tired by the end of the season, it was immediately clear that he was probably already the most talented player in the OHL at that young of an age. By next year he had firmly cemented himself as such. The year after was just domination the likes of which the OHL hasn't seen since Eric Lindros. Even among special talents, he was heads and shoulders the best.

 

I have yet to see the same sheer potential out of Patrick. I don't like dealing in what ifs and while hoping for him to become an elite first line player is far from unlikely, that doesn't make him a generational prospect. Patrick becoming a consistent 100+ point forward requires a lot of development, while for McDavid coming out of his draft it's, what, an extra 0.15 points per game (going by his rookie season)? The difference in development required for one to become such a player is vastly different from the other.

 

The NHL is what it is, this isn't an alternate reality and the league doesn't change overnight in such a manner. Not to mention, the current league metagame is already heavily based on boardwork and the cycle game which theoretically should benefit a big skilled player more than a Crosby or McDavid, and yet we don't see a player like Benn or Getzlaf score 100 points with impunity. There are bottlenecks in development all the way up, and that final bottleneck is what separates a player from being a superstar and being a face of the league, and only 1 or 2 players seem to be able to break through that for more than a few seasons in any given decade. McDavid is the kind of player where even uneducated fans can tell his processing power and understanding (in other words, all traits that make him not just a fast skater but just fast all around, which is the way I'd describe his play) have already begun to bump him against said bottleneck. I don't foresee another player who can do that is as short a timespan as McDavid, not in the last few drafts, and not in the next few either (and there's some real good looking drafts in the next 5 years).

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, Crzydrvr said:

 

McDavid stepped in as a 15 year old, and while he suffered physically and seemed tired by the end of the season, it was immediately clear that he was probably already the most talented player in the OHL at that young of an age. By next year he had firmly cemented himself as such. The year after was just domination the likes of which the OHL hasn't seen since Eric Lindros. Even among special talents, he was heads and shoulders the best.

 

 

So...again, amazing post, and thank you for that.  Really good point about the age, definitely.

 

I hate to do this, but I do have to make one interjection with regards to the obviousness of McDavid:   I first posted on him in 2013(?), a post I cannot find now, but I distinctly remember comparing him to Crosby, and specifically you taking me down off that ledge, explaining in great detail similar to this, how much more exceptional Crosby was at a similar age.   I can't find the McDavid thread anymore...it seems to have vanished, or perhaps merged into the Oilers thread (poor guy).  But even in your draft rankings, with all the information up to that point, he was not projected as a generational talent and you even hinted at expecting more from Eichel.

 

So, this all has to be taken with a grain of salt.  Things look different in the rearview mirror sometimes.

 

I DO acknowledge that the age thing is a huge factor, as it was with Matthews, and I did consider it.   I appreciate the efforts to break it down to like age months, but the sample size kind of makes this difficult.   Also, it doesn't take into account the "other" kind of age:  Junior experience.   On one hand, McDavid was younger.  From an experience standpoint, he was older.  It's tough, and I'm not sure there's a perfect way to break it down.

 

then, consider the size difference.  The bigger players tend to develop offensively a little slower.  Lindros would be the case in point.   He was middle-aged for the draft, I guess we could say.  Yet still became a generational player, despite a comparatively unimpressive OHL rookie season for a Generational Player, he still exploded the next year and translated it Right to the NHL.

 

I guess, what I'm trying to say is that one does not necessarily need to be an Early-Ager in a draft, to be generational.  Especially when you're a huge RH C.

 

But I'm getting subjective.

 

Here's the biggest thing:   If you look the goals...even when you give McDavid  an age handicap (take Nolan's earlier season):   Nolan Still has considerably more goals.   The only way you get around that is by using McDavid's Third and final junior season.  Which, quite frankly, I see as a bit of an extreme age handicap due to the experience advantage, and his incredibly, incredibly stacked team that year.

 

That, on a team with considerably less firepower.  McDavid's teams were Always, always more stacked, whereas Nolan may have had to make a go of it more on his own, out of necessity.  You could argue it's because he's a prototypical WHLer...or you could argue...he just didn't have the same calibre linemates, so he took matters into his own hands.

 

Yes, Nolan's performance this year will have a dramatic impact on the arguement and we don't know which way it will go, obviously.   But based on what we have now...you look at the goals, and his team, and his ability to translate (big RH C), does that not make up for some of the concerns about his age and being a WHLer?

 

 

[Crzydrvr]

29 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

So...again, amazing post, and thank you for that.  Really good point about the age, definitely.

 

I hate to do this, but I do have to make one interjection with regards to the obviousness of McDavid:   I first posted on him in 2013(?), a post I cannot find now, but I distinctly remember comparing him to Crosby, and specifically you taking me down off that ledge, explaining in great detail similar to this, how much more exceptional Crosby was at a similar age.   I can't find the McDavid thread anymore...it seems to have vanished, or perhaps merged into the Oilers thread (poor guy).  But even in your draft rankings, with all the information up to that point, he was not projected as a generational talent and you even hinted at expecting more from Eichel.

 

So, this all has to be taken with a grain of salt.  Things look different in the rearview mirror sometimes.

 

I DO acknowledge that the age thing is a huge factor, as it was with Matthews, and I did consider it.   I appreciate the efforts to break it down to like age months, but the sample size kind of makes this difficult.   Also, it doesn't take into account the "other" kind of age:  Junior experience.   On one hand, McDavid was younger.  From an experience standpoint, he was older.  It's tough, and I'm not sure there's a perfect way to break it down.

 

then, consider the size difference.  The bigger players tend to develop offensively a little slower.  Lindros would be the case in point.   He was middle-aged for the draft, I guess we could say.  Yet still became a generational player, despite a comparatively unimpressive OHL rookie season for a Generational Player, he still exploded the next year and translated it Right to the NHL.

 

I guess, what I'm trying to say is that one does not necessarily need to be an Early-Ager in a draft, to be generational.  Especially when you're a huge RH C.

 

But I'm getting subjective.

 

Here's the biggest thing:   If you look the goals...No matter which season you compare to what season, no matter what handicap you give McDavid (take Nolan's earlier season):   Nolan Still has considerably more goals.  Any.  Way. You. Slice. It.

 

That, on a team with considerably less firepower.  McDavid's teams were Always, always more stacked, whereas Nolan may have had to make a go of it more on his own, out of necessity.  You could argue it's because he's a prototypical WHLer...or you could argue...he just didn't have the same calibre linemates, so he took matters into his own hands.

 

Either way, handicap for age any way you like, Nolan has more goals...than McDavid. 

 

Should that not matter?

 

That is definitely true with regards to the McDavid thread you started and my initial comments. Understanding the pressure of hype and the junior system, I do my best to stay realistic wherever possible. One is to avoid disappointment and the other is because you just never know with junior aged kids. It's a very unforgiving system where you're expected to act like a great teammate and be supportive while all the while fighting off your teammates for the lion's share of ice time and media attention.

 

It's not healthy development and in many cases kids will not live up to lofty expectations. I'd rather be proven wrong and witness a McDavid live up to all the expectations while remaining who he is than see him crash and burn with the weight of the world on his shoulders. He has proven he deserves all the labels given and I am willing to adjust my expectations as he develops. He went from a very good player in my mind who was the clear best in his draft year to almost Crosby-level talent (almost, not quite) because he performed like it. And even then, I expected Eichel to perform better initially because his body was more built to withstand pro players, acknowledging that McDavid would likely surpass him after an adjustment period (if the adjustment period was literally a period, then I'd like to still take credit for that call ).

 

Same with Patrick. If he proves he deserves the hype then I adjust accordingly. So far, he is worth the hype he's getting (for the most part). Is he generational? I don't think he is. McDavid was a case where the greater majority were already expecting him to be a franchise level superstar and he did end up proving it with his performance in all facets. Patrick has not blown the doors off in the same way, and it's not just low key because of the way he plays. McDavid's teams were stacked, and partly because of his play helping lift his teammates' point totals as well. Nolan Patrick's teams were also stacked up to this point, and also partly because he lifts the play of his teammates. Great players tend to do that. Yes, big players tend to develop slower, but expecting every one to turn out like Lindros or Thornton is probably not a great use of time.

 

If Patrick does prove me wrong, I'm willing to eat my words. I don't have an ego, him doing better than expected is great for hockey and I'd love it if that were the case. I might have a GM mindset of "expect the worst" but I'm not daft.

 

Nolan does have more goals. He's definitely more balanced offensively in terms of pass vs. finish. McDavid's bread and butter on the other hand will always be playmaking, he's never been a scorer in the sense that he has an elite shot and in fact it's still one of the weaker shots in the league. If he could finish he'd be an easy 40 goal scorer. It's accurate, and he gets to scoring areas because he's smart, it just lacks the mustard to surprise goalies. Nolan being a bigger body and more developed physically not only gives him the ability to drive around defensemen and work the boards, but also a higher base strength that gives him the ability to score. McDavid, you literally wondered whether he could bend his stick in his 1st 2 seasons in the OHL.

 

Ovechkin has a better shot than Crosby. It doesn't necessarily make him a better player overall. Players have different strengths and the only thing I worry about is how well they understand those strengths and how capable they are of using said strengths to produce and help their team win games. Patrick understands his limits as a player in the sense he isn't trying to dangle his way through 4 defenders, and that bodes well for a quick transition to the NHL. I do think he is more limited in terms of point production compared to more dynamic players, which might cap him lower than a player like Matthews, but overall you can't go wrong with a big center.

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, Crzydrvr said:

 

That is definitely true with regards to the McDavid thread you started and my initial comments. Understanding the pressure of hype and the junior system, I do my best to stay realistic wherever possible. One is to avoid disappointment and the other is because you just never know with junior aged kids. It's a very unforgiving system where you're expected to act like a great teammate and be supportive while all the while fighting off your teammates for the lion's share of ice time and media attention.

......

...... I'd rather be proven wrong and witness a McDavid live up to all the expectations while remaining who he is than see him crash and burn with the weight of the world on his shoulders. ......

 

Crzydrvr, you are the Worst to argue with...you are So Damn Likeable, Cuddly in fact....and you do it in such an intelligent, thoughtful and diplomatic way, you should really be ashamed of yourself

 

Then you go Admitting to things to help my arguement, when I have no proof and no leg to stand on...who does that?  How do I fight with that?  lol

 

About the goals, I edited my post right about the same time you were replying...there IS of course a way to show McDavid has more goals, but you have to really give McDavid the benefit of the doubt to do that comparison.   All of this will change by end of season, and we can make a better comparison then.

 

Yes, I agree, McDavid was very much hyped, and I was supporting that hype, which, in Most cases, isn't a great idea.   

 

Yes, I also agree, this is more extreme.   This time, really, I'm almost the Only one hyping Patrick to the level of generational.   And at this stage, I deserve everything that comes at me for it.  But in my defence, I do at least have a thought process for it with imperfect, but somewhat valid justifications.

 

Your level-headedness is very, very admirable.   If I thought that my opinions would reach the masses, or be picked up by the media, then yes....I would definitely tone things down because this kind of talk Can't be good for any prospect.    But, as it stands, I would be surprised if more than 20 people read this, None of them him, and my primary purpose is essentially to take breaks from house chores.

 

 

[JTech780]

I think Patrick will end up closer to Monahan than he will McDavid. 

 

Patrick doesn't have one skill or area that I would say is elite, I would say his skills and abilities are very good across the board, but he lacks that dynamic ability.

 

Depending on the length of Liljegren's injury I wouldn't be surprised that as we get closer to the draft that he closes the gap and quite possibly overtakes Patrick in the rankings. Liljegren has that dynamic ability.

[Flyerfan52]

So is the general view that Nolan Patrick is more Jonathan Toews like than the flash of a Crosby/McDavid?

I'd take that.

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

I think Patrick will end up closer to Monahan than he will McDavid. 

 

Patrick doesn't have one skill or area that I would say is elite, I would say his skills and abilities are very good across the board, but he lacks that dynamic ability.

 

Depending on the length of Liljegren's injury I wouldn't be surprised that as we get closer to the draft that he closes the gap and quite possibly overtakes Patrick in the rankings. Liljegren has that dynamic ability.

 

If it came down to the wire between these two, that would be interesting.  I would be happy to select either, considering we don't currently have any elite level D-men in the system.  We have some good-uns, just nobody elite...yet.  Some of the people that follow the Flames prospects are concerned that Hickey has been passed by two younger guys.  Loads of time, but that is concerning.  Still have Kylington and Andersson, who may get to a high level if they can work out the various kinks in their games.

 

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, Flyerfan52 said:

So is the general view that Nolan Patrick is more Jonathan Toews like than the flash of a Crosby/McDavid?

I'd take that.

 

 

In a Nutshell, yeah.  I think that's the widespread view.  But RH shot, pure goalscorer.    Ranked not unlike Laine (RH pure goalscorer) was ranked at that time.

 

I am definitely the exception in seeing a generational player at this stage.  But then, anyone who thought Laine would have been this good, would also have been the exception (I'm not saying Laine's generational...).

 

IMHO, for Patrick to project as generational, he needs to do something Along the Lines of score More than one goal per game this season in the WHL.

 

I personally think that's what we'll be seeing.   And if I'm wrong, I'll change my view on him accordingly.

[cross16]

35 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

In a Nutshell, yeah.  I think that's the widespread view.  But RH shot, pure goalscorer.    Ranked not unlike Laine (RH pure goalscorer) was ranked at that time.

 

I am definitely the exception in seeing a generational player at this stage.  But then, anyone who thought Laine would have been this good, would also have been the exception (I'm not saying Laine's generational...).

 

IMHO, for Patrick to project as generational, he needs to do something Along the Lines of score More than one goal per game this season in the WHL.

 

I personally think that's what we'll be seeing.   And if I'm wrong, I'll change my view on him accordingly.

 

You might end up being right about this but Laine does posses a generational skill, his shot. Laine, for me at least, has the best shot coming out of the draft since Ovechkin and personally i'm not surprised with what he is doing in the NHL right now. His shot is elite and you say that during his breakout season last year. I don't think its a numbers thing its a skill set you are looking for. 

 

But to your point, Patrick maybe has that but if he does why have we not seen it yet? Its tough for someone to develop an elite skill, they usually have it by now or they don't. For me an elite or generational skill is something you are born with. Nothing against Patrick who i think is a great prosepct but I agree with Cyvr that you are looking at a Kopitar more so then a McDavid, or even a Toews. 

[Flyerfan52]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

You might end up being right about this but Laine does posses a generational skill, his shot. Laine, for me at least, has the best shot coming out of the draft since Ovechkin and personally i'm not surprised with what he is doing in the NHL right now. His shot is elite and you say that during his breakout season last year. I don't think its a numbers thing its a skill set you are looking for. 

 

But to your point, Patrick maybe has that but if he does why have we not seen it yet? Its tough for someone to develop an elite skill, they usually have it by now or they don't. For me an elite or generational skill is something you are born with. Nothing against Patrick who i think is a great prosepct but I agree with Cyvr that you are looking at a Kopitar more so then a McDavid, or even a Toews. 

Laine does have that exceptional shot & is probably the most exciting to watch since OV or the rookie Selanne.

 

Why does a generational talent need to excel @ 1 thing? I consider Toews a more important player than Crosby whenever Canada takes on the other countries. Crosby gets the "C" because of name recognition but IMO Toews is the 1 the players take their lead from. Flash & dash bring individual awards but being top end  @ everything brings the big prize.

[cross16]

Just now, Flyerfan52 said:

Laine does have that exceptional shot & is probably the most exciting to watch since OV or the rookie Selanne.

 

Why does a generational talent need to excel @ 1 thing? I consider Toews a more important player than Crosby whenever Canada takes on the other countries. Crosby gets the "C" because of name recognition but IMO Toews is the 1 the players take their lead from. Flash & dash bring individual awards but being top end  @ everything brings the big prize.

 

I define generational talent as something you don't see very often or that is "special". You don't see a prospect shoot the puck like Laine can very often. 

 

I get what you are saying and I don't disagree about the argument about Toews vs Crosby but I will counter by saying there is 1 Crosby. There are more than a few centers I would say are equal to or better than Toews, thus why I think the term "generational" should be saved. 

 

In reference to Nolan Patrick, a normal talent cycle for the draft should see, IMO, at least 1 Nolan Patrick basically every year at the most every 2nd year. If it takes you ever 3 drafts to get a prospect the calibre of Nolan Patrick, you have a VERY weak talent cycle IMO. 

[JTech780]

5 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

So is the general view that Nolan Patrick is more Jonathan Toews like than the flash of a Crosby/McDavid?

I'd take that.

 

 

I think Toews is more dynamic and has more overall skill than Patrick. 

[Cowtownguy]

I am not sure that I believe in the idea of a generational player given the way sports channels seem to define them. Reporters trying to sell the game to generate excitement conflate generational with excellent. Maybe they believe that generation is the same as "every five years". To me, a generational player is one so exceptional that they literally come along once in a generation. Perhaps that means Maurice Richard and Wayne Gretzky. I will wait to see what McDavid actually does before passing judgement. When reporters add in Lafleur, Orr, Lemieux, Modano, McKinnon etc. etc., the phrase loses all meaning. 

 

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

 

I think Toews is more dynamic and has more overall skill than Patrick. 

What I like about Toews is his stoic determination.